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: "Savings estimates"

    6 publications with a total of 19 open recommendations
    Director: David Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to ensure that its reports to Congress about the results of IT reform efforts accurately reflect savings generated from all PortfolioStat initiatives, including those associated with FDCCI.

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

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to track agencies' planned savings and use them as a baseline for measuring reported actual savings.

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

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to require agencies to document specifically how the cost savings achieved from PortfolioStat have been reinvested.

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

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to establish time frames for completing assigned PortfolioStat action items and hold agencies accountable for meeting those time frames.

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

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief Information Officer to revisit the 25 cost initiatives GAO reported in GAO-14-65 to identify those that have achieved savings and cost avoidances and report those savings and avoidances to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In March 2016, during our review of federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of software applications, the department reported that it does not collect data specifically on savings and cost avoidance associated with the business and enterprise IT applications that comprise most of the 25 cost initiatives reported in GAO-14-65. We will continue to follow up with the department on this recommendation.
    Director: James Cosgrove
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help the Department of Health and Human Services better control spending and encourage efficient delivery of care, Congress should consider requiring Medicare to pay PCHs as it pays PPS teaching hospitals, or provide the Secretary with the authority to otherwise modify how Medicare pays PCHs. To generate cost savings from any reduction in outpatient payments to PCHs, Congress should also provide that all forgone outpatient payment adjustment amounts be returned to the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: The 21st Century Cures Act enacted in December 2016 slightly reduces the additional payments to PCHs for outpatient services furnished on or after January 1, 2018, and returns savings to the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. However, the law does not substantively change how PCHs are paid for outpatient services, which differs from how Medicare pays PPS teaching hospitals. In addition, as of March 1, 2017, no legislative action had been identified that changes how PCHs are paid for inpatient services, as GAO suggested in February 2015. Until Medicare pays these cancer hospitals in a way that encourages greater efficiency, Medicare remains at risk for overspending.
    Director: David Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    8 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to ensure that all IT investments are assessed for suitability for migration to a cloud computing service.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are in the process of reviewing agency documentation and waiting for additional supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to ensure that all IT investments are assessed for suitability for migration to a cloud computing service.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: We contacted the agency and are awaiting its response on the status of efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to ensure that all IT investments are assessed for suitability for migration to a cloud computing service.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of State established a requirement for completing a cloud computing service alternatives analysis for all new projects, and that existing IT projects be evaluated for the viability to migrate to a cloud computing environment. Further, the department established key factors for consideration when selecting applications for migration to a cloud environment. However, State has not yet evaluated a majority of its IT investments for cloud alternatives. The department said it plans to complete evaluations for some of these investments by the end of FY2017, but has not yet established plans to evaluate over a third of its investments.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to ensure that all IT investments are assessed for suitability for migration to a cloud computing service.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are waiting for a response from SBA on the status of efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to establish evaluation dates for those investments identified in this report that have not been assessed for migration to the cloud.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are in the process of waiting for additional department documentation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to establish evaluation dates for those investments identified in this report that have not been assessed for migration to the cloud.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are waiting for a response from the department on the status of efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to establish evaluation dates for those investments identified in this report that have not been assessed for migration to the cloud.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of State established a requirement for completing a cloud computing service alternatives analysis for all new projects, and that existing IT projects be evaluated for viability to migrate to a cloud computing environment. Further, the department established key factors for consideration when selecting applications for migration to a cloud environment. However, the department has not yet established evaluation dates for the vast majority of the investments that have not been assessed for migration to the cloud. Specifically, the department plans to complete evaluations for some of these investments by the end of fiscal year 2017, but does not plan to do so for most of them.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of cloud computing services, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury; and the Administrators of the General Services Administration and Small Business Administration should direct their respective Chief Information Officers to establish evaluation dates for those investments identified in this report that have not been assessed for migration to the cloud.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are waiting for a response from the department on the status of efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Director: Maurer, Diana C
    Phone: (202) 512-9627

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure effective evaluation of federal training programs and enhance DHS's stewardship of resources for federal training programs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct DHS components to ensure that their documented training evaluation processes fully address attributes for effective training evaluation processes as they are drafted, updated, or revised.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2014, we reported on the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) training efforts, including the extent to which DHS has a documented process to evaluate training and development programs. We found that all five DHS components in GAO's review--U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center--have a documented process to evaluate their training programs. Their documented processes fully included three of six attributes of effective training evaluation processes identifying goals, programs to evaluate, and how results are to be used. However, the documented processes did not consistently include the other three attributes: methodology, timeframes, and roles and responsibilities. We concluded that by updating documentation to address these attributes, DHS components would have more complete information to guide its efforts in conducting effective evaluations. We therefore recommended that DHS direct its components to ensure that their documented training evaluation processes fully address attributes for effective training evaluation processes as they are drafted, updated, or revised. In September 2016, DHS officials reported that a DHS-wide self-audit of training evaluation processes was completed on March 31, 2016 and found that DHS has current documentation addressing effective learning evaluation programs and that there are commonalities in evaluation procedures across the components. As a part of the self-audit, components provided policy and procedures documents related to their training evaluation processes and found that they adhere to sound instructional systems design models. However, the self-audit focused on identifying the specific training evaluation practices for a sample of courses at each component and not whether the component-level guidance included the attributes for effective training evaluation processes we identified in our report. Further, although DHS updated its department-wide guidance on training evaluation in April 2016 to incorporate the attributes for effective training evaluation processes and some components have followed suit, other components have not. For example, we found that some components, such as Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Coast Guard, had updated their training evaluation guidance to include the attributes we identified in our report. Others, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement were in the process of updating their guidance. However, as of April 2017, the guidance from the Transportation Security Administration remained in draft and the guidance from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center had not been updated since our review. Therefore, this recommendation remains open pending action on the above noted items.
    Recommendation: To ensure effective evaluation of federal training programs and enhance DHS's stewardship of resources for federal training programs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should identify existing challenges that prevent DHS from accurately capturing training costs department-wide and, to the extent that the benefits of addressing those challenges exceed the costs, implement corrective measures to overcome these challenges..

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2014, we reported on the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) training efforts, including the extent to which DHS has a documented process to reliably capture costs. We found that DHS identified efficiencies and cost savings for delivering a number of training programs. However, different methods are used for capturing training costs across the department, which poses challenges for reliably capturing these costs across DHS. Components capture training costs differently, contributing to inconsistencies in training costs captured across DHS. Variation in methods used to collect data can affect the reliability and quality of DHS-wide training program costs. However, DHS has not identified all challenges that contribute to these inconsistencies. We concluded that DHS could improve its awareness about the costs of training programs DHS-wide and thereby enhance its resource stewardship by identifying existing challenges that prevent DHS from accurately capturing training costs and implementing corrective measures. We therefore recommended that DHS identify existing challenges that prevent DHS from accurately capturing training costs department-wide and, to the extent that the benefits of addressing those challenges exceed the costs, implement corrective measures to overcome these challenges. As of September 2016, DHS reported that its Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and Office of the Chief Financial Officer worked together to research the issue and determine the best course of action to standardize training cost reporting. However, this did not require a formal root cause analysis. In order to identify a way for the components to capture training costs in a standardized manner, DHS formed a Tiger Team that included officials from each component which identified 12 common functional areas for training to capture training costs. Components were directed to prepare implementation plans outlining how they will begin capturing cost data within the identified functional training areas and, according to DHS, began capturing the data on September 29, 2016. In January 2017, the DHS Chief Financial Officer provided guidance to the components as to how they are to report their training costs to DHS on a quarterly basis. Components provided their first quarterly submission to DHS in January 2017. These steps are in line with the intent of our recommendation. This recommendation will remain open as we monitor its continued implementation over the next two quarters.
    Director: Cha, Carol R
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve planning and execution of the next telecommunications transition, the Administrator of General Services, in coordination with the Office of Personnel Management, should examine potential government-wide telecommunications expertise shortfalls and use the study to shape the NS2020 strategic approach.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) has not addressed this recommendation. In June 2014, the agency reported that it had coordinated with OPM to incorporate key objectives in its NS2020 strategy to address and mitigate challenges with regards to government-wide expertise needed to execute the NS2020 program. However, as of May 2017, GSA had not demonstrated that it had studied potential government-wide telecommunications expertise shortfalls or used the study to shape the NS2020 strategic approach.
    Recommendation: To improve planning and execution of the next telecommunications transition, the Administrator of General Services should ensure that the lessons are applied, based on priority and available resources, to the next transition strategy.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The General Services Administration has not implemented this recommendation but has taken steps to address it. In April 2014, the agency developed a strategy for transitioning to the next telecommunications contract vehicle. The strategy described the lessons learned that contributed to the delay in the prior transition and identified approaches the agency planned to take to apply the lessons learned. For example, it identified high level plans for addressing the need for improved management of the complex acquisition process and the need for technical and contracting telecommunications expertise across the government. As of August 2016, GSA had prioritized the lessons learned and considered the resources needed to apply them. However, as of May 2017, the agency had not demonstrated that it had ensured that the lessons were applied, based on priority and available resources, to the next transition strategy. We will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Director: White, James R
    Phone: (202) 512-9110

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that IRS is meeting the stated goals of CAP, the Principal Deputy Commissioner of Internal Revenue and Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement should track savings from Compliance Maintenance and CAP overall and develop a plan for reinvesting any savings.

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

    Comments: As of March 2017, IRS had taken some steps to implement this recommendation, but is not fully tracking the amount of dollar savings from using CAP nor developing a plan to reinvest any savings, as GAO recommended in August 2013. IRS is tracking savings by analyzing and comparing the workload inventory of account coordinators who handle CAP cases against team coordinators who handle non-CAP cases. This caseload comparison is a part of IRS's annual CAP evaluation and was included in its June 2014 CAP evaluation plan. Based on GAO's review of the evaluation plan and results, IRS's caseload comparison did not show the amount of dollar savings from CAP. The comparison for tax years 2010 through 2012 showed that account coordinators handling CAP cases exclusively or in conjunction with non-CAP cases have a larger caseload than team coordinators handling non-CAP cases. In addition, IRS has not developed a plan for reinvesting any savings, as GAO recommended in August 2013. Such a plan could help IRS increase audit coverage. IRS stated that it cannot measure the CAP's impact on audit coverage because audit coverage is based on staffing and compliance priorities. Also, IRS said that while quantifying monetary savings would be difficult, it has reinvested its savings by expanding account coordinators' caseloads as shown in the average caseload of CAP and non-CAP cases worked. However, without a plan for tracking savings and using them to increase audit coverage, IRS cannot be assured that the savings are effectively invested in either CAP or non-CAP taxpayers with a high compliance risk. IRS is evaluating the CAP program to determine how it fits with IRS's future vision for examinations. It has no timetable for completing this evaluation. IRS did not accept new CAP applications for 2016, deciding that CAP would be limited to taxpayers who are in the program for 2017.