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: Prioritizing

    22 publications with a total of 87 open recommendations including 3 priority recommendations
    Director: Michael J. Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure DOD takes a strategic approach for its prototyping and innovation initiatives and overcomes funding and cultural barriers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to develop a high-level DOD-wide strategy, in collaboration with the military services and other appropriate DOD components, to communicate strategic goals and priorities and delineate roles and responsibilities among DOD's prototyping and innovation initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help ensure DOD takes a strategic approach for its prototyping and innovation initiatives and overcomes funding and cultural barriers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to take steps, such as adopting a "strategic buckets" approach, to help ensure adequate investments in innovation that align with DOD-wide strategy.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help ensure DOD takes a strategic approach for its prototyping and innovation initiatives and overcomes funding and cultural barriers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to expand the Community of Interest working groups to include budget activity 6.4-funded prototyping and innovation initiatives in their science and technology planning and coordination processes or employ a similar coordination mechanism for budget activity 6.4-funded prototyping and innovation initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help ensure DOD takes a strategic approach for its prototyping and innovation initiatives and overcomes funding and cultural barriers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to review budget activity 6.4 funding requests to help maintain a level of investment for budget activity 6.4-funded prototyping and innovation efforts that is consistent with DOD-wide strategy.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

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

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To make it more likely that HHS will achieve its goals to reduce quality measure misalignment and associated provider burden, the Secretary of HHS should direct CMS and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology to prioritize their development of electronic quality measures and associated standardized data elements on the specific quality measures needed for the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: In January 2017, HHS told us that ONC and CMS are prioritizing efforts to understand challenges associated with the development and implementation of electronic clinical quality measures. However, we determined that the actions did not fully address the recommendation because they focus on efforts to understand the challenges associated with electronic clinical quality measures as opposed to efforts to prioritize their development of measures from the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use. As of August 2017, HHS officials have not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Recommendation: To make it more likely that HHS will achieve its goals to reduce quality measure misalignment and associated provider burden, the Secretary of HHS should direct CMS to comprehensively plan, including setting timelines, for how to target its development of new, more meaningful quality measures on those that will promote greater alignment, especially measures to strengthen the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: In January 2017, HHS told us that it considers this recommendation open and CMS will continue to explore ways for greater alignment through its planning efforts. As of August 2017, HHS officials have not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Director: Chris Currie
    Phone: (404) 679-1875

    3 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To strengthen efforts to mitigate earthquake risks to federal buildings, the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of GSA should (1) Define what constitutes an exceptionally high risk building, identify such buildings, and develop plans to mitigate those risks, including prioritizing associated funding requests as needed; and (2) To the extent practicable, prioritize and implement comprehensive seismic safety measures which could include earthquake drills, seismic safety inspections, and non-structural retrofits to decrease risks and reduce damage in federally-owned and -leased buildings in earthquake hazard areas.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To strengthen efforts to mitigate earthquake risks to federal buildings, the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of GSA should (1) Define what constitutes an exceptionally high risk building, identify such buildings, and develop plans to mitigate those risks, including prioritizing associated funding requests as needed; and (2) To the extent practicable, prioritize and implement comprehensive seismic safety measures which could include earthquake drills, seismic safety inspections, and non-structural retrofits to decrease risks and reduce damage in federally-owned and -leased buildings in earthquake hazard areas.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: Following the expansion of the ShakeAlert governance structure to include key stakeholders, the Secretary of the Department of the Interior should direct the U.S. Geological Survey, working through the ShakeAlert governance structure, to establish a program management plan that addresses, among other things, the known implementation challenges.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Gregory C. Wilshusen
    Phone: (202) 512-6244

    22 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To assist CISOs in carrying out their responsibilities, the Director of OMB should issue guidance for agencies' implementation of the FISMA 2014 requirements to ensure that (1) senior agency officials carry out information security responsibilities and (2) agency personnel are held accountable for complying with the agency-wide information security program. This guidance should clarify the role of the agency CISO with respect to these requirements, as well as implementing the other elements of an agency-wide information security program, taking into account the challenges identified in this report.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) partially concurred with this recommendation, but does not intend to directly issue guidance as recommended. Instead, we are reviewing the relevant OMB memoranda that officials believe address the intent of the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with the FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Commerce should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that plans and procedures are in place to ensure recovery and continued operations of the department's information systems in the event of a disruption.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Commerce concurred with the recommendation, stating that the department's policy documents are expected to be updated by the end of the 4th Quarter in 2017. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the senior information security officer (SISO) is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Defense should define the SISO's role in department policy for ensuring that information security policies and procedures are developed and maintained.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) did not concur with our recommendation, nor has it provided evidence that it has implemented the recommendations.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the SISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Defense should define the SISO's role in department policy for ensuring that the department has procedures for incident detection, response, and reporting.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with our recommendation, but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the SISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Defense should define the SISO's role in department policy for oversight of security for information systems that are operated by contractors on the department's behalf.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with our recommendation, but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that subordinate security plans are documented for the department's information systems.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that all users receive information security awareness training.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that the department has a process for planning implementing, evaluating, and documenting remedial actions.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that plans and procedures are in place to ensure recovery and continued operations of the department's information systems in the event of a disruption.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy for oversight of security for information systems that are operated by contractors on the department's behalf.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Energy should define the CISO's role in department policy in the periodic authorization of the department's information systems.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with the recommendation, and estimates completion by March 1, 2018. The Department decided in April 2017 to make significant updates to its Cyber Security Program, and estimates it will take up to nine months to gain Departmental concurrence, complete revisions, and close this recommendation. However, the Department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that plans and procedures are in place to ensure recovery and continued operations of the department's information systems in the event of a disruption.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurs with our recommendation but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Attorney General should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that information security policies and procedures are developed and maintained.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Justice concurs with our recommendation but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Attorney General should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that plans and procedures are in place to ensure recovery and continued operations of the department's information systems in the event of a disruption.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Justice concurs with our recommendation but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of State should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that the department has procedures for incident detection, response, and reporting.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of State (State) concurred with this recommendation. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided by State to determine whether the role of the CISO has been defined in its policy to for ensuring that State has procedures for incident detection, response, and reporting.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Transportation should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that subordinate security plans are documented for the department's information systems.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with the recommendation and is currently updating its Cybersecurity Policy. The Department plans to be complete by June 29, 2018. However, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in department policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Secretary of Transportation should define the CISO's role in department policy for ensuring that security controls are tested periodically.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with the recommendation and is currently updating its Cybersecurity Policy. The Department plans to be complete by June 29, 2018. However, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the senior agency information security officer (SAISO) is defined in agency policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Administrator of the Environment Protection Agency should define the SAISO's role in agency policy for ensuring that subordinate security plans are documented for the department's information systems.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with our recommendation. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided by EPA to determine whether the role of the SAISO has been defined in its policy to for ensuring that subordinate security plans are documented for the agency's information systems.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the SAISO is defined in agency policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Administrator of the Environment Protection Agency should define the SAISO's role in agency policy for ensuring that plans and procedures are in place to ensure recovery and continued operations of the department's information systems in the event of a disruption.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with our recommendation. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided by EPA to determine whether the role of the SAISO has been defined in its policy to ensure recovery and continued operations of the agency's information systems in the event of a disruption.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the SAISO is defined in agency policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Administrator of the Environment Protection Agency should define the SAISO's role in agency policy in the periodic authorization of the department's information systems.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with our recommendation. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided by EPA to determine whether the role of the SAISO has been defined in agency policy for the periodic authorization of the department's information systems.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the SAISO is defined in agency policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should define the SAISO's role in agency policy for oversight of security for information systems that are operated by contractors on the agency's behalf.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) concurred with our recommendation. We are currently reviewing the evidence provided by NASA to determine whether the role of the SAISO has been defined in agency policy for oversight of security for information systems that are operated by contractors on NASA's behalf.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the role of the CISO is defined in agency policy in accordance with FISMA 2014, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration should define the CISO's role in agency policy for ensuring that personnel with significant security responsibilities receive appropriate training.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Small Business administration (SBA) concurs with our recommendation but has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.
    Director: Asif A. Khan
    Phone: (202) 512-9869

    7 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare a level I quantitative drilldown in accordance with the FIAR Guidance.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to prepare a quantitative drilldown. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prioritize audit readiness efforts for the key FBWT systems, prepare an audit strategy that identifies for each system (1) the Navy's plan for assessing the system to gain assurance that the system can be relied on; (2) the assessment types, including prioritizing the assessments based on qualitative and quantitative factors for each system; and (3) planned start and completion dates of these assessments for each system.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to prioritize audit readiness efforts for key FBWT systems. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare, in accordance with FIAR Guidance, the documentation of control activities and information technology general computer controls for significant systems; system certifications or accreditations; system, end user, and systems documentation locations; and hardware, software, and interfaces.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to document control activities, information technology general computer controls for significant systems, systems documentation locations, and hardware, software, and interfaces. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare an internal control assessment document for each assessable unit, summarizing control activities that are appropriately designed and in place.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to prepare an internal control assessment document. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to perform sufficient testing for supporting documentation to reasonably determine whether such documentation, including that for key reconciliations, is available in a sustainable manner for future audit efforts.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to test the effectiveness of Fund Balance with Treasury controls, which includes assessing the availability of supporting documentation. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to, for each fiscal year expected to be under audit, identify and address unusual and invalid transactions, abnormal balances, and missing data fields in the universe of collection and disbursement transactions.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to obtain monthly data from Defense Finance and Accounting Service on invalid Fund Balance with Treasury transactions. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to update FBWT data flowcharts and narratives to fully describe the flow of data from the Navy's receipt of collection and disbursement transaction information through the financial statement line items, including the reversal of general ledger trial balance data generated by the automated system and other entries made within Defense Departmental Reporting System - Budgetary.

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

    Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendations and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to develop procedures and documentation that describe the processes associated with the flow of data. In August 2017 we contacted the Navy POC and requested an update on the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Cary B. Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to better integrate virtual training devices into operational training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to specify in Army guidance for developing virtual training device requirements that training developers consider and document the time available to train with the devices and intended usage rates to achieve training tasks and proficiency goals during operational training.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2017, the Army reported taking limited steps to address this recommendation. Army officials stated that the Army has established target usage rates for existing virtual training devices, and has promulgated guidance and tracking tools for recording usage. However, the Army has not modified its guidance for developing new virtual training devices to reflect consideration of time available to train with a new device or expected usage rates to achieve training tasks and proficiency goals during operational training, as GAO recommended in August 2016.
    Recommendation: In order to better integrate virtual training devices into operational training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to provide additional guidance on how to use virtual non-system training devices in operational training and explore opportunities to incorporate virtual training devices more fully into training strategies.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2017, the Army has taken steps towards addressing it. Specifically, during the period May to November 2017, Headquarters, Department of the Army is leading an in-depth analysis of regular Army formations' readiness training models in support of operational demand. The outcome of this analysis will be viable and executable training models which will also inform future budget requests. According to Army officials, key stakeholders and relevant subject matter experts will identify and update unit training models to reflect training events and tasks to achieve training proficiency, to include key virtual training capabilities that enable specified training events. Key virtual training capabilities will be reflected for each collective and individual training event/task, which will better incorporate virtual training devices into training strategies, as GAO recommended in August 2016.
    Director: David A. Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To effectively measure 18F's performance, the Administrator of GSA should direct the Commissioner for the Technology Transformation Service to ensure that goals and associated performance measures are outcome-oriented and that performance measures have targets, including (1) performance measures and targets tied to fully recovering program costs; and (2) goals, performance measures, and targets for how the program will achieve its mission after September 2016.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, GSA developed a quarterly performance report for fiscal year 2017 that includes an outcome-oriented goal for 18F as well as associated performance measures and targets. According to a Technology Transformation Service official, GSA plans to expand its quarterly performance report for fiscal year 2018 to reflect additional 18F goals and performance measures, including measures tied to fully recovering program costs. We will continue to evaluate GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To effectively measure 18F's performance, the Administrator of GSA should direct the Commissioner for the Technology Transformation Service to assess actual results for each performance measure.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, GSA developed a quarterly performance report for fiscal year 2017 that includes an outcome-oriented goal for 18F as well as associated performance measures with targets. Additionally, GSA has assessed actual results of the performance measures for the first two quarters of fiscal year 2017. According to a Technology Transformation Service official, GSA plans to expand its quarterly performance report for fiscal year 2018 to include additional 18F goals and performance measures. We will continue to evaluate GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to ensure that all goals and associated performance measures are outcome-oriented and that performance measures have targets.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB developed three goals for U.S. Digital Service (USDS): (1) rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; (2) expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools; and (3) bring top technical talent into public service. In addition, OMB established performance measures with targets for its third goal and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the first two USDS goals. Further, the program's third goal is not outcome-oriented. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to assess actual results for each performance measure.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB assessed the results of performance measures for one of the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) program's goals--bring top technical talent into public service--and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the other two USDS goals--rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; and expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to update USDS policy to clearly define the responsibilities and authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and the digital service teams and require existing agency digital service teams to address this policy. In doing so, the Federal Chief Information Officer should ensure that this policy is aligned with relevant federal law and OMB guidance on CIO responsibilities and authorities.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. In particular, OMB updated its digital service team policy to require that teams appropriately inform their chief information officers (CIO) regarding U.S. Digital Service (USDS) projects. However, the policy does not describe the responsibilities or authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and digital service teams. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.
    Director: Valerie C. Melvin
    Phone: (202) 512-6304

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOL's management of FOIA requests, the Secretary of Labor should direct the Chief FOIA Officer to establish a time frame for implementing, and take actions to implement, section 508 requirements in the department's FOIA system and online portal.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, the Department of Labor had provided a response regarding its actions to address our recommendation. We have not yet verified if the actions meet the intent of our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To improve DOL's management of FOIA requests, the Secretary of Labor should direct the Chief FOIA Officer to establish a time frame for implementing, and take actions to fully implement, recommended best practice capabilities for enhanced processing of requests in the department's FOIA system and online portal.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, the Department of Labor had provided a response regarding its actions to address our recommendation. We have not yet verified if the actions taken meet the intent of our recommendations. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To improve DOL's management of FOIA requests, the Secretary of Labor should direct the Chief FOIA Officer to require components to document in the Secretary's Information Management System for FOIA the rationales for delays in responding to FOIA requests, and to notify requesters of the delayed responses when processing requests.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, the Department of Labor had provided a response regarding its actions to address our recommendation. We have not yet verified if the actions taken meet the intent of our recommendations. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To improve DOL's management of FOIA requests, the Secretary of Labor should direct the Chief FOIA Officer to establish a time frame for consulting with the Department of Justice's Office of Information Policy on including language in DOL's response letters to administrative appeals notifying requesters of the National Archives and Records Administration's Office of Government Information Services' mediation services as an alternative to litigation, and then ensure that the department includes the language in the letters.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, the Department of Labor had provided a response regarding its actions to address our recommendation. We have not yet verified if the actions taken meet the intent of our recommendations. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken we will provide updated information.
    Director: Jennifer A. Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve transparency in allocating its limited resources, and to help ensure that its resource allocation decisions are the most effective ones for fulfilling its missions given existing risks, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should document how the risk assessments conducted were used to inform and support its annual asset allocation decisions.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
    Status: Open

    Comments: On December 14, 2016, the Coast Guard noted that the FY 2017 Strategic Planning Direction (SPD) was issued on October 1, 2016, which addresses GAO's recommendation and requested closure of this recommendation. In reviewing the FY 2017 SPD, however, it was not clear how risk assessments were conducted or the impact, if any, that risk factors had on asset allocations. GAO requested details on these issues on 12-17-2016 and as of 1-25-2017 GAO had not received any additional information, so this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To ensure that high priority mission activities are fully supported with the appropriate number of staff possessing the requisite mix of skills and abilities, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a systematic process that prioritizes manpower requirements analyses for units that are the most critical for achieving mission needs.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
    Status: Open

    Comments: On December 14, 2016, the Coast Guard noted the following: CG-1B submitted two FY 2019 Resource Proposals to staff and equip the Manpower Requirements Determination Division to conduct the analysis as described in the recommendation. Estimated completion: TBD. On March 24, 2017, the Coast Guard noted that it continues to prioritize and analyze manpower requirements and is tracking an initiative to catalogue and validate all DHS manpower modeling/analysis programs, but noted that the estimated completion for the recommendation remains as TBD.
    Recommendation: To improve the strategic allocation of assets, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should incorporate field unit input, such as information on assets' actual performance from Operational Performance Assessment Reports and Planning Assessments, to inform more realistic asset allocation decisions--in addition to asset performance capacities currently used--in the annual Strategic Planning Directions to more effectively communicate strategic intent to field units.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
    Status: Open

    Comments: On December 14, 2016, the Coast Guard noted that the Atlantic Area and Pacific Area Commands' Operational Planning Directions (OPDs) were approved and provided to their field units in July 2016 and August 2016, respectively, and that the OPDs took into account the actual performance of the assets in the allocation of asset hours to field units in line with GAO's recommendation. The Coast Guard requested closure of this recommendation. However, in reviewing the provided planning documents, it was not clear how asset allocations were changed to reflect actual asset performance by the field units, so GAO asked for further details on 12-17-2016. As of 1-25-2017, GAO had not received any updated information, so this recommendation remains open.
    Director: Andrew Von Ah
    Phone: (213) 830-1011

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure the quality of the risk assessments used to inform its future QHSR processes, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy to ensure future QHSR risk assessment methodologies reflect key elements of successful risk assessment methodologies, such as being: (1) Documented, which includes documenting how risk information was integrated to arrive at the assessment results, (2) Reproducible, which includes producing comparable, repeatable results, and (3) Defensible, which includes communicating any implications of uncertainty to users of the risk results.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 2016, the Office of Policy's Office of Strategy, Plans, Analysis and Risks completed initial meetings in April 2016 with government and non-government subject matter experts to refine risk analyses for the upcoming 2018 QHSR. Representatives from the department's component and headquarters staff are to take part in the Department's Risk Modeling and Analysis Steering Committee by reviewing, documenting and approving proposed new methodologies planned to help identify and prioritize threats and hazards. This effort is intended to lead to a documented, reproducible, and defensible assessment, according to the DHS officials. This recommendation will remain open until we verify that the risk analysis contains these elements.
    Recommendation: To enable the use of risk information in supporting resource allocation decisions, guiding investments, and highlighting the measures that offer the greatest return on investment, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy to refine its risk assessment methodology so that in future QHSRs it can compare and prioritize homeland security risks and risk mitigation strategies.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 2016, the Office of Policy's Office of Strategy, Plans, Analysis, and Risk, with support from the RAND Corporation, has proposed a methodology to assess threats, hazards, and vulnerabilities impacting U.S. homeland security. In addition, the department's Risk Modeling and Analysis Executive Steering Committee is to review and approve the proposed methodology. The methodology is intended to enable the Department of Homeland Security to compare and prioritize homeland security risks and risk mitigation strategies, according to DHS officials. The recommendation will remain open until we verify that the methodology allows such comparisons.
    Recommendation: To ensure proper management of the QHSR stakeholder consultation process, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy to identify and implement stakeholder meeting processes to ensure that communication is interactive when project planning for the next QHSR.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 2016, the Office of Policy's Office of Strategy, Plans, Analysis, and Risk finalized a draft stakeholder outreach plan to include use of the Office of Management and Budget's Max electronic collaboration website to engage with federal, state, and local stakeholders. The OMB-MAX website is available to government and non-government offices and allows the posting of documents, articles, and links, as well as facilitating collaborative editing of documents and participant interaction threads, according to DHS officials. In addition, the Office of Policy's Office of Strategy, Plans, Analysis, and Risk is exploring the use of different tools to facilitate more interactive stakeholder engagement. For example, DHS's Office of Partnerships and Engagement is to facilitate additional engagement with external subject matter experts, arrange interagency coordination, and organize review and approval with parties of the homeland security enterprise in order to coordinate and approve the development of the 2018 QHSR. This recommendation will remain open until we verify that interactive communication approaches are implemented.
    Recommendation: To ensure proper management of the internal QHSR stakeholder consultation process, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy to clarify component detailee roles and responsibilities when project planning for the next QHSR.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of June 2016, the Office of Policy's Office of Strategy, Plans, Analysis, and Risk (SPAR) drafted a memorandum for the Deputy Secretary to solicit Component subject matter experts. The memorandum specifies component detailee roles and responsibilities, to include serving in an advisory, consultation, and coordination role, according to DHS officials. SPAR is to lead an integrated group of analysts and strategic planners that are to be supported and augmented by the subject matter experts. The experts and detailees are to serve as members of study teams analyzing key threats, trends, and strategy and policy alternatives associated with issues and challenges relating to DHS's mission and objectives. A second memorandum requesting additional detailee support is to be issued in November 2016, prior to the formal review phase of the new QHSR which is to begin in January 2017. This recommendation will remain open until we verify that clarified detailee roles and responsibilities are finalized and implemented.
    Director: Chris Currie
    Phone: (404) 679-1875

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance accountability for key risk-management activities and facilitate coordination with federal and industry stakeholders regarding electromagnetic risks, the Secretary of Homeland Security should designate roles and responsibilities within the department for addressing electromagnetic risks and communicate these to federal and industry partners.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In a June 2016 update to our proposed recommendation, DHS reported that the Cyber, Infrastructure and Resilience (CIR) Policy Office within the DHS Office of Policy is working with DHS components to identify and articulate the roles of the National Protection and Programs Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Science and Technology Directorate, and others regarding to address electromagnetic risks. As part of this effort, CIR is to coordinate the development of a joint roles and responsibilities document to be communicated through existing partnership structures with internal and external entities.
    Recommendation: To more fully leverage critical infrastructure expertise and address responsibilities to identify critical electrical infrastructure assets as called for in the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Energy direct responsible officials to review FERC's electrical infrastructure analysis and collaborate to determine whether further assessment is needed to adequately identify critical electric infrastructure assets, potentially to include additional elements of criticality that might be considered.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In a June 2016 update to our proposed recommendation, DHS reported that the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) will increase collaborative outreach activities with FERC staff that will include a review of identified critical substations developed by FERC. The intended outcome of this review is to inform DHS activities regarding identification and prioritization of critical infrastructure assets for use during steady state and response activities. NPPD is also to inform FERC of its criticality modeling capabilities through the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC) to enhance engagement with FERC's electric power subject matter expertise and inform future capability developments regarding response to and recovery from events such as electromagnetic pulse.
    Recommendation: To more fully leverage critical infrastructure expertise and address responsibilities to identify critical electrical infrastructure assets as called for in the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Energy direct responsible officials to review FERC's electrical infrastructure analysis and collaborate to determine whether further assessment is needed to adequately identify critical electric infrastructure assets, potentially to include additional elements of criticality that might be considered.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: In June 2016, DOE provided an update (60-day letter) reiterating their intent to continue with actions identified previously to address the GAO recommendation, namely that the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability was to review the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's electrical infrastructure analysis, and subsequently engage with FERC and DHS to identify if any additional elements of criticality should be considered.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal efforts to assess electromagnetic risks and help determine protection priorities, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Under Secretary for National Protection and Programs Directorate and the Assistant Secretary for the IP to work with other federal and industry partners to collect and analyze key inputs on threat, vulnerability, and consequence related to electromagnetic risks--potentially to include collecting additional information from DOD sources and leveraging existing assessment programs such as the Infrastructure Survey Tool, Regional Resiliency Assessment Program, and DCIP.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In a June 2016 update, DHS reported that the department had completed the planned refresh of the Strategic National Risk Assessment, which was intended to incorporate potential impacts to the power system from electromagnetic events. In addition, DHS reported that the Electricity Sub-sector Coordinating Council created an Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) task force, which met in April 2016 and is currently working to develop a joint industry and government approach to address EMP. It was further noted that DHS and DOE initiated a joint study on the effects of EMP on the electric power sector - led by Los Alamos National Laboratory and the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC) - to analyze the hazard environments, impacts, and consequences of EMP and GMD on U.S. electric power infrastructure. In addition, DHS noted their support of a new effort by the Electric Power Research Institute and 39 industry partners to further study EMP vulnerabilities.
    Recommendation: To facilitate federal and industry efforts to coordinate risk-management activities to address an EMP attack, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Energy should direct responsible officials to engage with federal partners and industry stakeholders to identify and implement key EMP research and development priorities, including opportunities for further testing and evaluation of potential EMP protection and mitigation options.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: On March 9, 2016 DOE provided agency comments on GAO-16-243 concurring with the recommendation and identifying related actions. Specifically, DOE reported collaboration with the Electric Power Research Institute to develop a joint DOE/Industry EMP Strategy to include key goals and objectives and identification of R&D priorities. The Strategy is expected to be completed by August 31, 2016 to be followed by more detailed action plans. DOE reported that they will collaborate with DHS and DOD in development of the Strategy and action plans. DOE further noted that a report by the Idaho National Laboratory report also identifies potential technology gaps and includes recommendations for further R&D efforts, which will be incorporated when developing the forthcoming action plans.
    Director: Brian J. Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to improve the consistency of certain data submitted by the military services and defense agencies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and reported in the Energy Report, the Secretary of Defense should direct the secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the heads of the defense agencies, and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment to work together to provide more consistent guidance to the installations, including clearly stating the energy reporting requirements for tenant and host facilities, energy projects, and end-of-fiscal-year data.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation to provide more consistent guidance to the installations for the Energy Report. DOD stated that the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment will work with the military services in fiscal year 2016 to provide more consistent guidance to military installations. In a September 2017 follow up, DOD stated that it has draft guidance in progress and is awaiting finalization. We will continue to follow up on the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Jacqueline M. Nowicki
    Phone: (617) 788-0580

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To strengthen states' monitoring and facilitate local MOE compliance, the Secretary of Education should prioritize technical assistance and information sharing across states on ways to facilitate local MOE compliance with respect to the use of the four calculation methods and the exceptions.

    Agency: Department of Education
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2016, Education officials reported that the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has been working on guidance on local educational agency maintenance of effort (LEA MOE) and intends to issue an expanded question and answer document by the end of 2016. In addition, the officials reported that the OSEP-funded Center for Idea Fiscal Reporting (CIFR) has taken additions steps, including creating an LEA MOE calculator projected for publication in fall 2016. GAO anticipates closing this recommendation when these activities have been implemented.
    Recommendation: To help districts address key challenges in meeting MOE and mitigate unintended consequences that may affect services for students with disabilities, while preserving the safeguard for funding for students with disabilities, Congress should consider options for a more flexible MOE requirement. This could include adopting a less stringent MOE requirement to align with the MOE requirements in other education programs or adding to or modifying exceptions. For example, current exceptions could be changed to allow one-time increases in spending without changing a district's MOE baseline in order to encourage pilot innovations or to allow certain spending decreases (e.g., state caps on teacher benefits), as long as a district can demonstrate the decrease does not negatively affect services.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: Congress has not taken legislative action on this issue.
    Director: J. Christopher Mihm
    Phone: (202) 512-6806

    9 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor the Department of Agriculture's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor the Department of Defense's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor the Department of the Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: Labor officials informed us that they had planned to address this recommendation by using a data quality self-assessment pilot they had conducted with component agencies that support Labor's priority goals. Labor had described its plans for this pilot in its fiscal year 2015 performance report and a link is provided from Performance.gov to agencies' performance plans and reports. Labor officials told us they described the results of this pilot in their draft fiscal year 2016 performance report, but according to Labor officials were advised by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) staff to deemphasize the priority goals and thus they dropped this section from the published performance report. On June 15, 2017, the Director of OMB stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor Labor's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) annual performance report for fiscal year 2016 and performance plan for fiscal year 2018 continues to provide a general statement on how the agency uses a standardized methodology to measure its performance and that agency officials attest to the quality of the performance information. However, USDA does not provide more specific explanation of how it is ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the performance information used to measure progress on the priority goals the agency identified for fiscal years 2016 and 2017. On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget stated in a memorandum to agency heads that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense's (DOD) performance report for fiscal year 2016 continues to state that performance goal owners are expected to attest that their performance data is complete, accurate, and reliable. However, the report does not provide more specific explanation for individual priority goals. On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget stated in a memorandum to agency heads that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of the Interior's 2017/2018 Annual Performance Plan & 2016 Report (APP&R) includes a section concerning data accuracy and reliability and describes in general terms how Interior ensures the accuracy and reliability of performance information and how it addresses the five data quality requirements in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010(GPRAMA). However, Interior does not provide more specific explanation for individual priority goals. For example, Interior states that the source of performance information are program managers, but does not provide more specific explanation of how the agency obtains performance information for priority goals that address a diverse array of issues, such as assisting Indian tribes, addressing climate change, and managing oil and gas resources. In September 2016, we provided feedback to Interior officials, at their request, and suggested they provide more specific data quality explanation. On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget stated in a memorandum to agency heads that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: On June 15, 2017, Labor officials informed us that they had planned to address this recommendation by using a data quality self-assessment pilot they had conducted with component agencies that support Labor's priority goals. Labor had described its plans for this pilot in its fiscal year 2015 performance report. Labor officials told us they described the results of this pilot in their draft fiscal year 2016 performance report, but according to Labor officials were advised by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) staff to deemphasize the priority goals and thus they dropped this section from the published performance report. On June 15, 2017, the Director of OMB stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor Labor's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help participating agencies improve their public reporting, the Director of OMB, working with the PIC Executive Director, should identify additional changes that need to be made in OMB's guidance to agencies related to ensuring the quality of performance information for APGs on Performance.gov.

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

    Comments: On June 15, 2017, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) stated in a memorandum to agency heads that reporting on Performance.gov concerning the previous Administration's priority goals is suspended through the end of fiscal year 2017. The OMB Director stated that priority goals are intended to focus efforts toward achieving the priorities of the current political leadership and that new goals would be established when the President's fiscal year 2019 Budget is released. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.
    Director: Gerald Dillingham
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To implement a more effective international strategy for achieving NextGen interoperability with other nations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to conduct a risk assessment to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities to NextGen interoperability and establish timeframes for periodically re-evaluating these risks.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To implement a more effective international strategy for achieving NextGen interoperability with other nations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to identify and document actions FAA will undertake to mitigate these risks, using information from the risk assessment as a basis for making management decisions about how to allocate resources for these activities.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Mak, Marie A
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order for NASA to fully implement the NASA Authorization Act of 2008 and for CASIS to fulfill its responsibility as outlined in the cooperative agreement, the NASA Administrator should direct the Associate Administrator for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate to fully staff the ISS National Laboratory Advisory Committee.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: NASA does not plan to staff the International Space Station National Laboratory Advisory Committee (INLAC) at this time. Officials stated that they continue to believe that the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS) Board of Directors meets the intent of the INLAC charter by providing oversight of CASIS implementation of utilization of the ISS as a national laboratory. NASA remains concerned about staffing another oversight group that may create conflicts with the existing CASIS Board of Directors. NASA is also exploring with CASIS opportunities to open portions of board meetings to the general public and interested parties in order to foster additional transparency and a broad and free exchange of ideas. In response to this recommendation, the Associate Administrator for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate indicated that NASA was seeking relief from the statutory requirement to staff the INLAC.
    Director: David A. Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of OMB streamlining efforts and ensure agency CIOs are better able to carry out their responsibilities in managing IT, including implementing OMB's IT reform initiatives, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO, in collaboration with agency CIOs, to ensure there is a common understanding with agency CIOs on the priority of the current reporting requirements and related IT reform initiatives. This should include addressing underlying reasons cited by CIOs regarding the usefulness of requirements, including when department priorities are reportedly different than OMB's and the burdensome and duplicative nature of requirements.

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

    Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) neither agreed or disagreed with our recommendation. Subsequently, OMB has taken steps to address some aspects of our recommendation. Specifically, in January 2017, OMB worked with the Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council to issue a report entitled "State of Federal Information Technology (SOFIT)" which outlined current IT trends and their key challenges, and made recommendations to improve implementation efforts. Notably, the report also identified differences in priorities between OMB and agency CIOs on key IT reform initiatives and the need for improved reporting requirements. In addition, in June 2017, OMB staff reported that they met the CIO and head of each agency this past spring regarding their priorities and challenges. While these are positive steps toward ensuring a common understanding of these initiatives and reporting requirements, OMB still needs to take action to address the underlying reasons for these differences in priorities and reduce burdensome and duplicative requirements. Until OMB takes action in these areas, there is a risk that key IT reform initiatives may not fully succeed. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in addressing our recommendation.
    Director: John Neumann
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve internal control and promote transparency and to ensure consistency with OMB's guidance for internal control assessment, DNFSB should clearly document each step of its control assessment activities; maintain that documentation to provide evidence that assessment and control activities are being performed; and ensure that key responsibilities, such as reviewing control assessments, should be segregated among different people to help ensure that control activities are being accurately performed.

    Agency: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DNFSB officials, DNFSB has updated its policies to maintain paper and electronic documentation of its internal control activities and ensure that key responsibilities, such as reviewing internal control assessments, are segregated among different staff. In addition, DNFSB has contracted for an independent evaluation of its internal control policies. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve internal control and promote transparency and to promote public transparency and openness, DNFSB should clearly distinguish in Federal Register notices and during the proceedings between (1) public hearings held pursuant to DNFSB's statutory authority and (2) meetings as defined by the Sunshine Act, required to be open to the public.

    Agency: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DNFSB officials, as of October 2016, the agency has taken no action in response to this recommendation. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
    Director: Robert Goldenkoff
    Phone: (202) 512-2757

    2 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve the classification system and to strengthen OPM's management and oversight, the Director of OPM, working through the Chief Human Capital Officer Council, and in conjunction with key stakeholders such as the Office of Management and Budget, unions, and others, should use prior studies and lessons learned from demonstration projects and alternative systems to examine ways to make the GS system's design and implementation more consistent with the attributes of a modern, effective classification system. To the extent warranted, develop a legislative proposal for congressional consideration.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of April 2017, OPM officials said they continue to meet on a regular basis with the Interagency Classification Policy Forum group to inform strategies and action plans for implementation of general schedule system best practices. As a result, they have made changes for conducting occupational studies through various actions, including streamlining their process for conducting occupational studies. These actions include the cancellation of 21 occupational series with minimal agency use (25 or fewer Federal employees reported) and upcoming policy issuances - the Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families and the Interpretive Guidance for Cybersecurity Positions and 17 Professional Medical and Health occupational series. In addition, they have developed a methodology to streamline studies for occupational series with 1,000 or less Federal employees. OPM officials said any further action to develop a legislative proposal for congressional consideration would be contingent upon having permanent OPM leadership in place. We will continue to monitor OPM's efforts.
    Recommendation: To improve the classification system and to strengthen OPM's management and oversight, the Director of OPM should develop cost-effective mechanisms to oversee agency implementation of the classification system as required by law, and develop a strategy that will enable OPM to more effectively and routinely monitor agencies' implementation of classification standards.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: In June 2016, OPM officials said the agency had designed several efforts to improve the classification system and strengthen oversight: (1) OPM is reviewing occupational series post studies to assess whether agencies are implementing classification policy updates and new issuances. (2) Decisions from the classification appeals program are issued to monitor implementation of classification standards. (3) The classification policy group has formalized the participation of the Merit System Accountability and Compliance group to discuss best practices in monitoring and overseeing classification policies and is planning a related classification forum. We will continue to monitor these efforts. Specifically, OPM officials said they were conducting occupational series post studies of custodians, public affairs, financial management, sustainability and other White House initiatives. We will continue to monitor OPM's efforts.
    Director: Linda T. Kohn
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To address challenges that affect the ability of providers to electronically exchange health information, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS and ONC to develop and prioritize specific actions that HHS will take consistent with the principles in HHS's strategy to advance health information exchange.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 28, 2014, HHS provided some information indicating that it had begun the process of developing milestones with time frames for its actions toward advancing exchange, and that it plans to make them publicly available. Because HHS has only just begun the process and has not provided documentation, these actions are in progress and therefore not complete. We will follow up in fiscal year 2015 to gather additional information to determine if the actions fully address the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To address challenges that affect the ability of providers to electronically exchange health information, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS and ONC to develop milestones with time frames for the actions to better gauge progress toward advancing exchange, with appropriate adjustments over time.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 28, 2014, HHS provided some information indicating that it had begun the process of developing milestones with time frames for its actions toward advancing exchange, and that it plans to make them publicly available. Because HHS has only just begun the process and has not provided documentation, these actions are in progress and therefore not complete. We will follow up in fiscal year 2015 to gather additional information to determine if the actions fully address the recommendation.
    Director: Trimble, David C
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the resilience of the nation's infrastructure to climate change, the Executive Director of the United States Global Change Research Program or other federal entity designated by the Executive Office of the President should work with relevant agencies to identify for decision makers the "best available" climate-related information for infrastructure planning and update this information over time.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy: U.S. Global Change Research Program
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of 7/27/17, no federal entity has identified the best available climate-related information for infrastructure planning.
    Recommendation: To improve the resilience of the nation's infrastructure to climate change, the Executive Director of the United States Global Change Research Program or other federal entity designated by the Executive Office of the President should work with relevant agencies to clarify sources of local assistance for incorporating climate-related information and analysis into infrastructure planning, and communicate how such assistance will be provided over time.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy: U.S. Global Change Research Program
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of 7/27/17, no federal entity has comprehensively clarified sources of local assistance for incorporating climate-related information and analysis into infrastructure planning.
    Recommendation: To improve the resilience of the nation's infrastructure to climate change, the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality should finalize guidance on how federal agencies can consider the effects of climate change in their evaluations of proposed federal actions under the National Environmental Policy Act.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Council on Environmental Quality
    Status: Open

    Comments: On August 1, 2016, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued final guidance to federal departments and agencies on how to consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change when evaluating proposed federal actions in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. However, in March 2017, the White House issued Executive Order 13783, directing CEQ to rescind the guidance, among other things. CEQ rescinded the guidance on April 5, 2017.
    Director: Goldenkoff, Robert N
    Phone: (202)512-2757

    1 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve the Bureau's use of its master schedule to manage the 2020 decennial census, the Secretary of Commerce should require the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau to include estimates of the resources, such as labor, materials, and overhead costs, in the 2020 integrated schedule for each activity as the schedule is built, and prepare to carry out other steps as necessary to conduct systematic schedule risk analyses on the 2020 schedule.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Commerce neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. The Bureau continues to refine its 2020 Census master schedule, which it recently announced it completed in July 2016. Bureau officials have periodically described their intent to link resources to activities within their schedules, but as of July 2016 had confirmed that it had not yet done so. The Bureau has provided us with copies of its schedule, but not yet satisfactory evidence of having completed such an analysis. We are beginning an audit of the Bureau's scheduling practices this summer and will review actions the Bureau may have taken to address this recommendation. As of July 2017, we have received initial documents as we begin this review.