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: "Quality assurance"

    33 publications with a total of 91 open recommendations including 6 priority recommendations
    Director: Brenda S. Farrell
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    7 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should assess the feasibility of collecting additional workload data, such as the amount of direct and indirect labor hours associated with each case, and including such data in future personnel requirements assessments, as appropriate. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should report regularly to Congress on the timeliness of civilian and contractor investigations, including those contractor and subcontractor cases exceeding the 180-day timeliness requirement. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should implement a process to document employee recusals and impairments to independence and incorporate such information into an aggregate-level evaluation of threats to DODIG's independence. (Recommendation 3)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should establish and clearly communicate a declination policy for nondiscretionary cases in the AI Investigations Manual or other guidance, and align this policy with the intake policy. (Recommendation 4)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should revise the existing internal controls checklist to include all key case-file documentation and required investigative events. (Recommendation 5)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should work in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, and the inspectors general of the defense intelligence components to establish a process to fully implement the requirements of Directive-Type Memorandum 13-008 so that DODIG (1) receives notifications of all allegations received by the components, (2) reviews all component determinations to not investigate allegations, and (3) reviews all investigations conducted by the components. (Recommendation 6)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD Inspector General should develop quality performance measures and enhance existing timeliness performance measures to reflect key attributes of successful performance measures. At minimum, these measures should be clear, quantifiable, and objective, and they should include a baseline assessment of current performance. (Recommendation 7)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Debra A. Draper
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the WTC Health Program quality assurance (QA) program addresses required QA elements, including the three elements mandated in the Zadroga Act, the Director of NIOSH should develop and implement procedures for conducting systematic reviews of each clinic's QA plan (recommendation 1).

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the WTC Health Program QA program addresses required QA elements, including the three elements mandated in the Zadroga Act, the Director of NIOSH should develop and disseminate guidance that clearly specifies how the clinics should address mandated elements in their QA plans (recommendation 2).

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the WTC Health Program QA program addresses required QA elements, including the three elements mandated in the Zadroga Act, the Director of NIOSH should develop uniform performance measures that clinics are required to use to consistently evaluate mandated elements through their audits every quarter (recommendation 3).

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Rebecca Gambler
    Phone: (202) 512-8777

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better assess whether RSCs are meeting USRAP objectives, the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration should develop outcome-based indicators, as required by State policy.

    Agency: Department of State: Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To better assess whether RSCs are meeting USRAP objectives, the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration should monitor RSC performance against such indicators on a regular basis.

    Agency: Department of State: Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that USCIS officers effectively adjudicate applications for refugee status, the Director of USCIS should develop and implement a plan to deploy officers with national security expertise on circuit rides.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that USCIS officers effectively adjudicate applications for refugee status, the Director of USCIS should conduct regular quality assurance assessments of refugee application adjudications across USCIS's Refugee Affairs Division and International Operations Division.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: USCIS provided documentation that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials conducted a quality assurance assessment of refugee adjudications in July 2017 and has plans to conduct an additional quality assurance assessment in January or February 2018. To fully address this recommendation, USCIS should demonstrate a continued commitment to conducting regular quality assurance assessments of refugee application adjudications.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that USRAP applicant fraud prevention and detection controls are adequate and effectively implemented, the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State should conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that USRAP applicant fraud prevention and detection controls are adequate and effectively implemented, the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State should conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Maurer, Diana C
    Phone: (202) 512-8777

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the FBI Laboratory obtains additional transcripts, the FBI Director should require that the FBI Laboratory's procedure for tracking and obtaining transcripts routinely captures and uses additional information and data critical to transcript acquisition, such as the reason a transcript is unavailable, when it is expected to be available, the court jurisdiction, and a point of contact for the transcript.

    Agency: Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Anne-Marie Fennell
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NOAA Administrator to ensure that NOAA's efforts to improve its cost comparison reports include actions to fully track capital asset depreciation costs and account for ships in port undergoing major maintenance in accordance with its standard operating procedure.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, NOAA reported that it has taken steps to start developing procedures to fully track capital asset depreciation costs. NOAA expects to implement draft procedures by September 30, 2018, and fully implement them in fall 2019. In addition, NOAA stated that, by January 31, 2018, it will review and assess the current methodology it uses to account for the costs of ships in port undergoing major maintenance. NOAA intends to implement a revised methodology by February 28, 2018.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NOAA Administrator to develop a strategy for expanding NOAA's use of the private sector in its hydrographic survey program, as required by law.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, NOAA reported that it had begun developing a strategy to expand its hydrographic data collection program, and has determined that there are significant growth opportunities for private sector involvement in its program. NOAA intends to take several actions to promote the hydrographic surveying industry, and will compile the findings from the actions taken and issue a final strategy report by December 31, 2019.
    Director: J. Christopher Mihm
    Phone: (202) 512-6806

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To promote transparency in the development and management of data standards for reporting federal spending, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should ensure that the Data Standards Committee makes information about the topics of the committee's proceedings and any resulting outcomes available to the public.

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

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

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure future large-scale rehabilitation projects are in line with leading project management practices, WMATA should develop a policy that requires and includes relevant procedures specifying that, prior to starting large-scale projects, WMATA should use detailed data on the conditions of assets to develop project objectives and scope.

    Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
    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 future large-scale rehabilitation projects are in line with leading project management practices, WMATA should develop a policy that requires and includes relevant procedures specifying that, prior to starting large-scale projects, WMATA should evaluate and compare alternative ways of accomplishing the project objectives, including estimates for the alternatives' costs and impacts.

    Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
    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 future large-scale rehabilitation projects are in line with leading project management practices, WMATA should develop a policy that requires and includes relevant procedures specifying that, prior to starting large-scale projects, WMATA should develop a comprehensive project management plan for the selected alternative--to include key elements such as detailed plans for managing the project's scope, schedule, and cost--for those projects that may not be designated major capital projects.

    Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Debra A. Draper
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should collaborate to develop time frames and interim milestones for tracking and implementing each of their jointly developed recommended improvements.

    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: The Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should collaborate to develop time frames and interim milestones for tracking and implementing each of their jointly developed recommended improvements.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should collaborate to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis for the FHCC to establish a baseline for measuring the facility's efficiency over time.

    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: The Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should collaborate to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis for the FHCC to establish a baseline for measuring the facility's efficiency over time.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Carolyn L. Yocom
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    1 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should take immediate steps to assess and improve the data available for Medicaid program oversight, including, but not limited to, T-MSIS. Such steps could include (1) refining the overall data priority areas in T-MSIS to better identify those variables that are most critical for reducing improper payments, and (2) expediting efforts to assess and ensure the quality of these T-MSIS data.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of September 2017, CMS has begun targeted efforts to assess and improve T-MSIS data available for Medicaid program oversight, including initiating a pilot study with four states to identify data anomalies and obtaining input from external experts on data quality. However, because these initiatives are ongoing and further efforts to improve T-MSIS data are still evolving, this recommendation remains open.
    Director: Alicia Puente Cackley
    Phone: (202) 512-8678

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the transparency and accountability over the compensation paid to WYO companies and set appropriate compensation rates, the FEMA administrator should take into account WYO company characteristics that may impact companies' expenses and profits when developing the new compensation methodology and rates.

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

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Carol C. Harris
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    9 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS Chief Information Officer (CIO), in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of the Office of Transformation Coordination (OTC), to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to complete planning for software releases prior to initiating development and ensure software meets business expectations prior to deployment.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had taken steps to address this recommendation. In particular, in June 2017, USCIS provided an updated policy, dated April 2017, governing planning and deploying software releases. USCIS also demonstrated partial compliance with that policy. For example, it provided some release planning review documentation for recent releases that are required by the updated policy, including readiness review memos for releases 7.2 and 8.1. However, USCIS did not demonstrate that the program responsible for developing the USCIS Electronic Immigration System (USCIS ELIS) was consistently following its updated policy. For example, USCIS did not demonstrate that the program was completing all planning activities prior to initiating development, as called for in its updated policy. Moreover, the agency did not demonstrate compliance with its previous policy for all software releases planned and deployed since our July 2016 report. We will continue to work with USCIS to monitor actions the agency is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to consistently implement the principles of the framework adopted for Agile software development.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2017, USCIS provided updated policy governing the development of software releases, dated April 2017, along with release planning artifacts specific to USCIS ELIS. The updated policy included an appendix devoted to generally accepted agency practices and applying Agile principles in the agency. However, USCIS had not clearly indicated if USCIS ELIS was to implement the practices described in the policy. For example, the updated policy did not require program compliance with the generally accepted agency practices. Moreover, supporting artifacts from the release planning process did not always define a commitment to a particular development methodology or set of development practices. For example, the team process agreements, which describe how members of individual teams will work with each other, did not indicate if developers were to adhere to the practices described in updated USCIS policy. We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to define and consistently execute appropriate roles and responsibilities for individuals responsible for development activities consistent with its selected development framework.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in June 2017, USCIS provided updated policy, dated April 2017, governing the development of software releases and release planning artifacts. The updated policy and release documentation defined some roles and responsibilities that were previously only described by USCIS in its informal November 2014 management model, such as the authority and responsibility of a product owner. However, program documentation and policy did not define all of the roles and responsibilities. For example, program documentation and policy did not define the roles and responsibilities of a facilitator, or Scrum Master, which is a position identified in leading practices for software development using Scrum, the development methodology previously identified by the program. In addition, USCIS did not demonstrate that it had defined and committed to an updated development methodology for software releases. Such a defined methodology will impact expectations for the roles and responsibilities in software development. Without such a defined methodology or approach to Agile software development, it is not clear if roles and responsibilities defined by previously documented approach to Agile software development are still applicable for the current development approach. Moreover, documentation associated with program releases and updated policy did not define all of the roles and responsibilities for positions described by USCIS in its May 2017 written response to GAO. We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to identify all system users and involve them in release planning activities.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DHS and USCIS had not provided information demonstrating that the department has addressed this recommendation. In October 2016, DHS provided a written response stating that the USCIS Office of Information Technology and Office of Transformation Coordination were working closely with the various USCIS directorates to obtain and integrate feedback through regular review sessions with the end users and through additional end user testing. However, as of July 2017, DHS and USCIS have not provided new information about the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to write user stories that identify user roles, include estimates of complexity, take no longer than one sprint to complete, and describe business value.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had provided GAO with documentation intended to demonstrate that the agency had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2017, USCIS provided updated policy governing the development of software releases along with release planning artifacts specific to USCIS ELIS and an Independent Verification and Validation assessment. The agency also provided a series of backlogs that captured user stories for some software releases. In addition, the Independent Verification and Validation assessment indicated that the program was tracking user story quality as part of assessing whether value was continuously discovered and aligned to the mission. However, the assessment report provided to GAO indicated a negative trend for this outcome. Moreover, USCIS policy no longer set expectations regarding user story development. In addition, supporting artifacts from the release planning process did not always define a commitment to a particular development methodology, which is turn impacts the expectations for writing user stories. Finally, backlogs provided by USCIS did not cover all releases in development since our July 2016 report and did not include enough detail to assess all aspects of the user story process (e.g., story size and user involvement). We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to establish outcomes for Agile software development.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in April 2017, USCIS issued updated policy governing software development at the agency. The updated policy included an appendix devoted to generally accepted agency practices and applying Agile principles in the agency. This appendix also included a set of ten outcomes associated with using Agile practices at USCIS. For example, outcomes included that value is continuously discovered and aligned to the mission. However, the updated policy did not require program compliance with the practices and principles described in the appendix. Moreover, the agency did not demonstrate that USCIS ELIS had committed to achieving a specific set of outcomes for Agile software development, such as the outcomes described in the USCIS policy. We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that the program executes Agile software development for USCIS ELIS consistent with its own policies and guidance and follows applicable leading practices, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update, as needed, existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to monitor program performance and report to appropriate entities through the collection of reliable metrics.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2017, USCIS provided updated policy governing the development of software that called for teams to prepare an Operations Monitoring Plan or dashboard showing the practices, tools, and measures that will monitor applications in production. The agency also provided a series of documents from internal systems and processes intended to monitor performance, such as a product dashboard for analyzing code quality (i.e., SonarQube) and a report from its Independent Verification and Validation team. However, the program was undergoing a re-baseline and had yet to document updated cost, schedule, and performance expectations against which to monitor. Moreover, the agency did not demonstrate that other metrics, such as customer satisfaction and team velocity, were being reliably collected. We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help manage the USCIS ELIS system, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to conduct unit and integration, and functional acceptance tests, and code inspection consistent with stated program goals.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, USCIS had taken steps to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2017, USCIS provided artifacts from internal systems in place to monitor software development performance. These metrics monitored aspects of testing, such as code quality and code coverage. However, the program did not provide an updated Test and Evaluation Master Plan, which is a document it will produce as part of its ongoing effort to re-baseline. A Test and Evaluation Master Plan sets the testing expectations for the program as agreed upon with its stakeholders in DHS and USCIS. The updated plan will provide a basis for further evaluation of the steps DHS and USCIS have taken to address this recommendation. Moreover, the agency did not demonstrate that functional acceptance tests were being conducted in accordance with stated program goals. For example, the agency did not provide acceptance criteria or the associated tests demonstrating that user stories passed the defined acceptance criteria. We will continue to work with USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions it is taking to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help manage the USCIS ELIS system, the Secretary of DHS should direct the Director of USCIS to direct the USCIS CIO, in coordination with the DHS CIO and the Chief of OTC, to review and update existing policies and guidance and consider additional controls to develop complete test plans and cases for interoperability and end user testing, as defined in the USCIS Transformation Program Test and Evaluation Master Plan, and document the results.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DHS and USCIS had not provided information demonstrating that they had addressed this recommendation. In October 2016, DHS provided a written response indicating that an internal process for revisiting the USCIS ELIS Test and Evaluation Master Plan had been initiated, with participation from all relevant stakeholder groups. A Test and Evaluation Master Plan sets the testing expectations for the program as agreed upon with its stakeholders in DHS and USCIS. The updated plan will provide a basis for further evaluation of the steps DHS and USCIS have taken to address this recommendation. The letter also stated that USCIS had begun to work on a policy for new interoperability test procedures. Moreover, the letter added that end user testing is a continuing activity, including providing feedback of observed issues into the development queue, with the slow launch of the naturalization capabilities in USCIS ELIS being a model. However, as of July 2017, DHS and USCIS had not provided new information about the status of this recommendation. We will continue to work with DHS and USCIS to obtain additional documentation about actions they are taking to address this recommendation.
    Director: Frank Rusco
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    7 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to develop a consistent definition of patent quality, and clearly articulate this definition in agency documents and other guidance.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will update relevant agency guidance, conduct training, and take other actions in response to this recommendation by March 2017.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to further develop measurable, quantifiable goals and performance indicators related to patent quality as part of the agency's strategic plan.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will update existing indicators and, as appropriate, develop new measures by October 2016.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to analyze the time examiners need to perform a thorough patent examination. This action could be taken in conjunction with the recommendation in our report on USPTO's prior art search capabilities (GAO-16-479).

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will complete an examination of expectancy by April 2017.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to analyze how current performance incentives affect the extent to which examiners perform thorough examinations of patent applications.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will complete an assessment of examination quality across current incentive award tiers by September 2017.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to establish a process to provide data on the results of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings to managers and staff in the USPTO's Technology Centers, and analyze PTAB data for trends in patent quality issues to identify whether additional training, guidance, or other actions are needed to address trends.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will establish a process to provide examiners with information on various PTAB proceedings by September 2016.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to evaluate the effects of compact prosecution and other agency application and examination policies on patent quality. In doing so, USPTO should determine if any changes are needed to ensure that the policies are not adversely affecting patent quality.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will complete an assessment of various policies on patent quality by September 2017.
    Recommendation: To help improve patent quality, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the USPTO to consider whether to require patent applicants to include claim clarity tools--such as a glossary of terms, a check box to signal functional claim language, or claim charts--in each patent application.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the agency's action plan, USPTO will issue a request for comments on additional claim clarity tools by September 2017 and determine any new requirements by January 2018.
    Director: Dave Wise
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    2 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve the quality and transparency of data entered into FRPP as GSA transitions the database to a platform that would enable greater government-wide use, the Administrator of GSA, in consultation with OMB and federal agencies, should (1) assess the reliability of FRPP data by determining how individual agencies collect and report FRPP data for each FRPP field, including any supplemental guidance used by agencies to comply with government-wide FRPP data definitions as part of the annual certification of FRPP data; (2) analyze the differences in collecting and reporting practices used by these agencies; and (3) identify and make available to FRPP users the limitations of using FRPP data, in the context of how the data are intended to be used in real property decision making and to measure real property performance across agencies and update federal guidance to address limitations, as needed.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: GSA partially agreed with the recommendation noting that it has limited resources to fully analyze and map the data relative to FRPP data definitions, and that it is the responsibility of individual agencies to ensure reliability of the data and compliance with FRPP definitions. As of October 2016, GSA has taken some action to implement this recommendation. GSA told us it has made progress by conducting an in-depth survey in June 2106 focusing on several data elements including: replacement value, status, owned and otherwise management operating costs, repair needs, utilization, and lease costs. The survey asked agencies questions regarding the processes/resources used to source and compile these data elements from agency IT systems as well as internal agency guidance. GSA received responses from 24 agencies and stated it plans to complete its initial analysis of the survey in the fall of 2016 and indicate limitations of these data elements. GSA plans to conduct a series of working group meetings with agencies to conduct an in depth review of the survey results and to develop a set of recommendations for the Federal Real Property Council. GSA said these recommendations may include, but are not limited to, altering data dictionary definitions, sharing best or common practices for reporting these data elements, and sharing the limitations on the use of these data elements. Based on the working group outcomes and input from the Federal Real Property Council and OMB, GSA plans to produce a white paper on these topics by the latter part of 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance the usefulness of the National Strategy for managing federal real property government-wide, the Director of OMB should expand the National Strategy to further address long-standing real property management challenges by: (1) expanding the scope to include maintenance and repair needs; (2) articulating planned actions and identifying alternative approaches, including alternative-funding mechanisms, to address underlying causes of the real property problems; (3) ensuring that performance measures at the agency level inform the overall progress of the National Strategy; and (4) determining the government-wide costs, benefits, and risks by leveraging agencies' long-term capital plans and identifying approaches to optimally manage that risk.

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

    Comments: When we confirm the actions that OMB has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: J. Alfredo Gómez
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help federal, state, local, and private sector decision makers access and use the best available climate information, the Executive Office of the President should designate a federal entity to develop and periodically update a set of authoritative climate change observations and projections for use in federal decision making, which state, local, and private sector decision makers could also access to obtain the best available climate information.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of 6/7/17, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help federal, state, local, and private sector decision makers access and use the best available climate information, the Executive Office of the President should designate a federal entity to create a national climate information system with defined roles for federal agencies and nonfederal entities with existing statutory authority.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of 6/7/17, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.
    Director: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are accurate and well-documented, require all relevant departments and subordinate commands to provide documentation of cost-estimating details that include both source data and calculations.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are credible, implement management requirements to establish and conduct formal cross-checks of major cost elements among the relevant departments and subordinate commands to determine whether they are replicable.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To better determine the costs needed to sustain the equipment to support a Marine Air Ground Task Force capability, the Commandant of the Marine Corps should direct the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics to incorporate the four characteristics of reliable cost estimates in the Marine Corps' forthcoming prepositioning programs budget development policy, and specifically to ensure that estimates are comprehensive, implement a standardized structure for collecting all the necessary details used to develop and support cost estimates from all relevant departments and subordinate commands.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Recommendation: As part of its quality assurance program for ensuring that the Marine Corps has accurate and reliable information on inventory data for stored assets used to support combatant commanders' requirements, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, in consultation with the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization, should take steps to update the Technical Manual on Logistics Support for the Marine Corps Prepositioning Program - Norway and the Local Bilateral Agreement, to incorporate guidance and instructions on conducting a quality assurance review that assesses the accuracy and reliability of the Norwegian Equipment Information Management System.

    Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
    Status: Open

    Comments: Based on our review of DOD's database on DOD's actions addressing GAO recommendations and follow up with DOD officials, as of September 1, 2017, DOD has not yet addressed this recommendation.
    Director: Johana Ayers
    Phone: (202) 512-5741

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that the Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service (DCPAS) and DOD components are determining LQA eligibility consistently with DOD's LQA Instruction, the DSSR, and OPM compensation claim decisions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to require the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy or DCPAS, as delegated, to monitor reviews of LQA eligibility determinations conducted by DOD components.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: On February 11, 2016, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy issued a memorandum to conduct a review of overseas allowances and differentials (including Living Quarters Allowance (LQA)) paid to civilian employees. This memorandum orders DOD components to review 5 percent of their employees who received LQA during the calendar year 2015. These reports are to identify the employees locations, the annual amount of each allowance each employee receives, the laws and regulations authorizing the allowance, and confirmation that supporting documents used to determine employee eligibility for the allowance were reviewed and found acceptable. The February 2016 memorandum states that these reviews should be completed within 90 days of its issuance. However, the memorandum does not require the monitoring of these reviews by the Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service. In the absence of such a requirement, Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service officials told us in May 2016 that they had started receiving the results of these reviews and would assess them as soon as possible for any inconsistencies. These officials have not yet provided any documents demonstrating their monitoring of these reviews.
    Director: Bertoni, Daniel
    Phone: (202) 512-7215

    3 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To help ensure that Total Disability Individual Unemployability (TDIU) decisions are well supported and TDIU benefits are provided only to veterans whose service-connected disabilities prevent them from obtaining or retaining substantially gainful employment, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to update the TDIU guidance to clarify how rating specialists should determine unemployability when making TDIU benefit decisions. This updated guidance could clarify whether factors such as enrollment in school, education level, and prior work history should be used and if so, how to consider them; and whether or not to assign more weight to certain factors than others. Updating the guidance would also give VBA the opportunity to re-examine the applicability, if at all, of other factors it has identified as extraneous.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: VA reported in March 2017 that an internal workgroup is in the final stage of collecting and analyzing the data to determine if age should be a factor in deciding Total Disability Individual Unemployability (TDIU), and whether or not to use positive vocational assessments to disallow TDIU claims. VA reported that the workgroup is also in the process of completing an Inter-Rater Variability Assessment (IRVA) to examine the disparity in rating decisions involving entitlement to TDIU and service connection. After completion of the internal study on TDIU and the IRVA, targeted for September 30, 2017, the workgroup will submit its preliminary analysis and recommendations to VBA leadership for a decision on the next courses of action for future policy decisions and will then update any related guidance, as appropriate.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that TDIU decisions are well supported and TDIU benefits are provided only to veterans whose service-connected disabilities prevent them from obtaining or retaining substantially gainful employment, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to verify the self-reported income provided by veterans (a) applying for TDIU benefits and (b) undergoing the annual eligibility review process by comparing such information against IRS earnings data, which VBA currently has access to for this purpose. VA could also explore options to obtain more timely earnings data from other sources to ensure that claimants are working within allowable eligibility limits

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: VA is developing an upfront verification process by expanding the data sharing agreement with Social Security Administration (SSA), which enables VA to receive federal tax information via an encrypted electronic transmission through a secure portal. Once a Total Disability Individual Unemployability (TDIU) claim is received, VA will request the reported income through the secured SSA portal and receive a response within 10-16 days. VA reported that process will serve as a more efficient way to receive income data in a timely manner and maintain the integrity of the TDIU benefit while reducing improper payments. The development and implementation of the upfront verification process for TDIU claimants is anticipated to be completed by July 21, 2017. Meanwhile, VA has reinstituted the data match agreement with SSA through December 2017, which collects earned income (employment wages). The agreement allows VBA to compare reported income earnings of TDIU beneficiaries to earnings actually received. In addition, VA completed the upfront income verification manual guidance and is planning to pilot the guidance prior to implementation. VA also has drafted new manual guidance for the annual eligibility review process and the documents are currently under review. As of March 2017, VA reported delays and stated it planned to fully implement the annual eligibility review process by June 30, 2017.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that TDIU decisions are well supported and TDIU benefits are provided only to veterans whose service-connected disabilities prevent them from obtaining or retaining substantially gainful employment, in light of VA's agreement with the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to develop a plan to study the complex TDIU policy questions on (1) whether age should be considered when deciding if veterans are unemployable and (2) whether it is possible to disallow TDIU benefits for veterans whose vocational assessment indicated they would be employable after rehabilitation.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, a VA workgroup is in the final stages of collecting and analyzing the data to determine if age should be a factor in deciding TDIU, and whether or not the agency will use positive vocational assessments to disallow TDIU claims. Additionally, the workgroup is in the process of completing an Inter-Rather Variability Study (IRVA) to examine the disparity in rating decisions involving entitlement to TDIU and service connection. After completion of the internal study on TDIU and the IRVA, targeted for September 30, 2017, he workgroup will submit its preliminary analysis and recommendations and VA will then decide on the next courses of action for future policy decisions. Due to VA's earlier conclusions, in April 2015, that no immediate changes to its current guidance were necessary, and in the spirit of this recommendation, the status will remain open until the completion of these ongoing efforts.
    Director: Debra A. Draper
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To eliminate the fragmentation and duplication in the storage of unclassified OEHS data, the Secretary of Defense should determine which IT system--DOEHRS or MESL--should be used to store specific types of unclassified OEHS data, clarify the department's policy accordingly, and require all other departmental and military-service-specific policies to be likewise amended and implemented to ensure consistency.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In November 2016, officials told us that draft versions of the revised DoDI 6490.03, Deployment Health, and the new Defense Health Agency Procedural Instruction (DHA PI) 6490.03, Deployment Health, are still under review with DOD components. These revised and updated documents will address the recommendation on OEHS data storage. Additionally, DoDI 6055.05, Occupational and Environmental Health (OEH), and Military Service and Combatant Command policy and guidance documents are still being revised to be consistent with DoDI 6490.03 and DHA PI 6490.03 after they are published. These revisions will ensure the consistency among policies. As of November 2016, the entire process is expected to be complete within 10 to 14 months.
    Recommendation: To ensure the reliability of OEHS data, the Secretary of Defense should establish clear policies and procedures for performing quality assurance reviews of the OEHS data collected during deployment, to include verifying the completeness and the reasonableness of these data, and require that all other related military-service-specific policies be amended and implemented to ensure consistency.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2016, officials told us that draft versions of the revised DoDI 6490.03, Deployment Health, and the new Defense Health Agency Procedural Instruction (DHA PI) 6490.03, Deployment Health, are in review among the DOD Components. Further, DoDI 6055.05, Occupational and Environmental Health (OEH) and Military Service and Combatant Command policy and guidance documents will be revised to be consistent with DoDI 6490.03 and DHA PI 6490.03 after they are published. In addition, DOD is exploring improvement to the data quality assurance functionality within the Defense Occupational and Environmental Health Readiness System Industrial Hygiene (DOEHRS-IH). A new DOEHRS-IH version (2.0.18.1) was released on August 19, 2016 that contained several system enhancements and defect corrections to improve overall data quality in the system. DOD anticipates additional releases in FY 2017 that will further improve DOEHRS-IH data quality. The revised policies and the new DOEHRS-IH functionality will appropriately address the recommendation on quality assurance of OEHS data.
    Recommendation: To ensure that potential occupational and environmental health risks are mitigated for servicemembers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Secretary of Defense should require CENTCOM to revise its policy to ensure that base commanders' decisions on whether to implement risk mitigation recommendations identified in OEHSAs are adequately documented and consistently monitored by the appropriate command.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2016, officials told us that the current DoDI 6055.01, DoD Safety and Occupational Health Program, requires DoD components to establish procedures that document, archive, and reevaluate risk management decisions on a recurring basis. Draft versions of the revised DoDI 6490.03, Deployment Health, and the new Defense Health Agency Procedural Instruction (DHA PI) 6490.03, Deployment Health, include language that is consistent with DoDI 6055.01. Additionally, U.S. Central Command Regulation 40-2 (CCR 40-2), which was updated as of March 8, 2016, references the requirement to establish procedures to assure risk management decisions are documented, archived, and reevaluated on a recurring basis. The DOD is also exploring a risk management decision and monitoring functionality in DOEHRS-IH. It has identified and approved the necessary system change requests required to improve risk management decisions and monitoring functionality. These functionalities are primarily focused around the Occupational & Environmental Health Site Assessment (OEHSA) and associated exposure pathways, sampling plans, and assessments. Subject to the availability of FY 2017 funding, DOD will implement the system change requests, and achieve the required enhancements to DOEHRS-IH. These policies once published and the new DOEHRS-IH functionality will appropriately address the recommendation on documenting and monitoring risk management decisions.
    Director: David C. Trimble
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    5 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOE's management and oversight of the WTP project, the Secretary of Energy should, in assessing the alternatives, revise cost and schedule estimates for the Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System and the Tank Waste Characterization and Staging facility in accordance with industry best practices.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: We will monitor the status of this proposed requirement.
    Recommendation: To improve DOE's management and oversight of the WTP project, the Secretary of Energy should revise the statements of mission need for the two proposed projects to allow DOE to consider a variety of alternatives without limiting potential solutions, consistent with the DOE requirement that mission need statements should not identify particular solution such as equipment, facility, or technology.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOE DARTS report on 5/19/16, revision of the statement of mission for the Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System "has become overcome by events". We will continue to follow up on this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOE's management and oversight of the WTP project, the Secretary of Energy should, in accordance with DOE's Office of River Protection quality assurance policy, conduct an extent-of-condition review for WTP's High Level Waste and Low Activity Waste facilities' systems that have not been reviewed by DOE.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendations and in its written responses to our report stated that it had implemented them. However, we believe additional actions are needed, as indicated in the priority recommendations letter we sent to DOE in 2017. To fully address the recommendations, DOE should conduct an extent-of-condition review for WTP's High Level Waste and Low Activity Waste facilities' systems.
    Recommendation: To improve DOE's management and oversight of the WTP project, the Secretary of Energy should consider whether or to what extent construction activities for the High Level Waste and Low Activity Waste facilities should be further limited until aggressive risk mitigation strategies are developed and employed to address technical challenges that DOE, the contractor, and others have identified but not yet resolved.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOE has noted that these activities were already limited and stated that a specific set of criteria has been established for resuming construction on the High Level Waste facility. However, as we noted in our report, an extent-of-condition review has not been performed on the remainder of the facility's systems, and recommendations from the facility's design and operability review have not been implemented. DOE also stated that construction on the Low Activity Waste facility is nearly complete, that the WTP Federal Project Director has a detailed risk register, and that each remaining risk is being proactively mitigated. This statement, however, does not fully reflect the extent or potential seriousness of the technical risks that remain. An extent-of-condition review may mean limiting the production of new design documents until this review is complete in order to avoid potential costly rework. We believe additional actions are needed. To fully address the recommendation, DOE should consider whether or to what extent construction activities for those facilities should be further limited until this review is completed and aggressive risk mitigation strategies are developed and employed.
    Recommendation: To improve DOE's management and oversight of the WTP project, the Secretary of Energy should enlist the services of another agency or external entity to serve as an owner's agent to assist the Office of River Protection in reviewing and evaluating the WTP contractor's design and approach to mitigating design challenges.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: Congress required DOE to meet this requirement in the 2016 NDAA, and DOE reports that they issued a contract to Parsons Government Services on September 29, 2015. We have requested a copy of this contract for review to ensure that the recommendation has been addressed.
    Director: Beryl H. Davis
    Phone: (202) 512-2623

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help reduce the risk that improper payment estimates related to DRAA funding developed and reported by selected agencies may not be accurate or reliable, and to help ensure that DOT produces reliable estimates of its DRAA improper payments, as applicable to each administration, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrators of the Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, and Federal Transit Administration to revise their policies and procedures for estimating improper payments by: (1) clearly identifying roles and responsibilities for estimating improper payments; (2) defining improper payments consistently with IPIA, as amended, and OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix C; (3) requiring payments to federal employees to be included in populations for testing as required by IPIA, as amended; (4) including steps to assess the completeness of the population of transactions used for selecting the samples to be tested; (5) requiring the agency to maintain sufficient documentation to support improper payment estimates; (6) requiring that the sampling methodologies meet the precision requirements outlined in OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix C; and (7) requiring a consultation with a statistician to ensure the validity of sample design, sample size, and measurement methodology.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: On April 14, 2017, we were informed that the Office of the Chief Financial Officer has oversight over the Department of Transportation's (DOT) improper payments implementation and is revising DOT's policies for estimating improper payments. DOT plans to complete this action by 10/31/2017. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help reduce the risk that improper payment estimates related to DRAA funding developed and reported by selected agencies may not be accurate or reliable, and to help ensure that the Department of Housing and Urban Development produces reliable estimates of its DRAA improper payments, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct appropriate officials to revise its policies and procedures for estimating improper payments by (1) requiring payments to federal employees to be included in populations for testing as required by the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA), as amended, and (2) including steps to assess the completeness of the population of transactions used for selecting the samples to be tested.

    Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
    Status: Open

    Comments: Overall, we believe the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is on track for taking corrective actions that meet the intent of GAO recommendation. For example, we believe HUD has met the intent of this recommendation with regards to HUD revising its policies and procedures for estimating improper payments. Specifically, we have reviewed HUD's updated recapture audit plan dated June 26, 2015, and verified it requires payments to federal employees to be included in populations for testing. However, we do not believe HUD has met the intent of this recommendation with regards to including steps to assess the completeness of the population of transactions used for selecting the samples to be tested. Specifically, we have not seen where HUD's policies and procedures show how HUD ensures that it is selecting from a complete list of grantee files when conducting tests related to estimating improper payments. On July 19, 2017, a HUD official explained that HUD does not have controls in place to ensure that the grantee files are complete. Further, the HUD official indicated that the grantee files come from the grantee, and HUD relies on the grantees to provide a complete list of files. However, HUD does not currently have a way to verify that this list is complete. According to the HUD official, HUD he will explore options HUD can implement for ensuring that grantee files are complete, including possibly having grantees to sign a statement certifying that their grantee files are complete when provided to HUD. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help reduce the risk that improper payment estimates related to DRAA funding developed and reported by selected agencies may not be accurate or reliable, and to help ensure that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) produces reliable estimates of its DRAA improper payments, the Secretary of the Army should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of USACE to revise policies and procedures for estimating improper payments by: (1) defining improper payments consistently with IPIA, as amended, and OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix C; (2) requiring payments to federal employees to be included in populations for testing as required by IPIA, as amended; (3) including steps to assess the completeness of the population of transactions used for selecting the samples to be tested; (4) providing sufficient procedures for determining an error and what documentation is necessary to substantiate payment; and (5) requiring the agency to maintain sufficient documentation to support improper payment estimates.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 5, 2017, no updated information has been provided by the Department of Defense. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Daniel Bertoni
    Phone: (202) 512-7215

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help improve the quality of VBA's disability compensation claim decisions, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to take steps to ensure that any future upgrades to local data systems allow QRTs to pause the claims process when errors are detected and enable QRTs to better track error trends.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, VA reported that VBA has submitted business requirements to add new functionality in VA's electronic claims processing system, the Veterans Benefit Management System (VBMS), that will allow the agency to identify deficiencies during the claims process. If an error is detected, the claim will be paused to allow an in-process review (IPR), conducted by quality review teams, to occur. These new business requirements are under review for inclusion in a future release of VBMS. VBA expects to deploy the new VBMS functionality to pause the claims process by July 2017. In addition, the agency has secured funding and is in the process of developing a new quality assurance database that will capture data from all types of quality reviews at various stages of the claims process, to include local regional office individual quality reviews, IPRs, national STAR and consistency studies. VBA stated that this new database will support increased data analysis capabilities and allow VBA to evaluate the effectiveness of quality assurance activities through improved and vigorous error trend analysis. VBA anticipates deploying the new quality assurance database by July 2017. We will close this recommendation when VA provides documentation of the systems change that allows the process to be paused.
    Recommendation: To help improve the quality of VBA's disability compensation claim decisions, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to take additional steps to evaluate the effectiveness of quality assurance activities to identify opportunities to improve or better target these activities.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, VA reported that VBA is in the process of developing a new quality assurance database that will capture data from all types of quality reviews at various stages of the claims process, to include local regional office individual quality reviews in-process reviews, national STAR reviews and consistency studies. VBA stated that this new database will support increased data analysis capabilities and allow VBA to evaluate the effectiveness of quality assurance activities through improved and vigorous error trend analysis. VBA anticipates deploying the new quality assurance database by July 2017. To help close this recommendation, the agency will need to explain how this new approach will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of quality assurance activities and thus improve their rigor.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide greater awareness of and compliance with the specialty metal restrictions among DOD weapon system programs and their defense supplier-base, the Secretary of Defense should establish a mechanism for sharing and distributing non-sensitive information about national security waivers throughout the department and the defense supplier-base.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: To address the recommendation, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) is presently working on a substantive change to their internal instruction regarding the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP)and DCMA Forum Regarding Defective/Nonconforming Product and Process Notifications. The new version of this guidance (DCMA-INST-301), upon its planned release in March 2018, will address both specialty metals non-compliance and counterfeit occurrences. Additionally, DCMA officials stated they are communicating DCMA's specialty metals non-compliance reporting process via a Quality Technical Information Paper and the DCMA Forum (an internal DCMA communication tool). DCMA's website also includes guidance on reporting of specialty metals non-compliance issues.
    Director: Beryl H. Davis
    Phone: (202) 512-2623

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to ensure that the Commission receives effective oversight of its major programs and operations, the Commission IG, or the individual or entity that ultimately assumes IG oversight responsibilities for the Commission under an alternate structure, should conduct inspections that are fully in accordance with CIGIE's Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation and the OIG's policies and procedures.

    Agency: Denali Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Denali Commissions' office's directives include policies and procedures to address planning for, conduct of, and reporting on inspections and include a section on annual planning, risk assessments, and internal and external quality control processes and procedures. In March 2017, the Denali Commission's Inspector General (IG) provided us a template, which will be used to ensure that inspections are conducted in accordance with the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's (CIGIE) Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation and the Office of Inspector General's (OIG) policies and procedures. We have reviewed this template and concluded that it meets the intent of our recommendation. However, this template was not available in time for use during the last inspection, which was performed in 2016 and issued in March 2017. We will obtain a copy of the next inspection report once issued to ensure this latest template was used before we consider closing our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
    Director: David C. Trimble
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    5 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOE's cooperative agreement and internal documentation supporting its June 2012 acceptance of depleted uranium tails are accurate and transparent, the Secretary of Energy should continue to review the accuracy of its documentation associated with this transaction and seek an independent review of this documentation by a third party, such as the DOE Inspector General.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOE disagreed with our recommendation, and as of March 2017, has not taken steps to implement it. GAO staff will follow-up on this recommendation in fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: If DOE continues to transfer, sell, or barter depleted uranium tails pursuant to its general authority under the Atomic Energy Act, notwithstanding that the USEC Privatization Act likely prohibits such actions, to ensure that DOE is receiving the required compensation under the Atomic Energy Act and DOE policy, the Secretary of Energy should develop guidance for setting an appropriate method for determining the value of depleted uranium tails when transferring them as an asset and apply the method consistently and transparently, prior to conducting such transfers, sales, or barters.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOE disagreed with our recommendation and, as of March 2017, has not taken steps to implement it. DOE has maintained that the department is not required to establish guidance or a pricing policy for depleted uranium and that doing so would hinder DOE's ability to maximize the value received by the government in a given transaction. We continue to believe that having guidance that provides a consistent and transparent method of determining the value of tails in the context of a transaction is necessary to help DOE ensure that it is receiving reasonable compensation in return for its tails, especially given the potential for future tails transactions
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOE mitigates risks associated with achieving the expected benefits of future uranium transactions that may rely on third-party contracts, the Secretary of Energy should take steps to mitigate the risks for each uranium transaction, in accordance with federal internal control standards.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOE disagreed with our recommendation, and as of March 2017, has not taken steps to implement it. GAO staff will follow-up on this recommendation in fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: To ensure the quality, credibility, and transparency of any future uranium market impact studies, the Secretary of Energy should (1) conduct a rigorous and documented internal assessment consistent with contract provisions and the Department of Energy's Information Quality Guidelines of the quality of such studies and/or have an independent third party conduct a peer review; and (2) to the extent that market impact studies are made publicly available, require that studies include information on the methods, data sources, and assumptions used in such a way that allows others to understand, interpret, and evaluate the studies consistent with DOE's Information Quality Guidelines.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOE disagreed with our recommendation, and as of March 2017, has not taken steps to implement it. GAO staff will follow-up on this recommendation in fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: To further ensure that DOE's future uranium transfers do not have an adverse material impact on the domestic uranium market, the Secretary of Energy should seek and consider industry input both on the amount of DOE sales or transfers of uranium the market can absorb annually and on whether there is a need to reinstitute a guideline that limits annual uranium sales or transfers.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOE disagreed with our recommendation, and as of March 2017, has not taken steps to implement it. GAO staff will follow-up on this recommendation in fiscal year 2017.
    Director: Andrew Sherrill
    Phone: (202) 512-7215

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure servicemember participation in and completion of TAP, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness to require that all services provide unit commanders and their leaders information on TAP participation levels of servicemembers under their command, similar to that provided by the Army and Air Force. Such information could be used to help hold leaders accountable for ensuring TAP participation and completion.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD disagreed with this recommendation and, as of January 2016, has not taken action to address it. In its written comments published in GAO's 2014 report, DOD questioned GAO's concern that not having a mechanism to ensure a servicemember's completion of TAP by commander would result in commanders not supporting the release of servicemembers to attend TAP. DOD noted that GAO's concern is based on observations that preceded full implementation of the capstone event. In October 2013, DOD launched the capstone as a mandatory process by which commanders verify TAP participation and positively affirm that servicemembers have or have not met career readiness standards. In addition, DOD said that capstone event implementation was accompanied by a communications campaign to inform both commanders and the services. Finally, DOD said that capstone event completion is monitored departmentwide to ensure compliance. However, GAO believes that such monitoring does not provide routine information to commanders and their leaders and not all TAP locations will be monitored routinely. GAO's report noted that DOD reported that ensuring servicemember participation in capstone events was a challenge for most of the services possibly due, in part, to lack of commanders' support. Commander support for the program has been a long-standing challenge for the program. Therefore, we continue to believe that an accountability mechanism is needed for TAP that mirrors the level at which responsibility has been assigned. Since commanders are responsible for ensuring that eligible servicemembers have full access to and successfully complete required TAP components, providing them and their leaders information on TAP participation levels of servicemembers under their command could promote accountability and oversight. Servicemember participation in TAP is generally required by law and DOD policy, and also relates to a Cross-Agency Priority Goal, reinforcing the need for such a mechanism. For GAO to close this recommendation, DOD should require all services to provide unit commanders and their leaders information on TAP participation levels of servicemembers under their command.
    Recommendation: To provide information on the extent to which the revamped TAP is effective, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness to work with the partner agencies to develop a written strategy for determining which components and tracks to evaluate and the most appropriate evaluation methods. This strategy should include a plan to use the results of evaluations to modify or redesign the program, as appropriate.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has partially addressed GAO's recommendation on evaluating the effectiveness of the revamped TAP, information that is currently limited. DOD's May 2014 presentation to OMB on the status of TAP implementation and evaluation efforts lists specific TAP components and tracks in which VA, DOL, and SBA planned to assess TAP effectiveness or post-transition outcomes. Although the presentation to OMB indicated that VA planned a higher level evaluation, as of December 2015, VA officials said they are focusing on lower level evaluations, such as gauging participant reactions to training and monitoring. As of March 2016, DOL has been conducting a quasi-experimental evaluation of the Employment Workshop, which it expects to complete in 2017. Further, SBA officials said they are surveying Entrepreneurial track participants who agreed to a post-TAP, follow-up survey. However, DOD and the agencies have not fully demonstrated a strategic approach to planning higher level evaluations. Specifically, DOD and its partner agencies have not provided a rationale for why they chose to evaluate certain aspects of TAP and not others. A written rationale, along with how the agencies plan to use the results of the evaluations, is required for GAO to consider this recommendation closed.
    Director: Marcia Crosse
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance its oversight of drug shortages, particularly as the agency fine-tunes the manner in which it gathers data on shortages and transitions from its database to a more robust system, the Commissioner of FDA should conduct periodic analyses using the existing drug shortages database (and, eventually, the new drug shortages information system) to routinely and systematically assess drug shortage information, and use this information proactively to identify risk factors for potential drug shortages early, thereby potentially helping FDA to recognize trends, clarify causes, and resolve problems before drugs go into short supply.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2017, FDA reported that it had not conducted any rigorous analysis of predictors of drug shortages nor have new drug risk factors been identified. Although FDA adopted a new, commercially developed data system, the "Shortage Tracker" to track drug shortages in March 2016, it is used to help the Drug Shortage Staff manage their workload. FDA reported that this system has now been fully operational for over a year. However, no trend analysis relating to drug shortages has been conducted and the agency has no plans to conduct such analyses at this time.
    Director: Moran, Revae E
    Phone: (202) 512-7215

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the consistency and completeness of national data on participants in the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs, the Secretary of Labor should take additional steps to improve the uniformity of participant data reported by states. The Secretary of Labor should promote a formal, continuous process for improving the quality of data on participants in the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs through such measures as the following: (a) consistently sharing the results of all oversight activities with states and local areas, including findings from validation of participant data; (b) reviewing the methods used for data validation, such as its scope and error rate threshold, to identify opportunities to increase efficiencies and accountability in the process. This could include implementing, if appropriate, recommendations from the Regions' review of data validation procedures; (c) evaluating data validation efforts to determine their effects on data quality, particularly on systemic errors, and providing targeted guidance and assistance to states and local areas to address such errors; (d) regularly monitoring Social Policy Research Associates' corrections and analyses of state WIA participant data, sharing this information with states, and coordinating with states to ensure that any corrections are appropriate and accurate; and (e) collecting and disseminating promising practices to states and local areas on data collection and reporting on a regular basis.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: States began using a Participant Individual Record Layout (PIRL)--which includes common reporting definitions across WIOA core programs--as of July 1, 2016, and DOL anticipates receiving the first State Annual Performance Reports based on these data by October 16, 2017. As part of this effort, DOL has held in-person training sessions with state and local officials and also provided them with technical assistance, including guidance related to implementing required data collection and reporting efforts under WIOA. In addition, DOL outlined several ongoing data validation efforts, such as adding additional edit checks and identifying and addressing technical issues as they occur. We will close this recommendation when DOL receives and processes the first state performance reports under the PIRL and furnishes documentation of its data validation efforts.
    Director: Draper, Debra A
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To clarify IT requirements within the Executive Agreement, to enable VA and DOD to make an informed recommendation about whether the FHCC should continue after the end of the demonstration, and to provide useful information for other integrations that may be considered in the future, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should develop plans with clear definitions and specific deliverables, including time frames for two IT capabilities-documentation of patient care to support medical and dental operational readiness and outpatient appointment enhancements-and formalize these plans, for example, by incorporating them into the Executive Agreement.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, VA and DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Recommendation: To clarify IT requirements within the Executive Agreement, to enable VA and DOD to make an informed recommendation about whether the FHCC should continue after the end of the demonstration, and to provide useful information for other integrations that may be considered in the future, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should develop plans with clear definitions and specific deliverables, including time frames for two IT capabilities-documentation of patient care to support medical and dental operational readiness and outpatient appointment enhancements-and formalize these plans, for example, by incorporating them into the Executive Agreement.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, VA and DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Director: Goldstein, Mark L
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve internal controls over the E-rate program, the Federal Communications Commission should, based on the findings of the risk assessment, conduct a thorough examination of the overall design of E-rate's internal control structure to ensure that the procedures and administrative resources related to internal controls are aligned to provide reasonable assurance that program risks are appropriately targeted and addressed.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: In April 2014, FCC approved USAC's hiring of a contractor to conduct a risk assessment of the E-rate program. FCC plans to implement this recommendation after the risk assessment is completed and the results of the risk assessment can be used to inform the examination of the internal control structure.
    Recommendation: To improve internal controls over the E-rate program, the Federal Communications Commission should implement a systematic approach to assess internal controls that appropriately considers the results of beneficiary audits and that is supported by a documented and approved set of policies and procedures.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: In April 2014, FCC approved the hiring of a contractor to conduct a risk assessment of the E-rate program. In July 2014, an FCC official said that the agency planning to take action on this recommendation before the risk assessment is completed.
    Recommendation: To improve internal controls over the E-rate program, the Federal Communications Commission should develop policies and procedures to periodically monitor the internal control structure of the E-rate program, including evaluating the costs and benefits of internal controls, to provide continued reasonable assurance that program risks are targeted and addressed.

    Agency: Federal Communications Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: In April 2014, FCC approved the hiring of a contractor to conduct a risk assessment of the E-rate program. In July 2014, an FCC official said that the agency planning to take action on this recommendation before the risk assessment is completed.
    Director: Cosgrove, James C
    Phone: (202)512-7029

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that changes in Medicare payment methods for dialysis care do not adversely affect beneficiaries, the Administrator of CMS should monitor the access to and quality of dialysis care for groups of beneficiaries, particularly those with above average costs of dialysis care, under the new bundled payment system. Such monitoring should begin as soon as possible once the new bundled payment system is implemented and be used to inform potential refinements to the payment system.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: In March 2010, we recommended that the Administrator of CMS monitor the access to and quality of dialysis care for groups of beneficiaries, particularly those with above average costs, under the new bundled payment system to help ensure that changes in the Medicare payment methods for dialysis care do not adversely affect. We further specified that such monitoring begin as soon as possible once the new bundled payment system is implemented. CMS implemented the expanded bundled payment system for dialysis care in January 2011. As of August 2011, CMS is collecting data on dialysis care utilization that could be used to examine access to and quality of dialysis care by groups of beneficiaries. Although CMS anticipates using these data to identify potential problems in dialysis care, the agency has not begun using these data to examine access to and quality of care by groups of beneficiaries, nor has finalized plans to do so.
    Director: Dicken, John E
    Phone: (202)512-7043

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To address state agency practices and external pressure that may compromise survey accuracy, the Administrator of CMS should reestablish expectations through guidance to state survey agencies that noncitation practices--official or unofficial--are inappropriate, and systematically monitor trends in states' citations.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: September 2017: HHS reported CMS is working to address this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive further information. September 2016: CMS has not yet provided additional information. GAO will update the recommendation, as appropriate, when information is received. July 2015: CMS indicated it will provide GAO with updated actions in early 2016. May 2014: Though the best method to address external pressures on State Agencies was not identified, CMS is continuing to address the consistency, effectiveness, and integrity of the survey process through the following activities: reviewing citation patterns for the nursing home surveys; systematically identifying and testing opportunities to make the survey process more efficient and effective; and holding monthly CO and RO calls to address consistencies in the survey and enforcement process. CMS Regional Offices also routinely hold conference calls (e.g., monthly) with the State Survey Agencies in their region to address survey, enforcement and certification issues and conduct the federal validation survey of the state's findings. CMS is looking to review specific regulatory deficiencies for trends and areas where additional guidance is needed. Anticipated completion date of October 31, 2014. June 2013: Though the best method to address external pressures on State Agencies was not identified. CMS is continuing to address the consistency, effectiveness, and integrity of the survey process through the following activities: reviewing citation patterns for the nursing home surveys; systematically identifying and testing opportunities to make the survey process more efficient and effective; and holding monthly CO and RO calls to address consistencies in the survey and enforcement process. CMS Regional Offices also routinely hold conference calls (e.g., monthly) with the State Survey Agencies in their region to address survey, enforcement and certification issues and conduct the federal validation survey of the state's findings. September 2010: CMS held a State/Federal meeting in April 2010. The discussion with the State/Federal meeting did not shed light on best method to address possible external pressures on State Agencies. Some expressed that poor documentation/inadequate investigation may cause deficiencies to be dropped and not necessarily external pressure. They will continue to work on developing next steps.
    Recommendation: To address state agency practices and external pressure that may compromise survey accuracy, the Administrator of CMS should establish expectations through guidance to state survey agencies to communicate and collaborate with their CMS regional offices when they experience significant pressure from legislators or the nursing home industry that may affect the survey process or surveyors' perceptions.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: September 2017: HHS reported CMS is working to address this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive further information. September 2016: CMS has not yet provided additional information. GAO will update the recommendation, as appropriate, when information is received. July 2015: CMS indicated it will provide GAO with updated actions in early 2016. May 2014: CMS has undertaken a broader review of both the QIS and traditional survey processes, and the extent to which the methodology and guidance result in an effective and efficient survey process. In August 2012, CMS convened a broad group of surveyors to address these issues and make recommendations which have resulted in continuing work to develop and test alternative guidance and processes. CMS is looking to review specific regulatory deficiencies for trends and areas where additional guidance is needed. Anticipated Completion date of December 31, 2014. June 2013: Though the best method to address external pressures on State Agencies was not identified. CMS is continuing to address the consistency, effectiveness, and integrity of the survey process through the following activities: reviewing citation patterns for the nursing home surveys; systematically identifying and testing opportunities to make the survey process more efficient and effective; and holding monthly CO and RO calls to address consistencies in the survey and enforcement process. CMS Regional Offices also routinely hold conference calls (e.g., monthly) with the State Survey Agencies in their region to address survey, enforcement and certification issues and conduct the federal validation survey of the state's findings. September 2010: CMS held a State/Federal meeting in April 2010. The discussion with the State/Federal meeting did not shed light on best method to address possible external pressures on State Agencies. CMS will continue to work on developing next steps.
    Director: Williamson, Randall B
    Phone: (206)287-4860

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help DOD obtain reasonable assurance that all active and Reserve component servicemembers to whom the PDHRA requirement applies are provided the opportunity to have their health concerns identified, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the military services should take steps to ensure that PDHRA questionnaires are included in DOD's central repository for each of these servicemembers.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates.
    Director: Crosse, Marcia G
    Phone: (202)512-3407

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the FDA Commissioner to expeditiously take steps to issue regulations for each class III device type currently allowed to enter the market through the 510(k) process. These steps should include issuing regulations to (1) reclassify each device type into class I or class II, or requiring it to remain in class III, and (2) for those device types remaining in class III, require approval for marketing through the PMA process.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: FDA has taken steps to respond to this recommendation; however we are leaving the recommendation open because the agency has not yet taken final steps to reclassify or require premarket approval (PMA) for two class III device types allowed to enter the market through the less stringent 510(k) process. In 2009, FDA began a 5-step process to reclassify or to require PMAs for 26 class III device types. This process was modified by the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA)--instead of issuing regulations as the final step, FDA issues an administrative order to reclassify or require PMAs for the device types. In 2014, the agency reported it had set a goal to have all remaining devices finalized by the second quarter of 2015; however, as of August 2017, FDA had not finished the process of reclassifying or requiring PMAs for 2 of 26 devices types. The agency reported completing the process for 24 device types, and provided new planned milestones to complete the process for the remaining device types by the middle of 2018. We will leave this recommendation open until FDA makes progress in reclassifying or requiring PMAs for the remaining device types.