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: "Project planning"

    5 publications with a total of 23 open recommendations including 5 priority recommendations
    Director: James R. McTigue Jr.
    Phone: (202) 512-9110

    14 open recommendations
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including defining objectives to identify risk and defining risk tolerances.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including identifying, analyzing, and responding to risks to achieving the objectives.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including designing control activities to achieve objectives and responding to risks.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including using quality information to achieve objectives.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including communicating internally the necessary quality information about the objectives.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: As LB&I finishes implementing its new approach and decides which selection methods will be used with the campaigns, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the documentation gaps in policies and procedures are addressed for six internal control principles for the selection methods that will be used, including evaluating issues and remediating identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: Also in accordance with federal internal control standards, the Commissioner should direct LB&I to adopt a standard process for monitoring audit selection decisions in the field, such as by modifying the existing quality control system.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should create a timetable with specific dates for implementing its new compliance approach.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should establish metrics to help determine whether the campaign effort overall meets LB&I's goals.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should finalize and document plans to evaluate the human resources expended on campaign activities.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should document lessons learned from stakeholder input and past performance.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should monitor overall performance across future campaigns, not just individual compliance projects, and in doing so ensure that the data used for monitoring accounts for the costs beyond the auditor's time can clearly be linked with specific selection methods, including the Discriminant Analysis System method, to the extent that the selection methods continue to operate.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should develop and document criteria to use in choosing selection methods for campaigns using audits.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that the new campaigns under LB&I's new approach for addressing tax compliance are implemented successfully, the Commissioner should set a timetable to analyze and mitigate risks and document specific metrics for assessing mitigation of identified risks.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    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

    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: Carol R.Cha
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to require MAIS programs to establish their first acquisition program baseline within 2 years of beginning work on the programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department developed a draft process document that states that business system (e.g. financial management, logistics management) programs should start development on at least one release within 24 months after programs have identified the needed capabilities and received approval to conduct further analysis into the potential delivery of the capabilities. We will follow-up with the Department for the final process document and guidance, when available.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) to complete a plan for conducting auditability testing of LMP Increment 2 functionality to ensure that such testing occurs prior to the LMP program management office deploying future functionality.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, in response to our recommendation, the department developed a plan to conduct system testing on LMP Increment 2 in accordance with the Federal Information System Controls Audit Manual. The officials stated that the department's plan was to conduct this testing both prior to and after the deployment of new functionality to users. We have requested additional information and documentation from DOD regarding these LMP Increment 2 test plans in order to determine whether the testing associated with auditability of the system was to be conducted before deployment to users.
    Director: Mctigue Jr, James R
    Phone: (202) 512-7968

    3 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: Congress should consider altering the TEFRA audit procedures to require partnerships to designate a qualified Tax Matters Partner (TMP) and, if that TMP is an entity, to also identify a representative who is an individual and for partnerships to keep the designation up to date.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: In October 2015, H.R. 1314 was amended to include the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, which included provisions that would repeal the TEFRA audit procedures and put in place new audit procedures for partnerships with more than 100 partners. This legislation was signed into law in November 2015. According to the legislation, the new audit procedures would require partnerships to designate a qualified representative for the partnership audit. However, the legislation did not require audited partnerships to identify a representative who is an individual nor do they require that audited partnerships keep the designation up to date as suggested in GAO's report. The legislation does give IRS the authority to develop regulations about how the partnership representative should be designated by the partnership and such regulations may address the items in GAO's report. Currently regulations are under development at IRS. The legislation specifies that the new partnership audit procedures apply to partnership returns filed for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017.
    Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should track the results of large partnerships audits: (a) define a large partnership based on asset size and number of partners; (b) revise the activity codes to align with the large partnership definition; and (c) separately account for field audits and campus audits.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: No executive action taken. IRS said that it plans to address parts of GAO's September 2014 recommendation about tracking the audit results on large partnerships but has not yet done so. In November 2014, IRS said that it plans to define large partnerships using asset size and the number of partners and to find an alternative method to account for field and campus large partnership cases using existing capabilities, but that revising IRS's activity codes to enable it to track large partnership audits would be dependent on future funding. In March 2017, IRS told GAO that it would need until September 2017 to address this recommendation as IRS continues to monitor efforts to implement the Bipartisan Budget Act (BBA). Section 1101 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (Public law 114-74), which was enacted in November 2015, includes provisions that repeal TEFRA audit procedures and put in place audit procedures that would require partnerships with more than 100 partners to pay audit adjustments at the partnership level, among other changes. IRS explained that these changes significantly alter the procedural and administrative components of partnerships. IRS said it would need this additional time to analyze options and determine the most appropriate steps for effectively tracking the results of large partnership audits. Without changes to tracking partnership audit results, IRS cannot conduct analysis to identify ways to better plan and use IRS resources in auditing large partnerships as well as analyze whether large partnerships present a high noncompliance risk.
    Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should analyze the audit results by these activity codes and types of audits to identify opportunities to better plan and use IRS resources in auditing large partnerships.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of October 2016, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said that based on completion of GAO's recommendations on tracking results and after sufficient large partnership audit results have been obtained, it still plans to conduct a study to analyze these results and recommend any ways in which resource use can be improved. IRS still expects to complete this analysis by September 2018.
    Director: Maurer, Diana C
    Phone: (202) 512-9627

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help reduce the risk of duplication by strengthening DHS's administration and oversight of these programs, and to better identify and reduce the risk of duplication through improved data collection and coordination, the FEMA Administrator should take steps, when developing non disaster grant management system (ND Grants) and responding to the May 2011 FEMA report recommendations on data requirements, to ensure that FEMA collects project information with the level of detail needed to better position the agency to identify any potential unnecessary duplication within and across the four grant programs, weighing any additional costs of collecting these data.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, FEMA had taken steps to address GAO's February 2012 recommendation, but actions were not complete. For example, in fiscal year 2014, FEMA modified its existing grants data system to capture more robust project-level data--such as project budget data--for the Homeland Security Grant Program, which includes the State Homeland Security Grant Program and the Urban Areas Security Initiative. However, FEMA stated that it will not be able to use ND grants to cross-check for redundant projects across all preparedness grant programs until project-based applications are deployed for all preparedness grant programs in the system. For example, Port Security Grant Program and Transit Security Grant Program applications are not housed in the legacy grants data system that was modified to collect more specific project data. To mitigate this issue, FEMA reported that its program officers manually cross-check for redundant projects across all preparedness grant programs. Further, grant program policies call for applicants to coordinate across all preparedness grant stakeholders to help ensure unity of effort and avoid redundant investment proposals. Although future upgrades over several years to ND Grants are planned to eliminate duplication during the application process, FEMA believes the most efficient use of resources is to use current legacy systems to identify duplication in the meantime. Using this interim approach to collect more specific project-level data during the grant application process should help FEMA strengthen the administration and oversight of its grant programs until FEMA implements its long-term solution to upgrade ND Grants. However, implementing ND Grants as previously planned would better position FEMA to identify potentially unnecessary duplication within and across grant programs, as ND Grants was designed to have greater project-level enhancement capability than the legacy system.