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: "Program transparency"

    18 publications with a total of 45 open recommendations including 12 priority recommendations
    Director: Mark Goldstein
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Chairman of the FCC should establish quantifiable goals and related measures--performance indicators, targets, and timeframes--for its enforcement program and annually publish the results to demonstrate the performance of this program and improve transparency regarding FCC's enforcement priorities. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Chairman of the FCC should establish, and make publically available, a communications strategy outlining the agency's enforcement program for external stakeholders, to improve engagement with the telecommunications community on the purposes, objectives, and processes the Enforcement Bureau employs to achieve its mission. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To increase transparency and obtain information to better inform decisions on whether to investigate potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the air ambulance industry, the Secretary of Transportation should communicate a method to receive air ambulance-related complaints, including those regarding balance billing, such as through a dedicated web page that contains instructions on how to submit air ambulance complaints and includes information on how DOT uses the complaints.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To increase transparency and obtain information to better inform decisions on whether to investigate potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the air ambulance industry, the Secretary of Transportation should take steps, once complaints are collected, to make pertinent aggregated complaint information publicly available for stakeholders, such as the number of complaints received by provider, on a monthly basis.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To increase transparency and obtain information to better inform decisions on whether to investigate potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the air ambulance industry, the Secretary of Transportation should assess available federal and industry data and determine what further information could assist in the evaluation of future complaints or concerns regarding unfair or deceptive practices.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To increase transparency and obtain information to better inform decisions on whether to investigate potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the air ambulance industry, the Secretary of Transportation should consider consumer disclosure requirements for air ambulance providers, which could include information such as established prices charged, business model and entity that establishes prices, and extent of contracting with insurance.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Paula M. Rascona
    Phone: (202) 512-9816

    2 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: The Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Treasury should establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs, to help inform full implementation of the act's requirements across government.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Treasury stated it will establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs. Treasury also stated these mechanisms will inform Treasury's efforts on whether and how to tailor its future outreach efforts to help agencies meet their DATA Act requirements. We will continue to assess Treasury's efforts to address this recommendation as IGs plan to issue their required reports in November 2017.
    Recommendation: The Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Treasury should establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs, to help inform full implementation of the act's requirements across government.

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

    Comments: OMB stated that it reviewed available IG readiness review reports in its assessment of agency implementation efforts, and it also relied on other, more up-to-date sources of information from agencies including data obtained from one-on-one meetings and agency self-assessments. We will continue to assess OMB's efforts to address this recommendation as IGs plan to issue their required reports in November 2017.
    Director: Lori Rectanus
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Attorney General should instruct the Director of the Marshals Service to ensure that the improvements being made to the Marshals Service's information on the security concerns of individual buildings allow the Marshals Service to understand the concerns across the portfolio.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the Marshalls Service has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA and the Director of the AOUSC, on behalf of the Judicial Conference of the United States, in conjunction with the Marshals Service and FPS, should improve CSP documentation in order to improve transparency and collaboration in the CSP program.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions GSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA and the Director of the AOUSC, on behalf of the Judicial Conference of the United States, in conjunction with the Marshals Service and FPS, should improve CSP documentation in order to improve transparency and collaboration in the CSP program.

    Agency: Administrative Office of the United States Courts
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions AOUSC has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA--in conjunction with AOUSC, the Marshals Service, and FPS--should establish a national-level working group or similar forum, consisting of leadership designees with decision-making authority, to meet regularly to address courthouse security issues.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions GSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Gretta L. Goodwin
    Phone: (202) 512-8777

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that the Capitol Police Board's current and any new approaches help enhance accountability, transparency, and effective external communication with its stakeholders, the Board should revise its Manual of Procedures to fully incorporate each of the leading practices for internal control and governance standards discussed in this report. In so doing, the Board should engage stakeholders in the revision process, such as by soliciting their input on any non-statutory changes that could particularly address the concerns stakeholders have raised, and incorporating their views as appropriate. If, in making revisions to its Manual, the Board determines that statutory changes may be helpful to enhance Board operations, then the Board should also engage with stakeholders on such proposed changes.

    Agency: Capitol Police Board
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Michael Clements
    Phone: (202) 512-8678

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To promote transparency and accountability of federal spending, the Commissioner of the Fiscal Service should make basic information about Fiscal Service's use of financial agents publicly available in a central location, including compensation paid to each financial agent under its financial agency agreement and a description of the services provided.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: David B. Gootnick
    Phone: (202) 512-3149

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the quality of the data published on ForeignAssistance.gov and help ensure consistency in published information, the Secretary of State should, in consultation with the Director of OMB and the USAID Administrator, undertake a review of the efforts to date on ensuring data quality

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: State concurred with this recommendation and noted that it will continue to work with USAID in consultation with OMB to assess whether additional existing resources are required to meet the goals of ForeignAssistance.gov. As of June 2017, State has taken some steps to coordinate with OMB and USAID to improve the quality of data reported for ForeignAssistance.gov. For example, in January 2017, State co-hosted an interagency meeting with OMB and USAID to discuss data quality and reporting requirements. As of June 2017, GAO was following up with State to obtain additional information on how the established review process would or has helped improve the quality of the data reported on Foreignassistance.gov.
    Recommendation: To improve the quality of the data published on ForeignAssistance.gov and help ensure consistency in published information, the Secretary of State should, in consultation with the Director of OMB and the USAID Administrator, develop additional guidance that takes into consideration current challenges to updating ForeignAssistance.gov with verified data.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 2017, State has taken some steps to coordinate with OMB and USAID to improve the quality of data reported for ForeignAssistance.gov. For example, in January 2017, State co-hosted an interagency meeting with OMB and USAID to discuss data quality and reporting requirements. As of June 2017, GAO was following up with State to determine if additional guidance has been developed that takes into consideration current challenges to updating ForeignAssistance.gov with verified data
    Director: Paula M. Rascona
    Phone: (202) 512-9816

    3 open recommendations
    including 3 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure effective government-wide implementation and that complete and consistent spending data will be reported as required by the DATA Act, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should establish or leverage existing processes and controls to determine the complete population of agencies that are required to report spending data under the DATA Act and make the results of those determinations publicly available.

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

    Comments: OMB stated that each agency is responsible for determining whether it is subject to the DATA Act. To help agencies make that determination, OMB published guidance in the form of frequently asked questions and stated that the agencies may consult with OMB for additional counsel. In response to our recommendation, OMB staff told us they have reached out to federal agencies to identify which agencies have determined that they are exempt from reporting under the DATA Act and prepared a list of such agencies. However, OMB has not provided us the list or the procedures for reviewing agency determinations and compiling the results. In addition, OMB has not established procedures for ensuring non-exempt agencies are reporting spending data as required. Finally, OMB has not stated whether it will make the results of the determinations publicly available. Further, additional clarification would improve the usefulness of the frequently asked questions. For example, they state "Any Federal agency submitting data that OMB posts on its SF 133 Report on Budget Execution and Budgetary Resources is required to comply with DATA Act reporting." However, the SF 133 Report for the third quarter of 2016 includes entities such as the Postal Service which are not required by the DATA Act to report financial and payment information. In explaining the frequently asked questions to us, OMB officials clarified that they meant that an entity is required to report if its data appears on the SF 133 and it meets the applicable statutory definition of agency. The frequently asked questions document does not clearly communicate this two-prong approach. Additionally, OMB's verbal clarification when meeting with us does not account for those entities that meet the statutory definition of agency and are required by the DATA Act to report financial and payment information but do not appear on the SF 133. We will continue to assess OMB's efforts to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure effective government-wide implementation and that complete and consistent spending data will be reported as required by the DATA Act, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should reassess, on a periodic basis, which agencies are required to report spending data under the DATA Act and make appropriate notifications to affected agencies.

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

    Comments: OMB does not have plans to reassess, on a periodic basis, which agencies are required to report spending data under the DATA Act. We continue to believe action on this recommendation is important to effectively implement the DATA Act. We will continue to assess OMB's efforts to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure effective implementation of the DATA Act by the agencies and facilitate the further establishment of overall government-wide governance, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should request that non-CFO Act agencies required to report federal spending data under the DATA Act submit updated implementation plans, including updated timelines and milestones, cost estimates, and risks, to address new technical requirements.

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

    Comments: On June 15, 2016, OMB directed CFO Act agencies to update key components of their implementation plans by August 12, 2016. The requirement did not extend to non-CFO Act agencies. OMB stated that it is monitoring non-CFO Act agencies by providing feedback to non-CFO Act agencies through workshops instead of requesting updated implementation plan information. According to OMB officials, OMB has not followed-up with non-CFO Act agencies or requested updated implementation plan information because they are working with the CFO Act agencies which comprise approximately 90 percent of federal spending. In addition to these outreach efforts, OMB has worked with Treasury to engage with small and independent agencies through weekly phone calls and other forms of communication. However, the DATA Act applies to most federal agencies, and we believe that it is important to monitor smaller agencies' implementation plans as well as large agencies. We will continue to assess OMB's efforts to address this recommendation.
    Director: Michelle Sager
    Phone: (202) 512-6806

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To increase the transparency to Congress about the total amount of funds agencies have available in a given year, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should identify and publicly report the total amount of actual budget authority government-wide that is temporarily sequestered and "pops up," or becomes available again to agencies for obligation in the subsequent fiscal year.

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

    Comments: In February 2017, OMB staff told us they will consider additional options for reporting a government-wide total amount of actual budget authority that is temporarily sequestered during preparation of the full 2018 President's Budget.
    Recommendation: To promote further transparency in measuring the federal government's progress against deficit reduction targets required under current law, the Director of the Office of Management of Budget should identify and publicly report the total amount of actual reductions in budget authority government-wide each year as a result of sequestration or the reduction of discretionary spending limits under BBEDCA.

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

    Comments: In February 2017, OMB staff maintained their position of disagreement with this recommendation as summarized in our April 2016 report.
    Director: Mihm, J Christopher
    Phone: (202) 512-3236

    1 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To help ensure that agencies report consistent and comparable data on federal spending, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should provide agencies with additional guidance to address potential clarity, consistency, or quality issues with the definitions for specific data elements including Award Description and Primary Place of Performance and that they clearly document and communicate these actions to agencies providing this data as well as to end-users.

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

    Comments: In May 2016, OMB issued guidance for DATA Act Implementation entitled, Implementing Data-Centric Approach for Reporting Federal Spending Information (Management Procedures Memorandum No. 2016-03). This memorandum provided guidance on new federal prime award reporting requirements, agency assurances, and authoritative sources for reporting. In August 2016, OMB released additional draft guidance describing how agencies should report financial information involving intragovernmental transfers and personally identifiable information, as well as how agency Senior Accountable Officials should provide quality assurances for submitted data. Despite these positive steps, we continue to have concerns about the need for additional guidance to facilitate agency implementation of certain data definitions (such as "primary place of performance" and "award description") in order to produce consistent and comparable information, and whether the guidance provides sufficient detail in areas such as the process for providing assurance on data submissions.
    Director: Mihm, J Christopher
    Phone: (202) 512-6806

    2 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that federal program spending data are provided to the public in a transparent, useful, and timely manner, the Director of OMB should accelerate efforts to determine how best to merge DATA Act purposes and requirements with the GPRAMA requirement to produce a federal program inventory.

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

    Comments: OMB staff told us that they don't expect to be able to identify programs for the purposes of DATA Act reporting until sometime after May 2017. However, they said that they are conducting a program definition and alignment study to identify a more consistent framework for defining federal agency programs with the aim of improving government-wide comparability and tying programs to spending. The effort is supported by a working group comprised of representatives from the CFO community. OMB staff noted that they expect to begin analyzing the results of the study in fall 2016.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the integrity of data standards is maintained over time, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should establish a set of clear policies and processes for developing and maintaining data standards that are consistent with leading practices for data governance.

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

    Comments: OMB and Treasury have taken some initial steps to build a data governance structure including conducting interviews with key stakeholders and developing a set of recommendations for decision-making authority. In September 2016, OMB and Treasury took another step toward establishing a data governance structure by creating a new Data Standards and Management Committee that will be responsible for maintaining established standards and identifying new data elements. However, more remains to be done. As part of our ongoing feedback with OMB, we shared 5 key practices that we believe should inform their plans to develop a data governance framework moving forward.
    Director: Mark Goldstein
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help FCC determine whether its efforts to provide consumers with broadband performance information are effective and meeting consumers' needs, and whether additional efforts--such as a standardized label suggested by FCC's transparency working group--could benefit consumers, FCC should conduct or commission research on the effectiveness of FCC's efforts to provide consumers with broadband performance information and make the results of this research publicly available.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: In written comments provided on the draft report, FCC indicated that it concurred with this recommendation. However, as of August 2017, FCC has not taken steps to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help FCC determine whether its efforts to provide consumers with broadband performance information are effective and meeting consumers' needs, and whether additional efforts--such as a standardized label suggested by FCC's transparency working group--could benefit consumers, FCC should establish performance goals and measures under the agency's relevant strategic objectives that allow it to monitor and report on the impact and effectiveness of its efforts.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: FCC noted that its fiscal year 2015-2018 strategic plan has strategic objectives related to providing consumers with broadband performance information; however, these objectives lack performance goals that define desired outcomes for FCC's efforts to provide consumers with broadband performance information as well as performance measures to monitor the effectiveness of FCC's efforts.
    Director: Mark Goldstein
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve accountability and transparency of the high-cost program, the Chairman of FCC should demonstrate how high-cost funds were used to improve broadband availability, service quality, and capacity at the smallest geographic area possible, such as by conducting analyses of carrier data and publicly reporting this information, at least annually, in a manner that is easy and accessible for interested parties to use.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Mctigue Jr, James R
    Phone: (202) 512-7968

    3 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should issue guidance on how funding or assistance from other government programs can be combined with the NMTC including the extent to which other government funds can be used to leverage the NMTC by being included in the qualified equity investment.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Although the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) has not issued guidance on how funding or assistance from other government programs can be combined with the NMTC, as GAO recommended in July 2014, it has taken steps toward addressing this action. Specifically, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund), which administers the NMTC program, awarded a contract in September 2015 for new empirical research assessing the extent to which other government programs are being used to leverage the NMTC. CDFI officials have said that this research would help examine the various types of public support used for community development projects and assess the depth of the subsidy necessary to mitigate risk and attract new private capital to businesses located in low-income communities. As of October 2016, CDFI officials anticipate that the contract should be completed in March 2017.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should ensure that controls are in place to limit the risk of unnecessary duplication at the project level in funding or assistance from government programs and to limit above market rates of return, i.e., returns that are not commensurate with the NMTC investor's risk.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund), which administers the NMTC program, has developed a plan to issue guidance to help ensure that Community Development Entities (CDE) accurately report on sources of public funds and projected internal rates of return, as GAO recommended in July 2014. In January 2016, the CDFI Fund released updated guidance that explains in more detail how CDEs should report data on the use of other public sources in financing NMTC projects. This guidance should help ensure that CDEs accurately report on sources of public funds. As of October 2016, CDFI Fund officials are also evaluating changes to guidance on how CDEs are to report different project rates of return. The CDFI Fund awarded a contract in September 2015 for new empirical research assessing the extent to which other government programs are being used to leverage the NMTC. According to CDFI officials, this research will help them to examine the various types of public support used for community development projects and assess the depth of the subsidy necessary to mitigate risk and attract new private capital to low-income communities.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should ensure that the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund reviews the disclosure sheet that CDEs are required to provide to low-income community businesses to determine whether it contains data that could be useful for the Fund to retain.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) reported that as of September 2016, the CDFI Fund had reviewed the CDE disclosure sheets provided to low-income community businesses, as GAO recommended in July 2014, and determined that useful data from the sheets were already being collected through other data-gathering tools used by the Fund. In January 2016, CDFI officials reported that they did an initial comparison of the data on the disclosure sheets to the data in the Community Investment Impact System (CIIS)which is the system CDEs use to submit reports to CDFI. Officials said they were continuing to investigate any differences between the disclosure sheets and CIIS. Officials also said that they are performing additional analysis on any new data reporting requirements to meet the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, which aims to minimize the burden that agency data collections impose on the public.
    Director: Carol R. Cha
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    3 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the completeness and accuracy of data submissions to the USASpending.gov website, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in collaboration with Treasury's Fiscal Service, should clarify guidance on (1) agency responsibilities for reporting awards funded by non-annual appropriations; (2) the applicability of USASpending.gov reporting requirements to non-classified awards associated with intelligence operations; (3) the requirement that award titles describe the award's purpose (consistent with our prior recommendation); and (4) agency maintenance of authoritative records adequate to verify the accuracy of required data reported for use by USASpending.gov.

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

    Comments: As of July 2017, OMB and Treasury were working to implement the DATA Act, which includes several provisions that may address these recommendations once fully implemented. 1) OMB staff said they continue to deliberate on agency responsibilities for reporting awards funded by non-annual appropriations. 2) OMB staff provided a Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) addressing the applicability of USASpending.gov reporting requirements for recipient information related to classified or sensitive information. GAO reviewed the FAQ and determined that additional guidance is still needed to ensure complete reporting of unclassified awards as required by FFATA. 3) OMB staff have agreed that it will be important to clarify guidance on how agencies can report on award titles that appropriately describes the awards' purposes and noted that they are working on providing additional guidance to agencies as part of their larger DATA Act implementation efforts. 4) OMB released policy guidance in May 2016 (MPM 2016-03) that identifies the authoritative sources for reporting procurement and award data. However, GAO's review of this policy guidance determined that it does not address the underlying source that can be used to verify the accuracy of non-financial procurement data or any source for data on assistance awards.
    Recommendation: To improve the completeness and accuracy of data submissions to the USASpending.gov website, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in collaboration with Treasury's Fiscal Service, should develop and implement a government-wide oversight process to regularly assess the consistency of information reported by federal agencies to the website other than the award amount.

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

    Comments: As part of their DATA Act implementation efforts, OMB issued policy guidance in May 2016 (MPM 2016-03) that identifies authoritative systems to validate agency spending information. The guidance also directs agency DATA Act Senior Accountable Officials (SAOs) to provide a quarterly assurance regarding the data reported to USASpending.gov and specifies that this assurance should leverage data quality and management controls established in statute, regulation, and Federal-wide policy and be aligned with the internal control and risk management strategies in Circular A-123, and provides information on how agency DATA Act SAOs are to provide assurances over the spending data reported to USASpending.gov. In addition, Treasury's broker is to provide an additional set of validation rules to further ensure the proper formatting of data submitted to USAspending.gov. OMB staff noted that OMB and Treasury had prioritized the linking of financial data to award data as a means of addressing the issue of unreported awards we previously identified. We agree that linking financial and award data can help agencies identify gaps in reporting. However, as of July 2017, OMB did not identify any new or revised processes aimed at addressing the accuracy concerns we addressed other than citing agencies' responsibility to certify the accuracy of their data.
    Recommendation: To improve the completeness of foreign recipient data on the USASpending.gov website, the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation should direct responsible officials within the Corporation's Department of Administration and Finance to report spending information on all assistance award programs to USASpending.gov for prior and future fiscal years in accordance with statutory requirements and OMB guidance.

    Agency: Millennium Challenge Corporation
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Millennium Challenge Corporation has begun reporting awards made in fiscal year 2015. As of July 2017, it has not yet reported awards for previous fiscal years, as we had recommended. We will continue to follow up.
    Director: Dinapoli, Timothy J
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    7 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve civilian IC elements' or their respective departments' ability to mitigate risks associated with the use of contractors, the Director of National Intelligence, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Attorney General of the United States, and Secretaries of Energy and the Treasury should direct responsible agency officials to set time frames to develop guidance that fully addresses the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Policy Letter 11-01's requirements related to closely supporting inherently governmental functions.

    Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation. ODNI has held roundtables to discuss OFPP PL 11-01 implementation with other IC agencies. ODNI also revised ICD 612 but has not developed implementing guidance for ODNI MSD.
    Recommendation: To improve civilian IC elements' or their respective departments' ability to mitigate risks associated with the use of contractors, the Director of National Intelligence, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Attorney General of the United States, and Secretaries of Energy and the Treasury should direct responsible agency officials to set time frames to develop guidance that fully addresses the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Policy Letter 11-01's requirements related to closely supporting inherently governmental functions.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its letter to OMB and the Congress, the agency concurred with this recommendation. In July 2015, the agency issued interim guidance, but the guidance does not fully address OFPP Policy Letter 11-01. The agency explained that once the Federal Acquisition Regulation is updated, the agency's acquisition regulation will be updated as necessary to reflect the new guidance. Since that time, no further action has occurred.
    Recommendation: To improve civilian IC elements' or their respective departments' ability to mitigate risks associated with the use of contractors, the Director of National Intelligence, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Attorney General of the United States, and Secretaries of Energy and the Treasury should direct responsible agency officials to set time frames to develop guidance that fully addresses the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Policy Letter 11-01's requirements related to closely supporting inherently governmental functions.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its letter to OMB and the Congress, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken the actions necessary to implement it.
    Recommendation: To improve civilian IC elements' or their respective departments' ability to mitigate risks associated with the use of contractors, the Director of National Intelligence, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Attorney General of the United States, and Secretaries of Energy and the Treasury should direct responsible agency officials to set time frames to develop guidance that fully addresses the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Policy Letter 11-01's requirements related to closely supporting inherently governmental functions.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its letter to OMB and the Congress, the agency concurred with this recommendation. Treasury issued additional supplemental guidance and is currently updating its procurement and workforce guidance to fully address OFPP Policy Letter 11-01.
    Recommendation: To improve civilian IC elements' or their respective departments' ability to mitigate risks associated with the use of contractors, the Director of National Intelligence, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Attorney General of the United States, and Secretaries of Energy and the Treasury should direct responsible agency officials to set time frames to develop guidance that fully addresses the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Policy Letter 11-01's requirements related to closely supporting inherently governmental functions.

    Agency: Central Intelligence Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: The agency did not comment on our recommendation. Please contact Timothy DiNapoli at (202) 512-4841 or dinapolit@gao.gov for additional information on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve congressional oversight and enhance civilian IC elements' insights into their use of core contract personnel, when reporting to congressional committees, the IC CHCO should clearly specify limitations and significant methodological changes and their associated effects.

    Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: IC Chief Human Capital Officer
    Status: Open

    Comments: The IC CHCO described steps it was taking to implement the recommendation. For example, the IC CHCO stated it highlighted limitations to the data and the reasons for data adjustments from year-to-year in its FY 2014-2016 briefings to Congress. We will continue to follow up with the IC CHCO to determine whether these actions meet the intent of the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the civilian IC elements to strategically plan for their contractors and mitigate associated risks, the IC CHCO should revise the Intelligence Community Directive 612's provisions governing strategic workforce planning to require the IC elements to identify their assessment of the appropriate workforce mix on a function-by-function basis.

    Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: IC Chief Human Capital Officer
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2015, IC CHCO revised Intelligence Community Directive 612 and removed the provisions governing strategic workforce planning. We will continue to follow up with IC CHCO to determine whether steps will be taken to require IC elements to identify an appropriate workforce mix.
    Director: Mihm, J Christopher
    Phone: (202)512-3236

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance the value of Performance.gov for intended audiences and improve the ability to identify and prioritize potential improvements, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget--working with the Performance Improvement Council and the General Services Administration--should clarify the ways that intended audiences could use the information on the Performance.gov website to accomplish specific tasks and specify the design changes that would be required to facilitate that use.

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

    Comments: OMB has taken some steps to address this recommendation, but additional actions are needed. The General Services Administration, on behalf of OMB, conducted usability testing on Performance.gov in September 2013. The test found that (1) sections of the website were not accessible; (2) users were unclear about the purpose of Performance.gov, its intended audiences, and what users can do on the website; (3) users had difficultly locating graphics and understanding if agencies had met their goals; and (4) the search functionality produced poor results and the search terms were not highlighted. This usability test produced several recommendations based on these findings. According to OMB and PIC staff in August 2015 and May 2016, they have taken some actions to address the recommendations. For example, staff addressed the accessibility issue and partly addressed the search issue. However, as of June 2017, OMB has not yet addressed the other two recommendations. Further, OMB and the PIC have not clarified the ways that intended audiences can use the information on the website to accomplish specific tasks, or specified design changes that would be required to facilitate that use, as we described in our report. We will continue to monitor progress.
    Recommendation: To enhance the value of Performance.gov for intended audiences and improve the ability to identify and prioritize potential improvements, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget--working with the Performance Improvement Council and the General Services Administration--should seek to more systematically collect information on the needs of a broader audience, including through the use of customer satisfaction surveys and other approaches recommended by HowTo.gov.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) systematically collect information on the needs of its users, by implementing a website survey, a feedback form on Performance.gov and a working group focused on improving the PREP system. Staff have set up a backlog system to prioritize, store and address user feedback. According to PIC staff, feedback is prioritized based on several factors, including the value it would bring to a larger audience, the cost and estimated time to implement, and the risk and opportunity cost of addressing the feedback. The highest priority items on the product backlog system are placed on the monthly prioritized list for the contractor to begin work on. However, as of June 2017, OMB and the PIC have not identified, engaged, or collected information on the needs of a broader audience, such as interested members of the public, and how those needs might be addressed through the website.
    Recommendation: To enhance the value of Performance.gov for intended audiences and improve the ability to identify and prioritize potential improvements, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget--working with the Performance Improvement Council and the General Services Administration--should seek to ensure that all performance, search, and customer satisfaction metrics, consistent with leading practices outlined in HowTo.gov, are tracked for the website, and, where appropriate, create goals for those metrics to help identify and prioritize potential improvements to Performance.gov.

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

    Comments: As of June 2017, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) monitor 18 of the 24 recommended performance metrics. PIC staff said that they now track the performance measures through the Digital Analytics Program, which does not track the remaining 6 measures. OMB and PIC staff have not created goals for the measures they track to help identify and prioritize potential improvements to Performance.gov. We will continue to monitor progress
    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.