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: Terrorists

    12 publications with a total of 31 open recommendations including 1 priority recommendation
    Director: Jennifer Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should explore and pursue methods to assess the deterrent effect of TSA's passenger aviation security countermeasures; such an effort should identify FAMS—a countermeasure with a focus on deterring threats—as a top priority to address. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. When we confirm what actions TSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should systematically evaluate the potential cost and effectiveness tradeoffs across countermeasures, as TSA improves the reliability and extent of its information on the effectiveness of aviation security countermeasures. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and in its September 2017 response to our report, DHS stated that TSA will continue efforts to improve both its analysis of information related to security effectiveness and its cost information, leading to better informed cost-benefit decisions for individual countermeasures. To address the intent of our recommendation, TSA will need to evaluate the costs and effectiveness of individual aviation security countermeasures and then use this information to systematically evaluate the potential cost and effectiveness tradeoffs across countermeasures. When we confirm what actions TSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Rebecca Gambler
    Phone: (202) 512-8777

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure the effectiveness of CBP's predeparture programs, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection should develop and implement a system of performance measures and baselines to evaluate the effectiveness of CBP's predeparture programs and assess whether the programs are achieving their stated goals.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
    Status: Open

    Comments: U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Office of Field Operations (OFO) reported that it established a working group comprised of designated program officials from CBP's Admissibility and Passenger Programs; National Targeting Center; Planning, Program Analysis, and Evaluation; and, Preclearance offices to develop and implement a system of performance measures and baselines to evaluate the effectiveness of CBP's predeparture programs. As of July 2017, CBP reported that the working group had developed three performance measures for its predeparture programs. According to OFO officials, fiscal year 2018 will be the first complete year that each of these measures is calculated using a standardized and repeatable methodology and will thus be used as a baseline year. The baselines developed during fiscal year 2018 will then be used in future assessments of program effectiveness. To fully address this recommendation to develop and implement performance measures and baselines for evaluating its predeparture programs, GAO will review documentation from CBP, when available, on the fiscal year 2018 baselines and CBP's planned evaluation of fiscal year 2019 data against those baselines.
    Director: Kimberly Gianopoulos
    Phone: (202) 512-8612

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide a basis for comparing actual results with intended results that can generate more meaningful performance information, the Secretaries of the Interior and State and the Attorney General of the United States should jointly work with the Task Force to develop performance targets related to the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking Implementation Plan.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Agency agreed with recommendation and plans to implement it
    Recommendation: To provide a basis for comparing actual results with intended results that can generate more meaningful performance information, the Secretaries of the Interior and State and the Attorney General of the United States should jointly work with the Task Force to develop performance targets related to the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking Implementation Plan.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: Agency agreed with recommendation and plans to implement it
    Recommendation: To provide a basis for comparing actual results with intended results that can generate more meaningful performance information, the Secretaries of the Interior and State and the Attorney General of the United States should jointly work with the Task Force to develop performance targets related to the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking Implementation Plan.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: Agency agreed with recommendation and plans to implement it
    Director: Jenny Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure effective evaluation of air marshal training, the TSA Administrator should direct OTD to implement a mechanism for regularly collecting and incorporating incumbent air marshals' feedback on the training they receive from field office programs.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure effective evaluation of air marshal training, the TSA Administrator should direct OTD to take additional steps to improve the response rates of the training surveys it conducts.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that air marshals are complying with recurrent training requirements and have the capability to carry out FAMS's mission, the TSA Administrator should direct FAMS to specify in policy who at the headquarters level has oversight responsibility for ensuring that field office Supervisory Air Marshals-in-Charge or their designees meet their responsibilities for ensuring that training completion records are entered in a timely manner.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that air marshals are complying with recurrent training requirements and have the capability to carry out FAMS's mission, the TSA Administrator should direct FAMS to specify in policy who at the headquarters level is responsible for ensuring that headquarters personnel enter approved air marshals' training exemptions into the Federal Air Marshal Information System, and define the timeframe for doing so.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that air marshals are complying with recurrent training requirements and have the capability to carry out FAMS's mission, the TSA Administrator should direct FAMS to develop and implement standardized methods, such as examinations and checklists, for determining whether incumbent air marshals continue to be mission ready in key skills.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Jennifer Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure that FAMS uses its resources to cover the highest-risk flights, in addition to considering risk when determining how to divide FAMS's international flight coverage resources among international destinations, the Director of FAMS should incorporate risk into FAMS's method for initially setting its annual target numbers of average daily international and domestic flights to cover.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration: Office of Law Enforcement - Federal Air Marshal Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: In May 2016, we found that FAMS officials considered risk when selecting specific domestic and international flights to cover, but they did not consider risk when deciding how to initially divide their annual resources between domestic and international flights. Rather, each year FAMS considered two variables--travel budget and number of air marshals--to identify the most efficient way to divide the agency's resources between domestic and international flights. As a result, we recommended that FAMS incorporate risk into FAMS's method for initially setting its annual target numbers of average daily international and domestic flights to cover. In March 2017, TSA officials reported that FAMS was continuing to identify ways to refine the methodology FAMS uses to allocate resources between international and domestic flights. Specifically, TSA officials noted that FAMS was considering ways to incorporate information on the travel patterns of known or suspected terrorists, trends in TSA PreCheck passenger data, airport screening capabilities, and other factors. FAMS officials also reported that, as part of this effort, they were reviewing their International Concept of Operations. It is unclear how these steps will address the recommendation. To fully address this recommendation, FAMS should incorporate risk into its method for initially setting its annual target numbers of average daily international and domestic flights to cover.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that FAMS uses its resources to cover the highest-risk flights, the Director of FAMS should conduct and document a risk assessment--systematically collecting information on and assigning value to current risks--to further support FAMS's domestic resource allocation decisions, including the identification of high-priority geographic areas.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration: Office of Law Enforcement - Federal Air Marshal Service
    Status: Open

    Comments: In May 2016, we reported that FAMS's choice of domestic geographic focus areas and resource allocation levels were based on professional judgment, not risk assessment. With regard to the geographic focus areas, for example, FAMS officials explained that they did not conduct a risk assessment to inform this decision, but rather selected these areas in consultation with 30 subject matter experts from various offices within TSA based on their intuitive, qualitative perceptions of threats, vulnerabilities, potential impacts, history, and the demographics of the areas. Without fully incorporating risk when determining such priorities, FAMS cannot reasonably ensure it is targeting its resources to the highest-risk flights. As a result, we recommended that FAMS conduct and document a risk assessment--systematically collecting information on and assigning value to current risks--to further support FAMS's domestic resource allocation decisions, including the identification of high-priority geographic areas. In March 2017, TSA officials explained that they were continuing to develop their "risk-by-flight" initiative--a long-term effort to develop a method of assigning each domestic flight a relative risk score to assist in identifying high-risk flights. At the time of our report in 2016, FAMS officials estimated that the risk-by-flight tool would probably be ready for use within 7 to 10 years. In March 2017, TSA officials stated that they had developed a prototype Risk-Based Resource Deployment Decision Aid, which they refer to as R2D2. TSA officials further reported that the DHS Science and Technology Directorate had contracted for the development of a risk engine--based on the R2D2 data--to assign risk values to all U.S.-carrier domestic and international flights. TSA officials reported that this contract runs through early 2018. To fully address this recommendation, FAMS should conduct and document a risk assessment to further support FAMS's domestic resource allocation decisions, including the identification of high-priority geographic areas.
    Director: Michael J. Courts
    Phone: (202) 512-8980

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To strengthen DHS's ability to fulfill legislative requirements for the VWP and protect the security of the United States and its citizens, the Secretary of Homeland Security should specify time frames for working with VWP countries to institute the additional VWP security requirements, including the requirement that the countries fully implement agreements to share information about known or suspected terrorists through the countries' Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 arrangements and Preventing and Combating Serious Crime agreements with the United States.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In April 2017, DHS reported that nearly all VWP countries have begun sharing information on known or suspected terrorists through Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 arrangements and that DHS also made progress in fully implementing Preventing and Combating Serious Crime agreements. According to DHS, all VWP countries were informed of the new VWP requirements in July 2016. In its initial response, DHS stated that it planned to conduct a comprehensive assessment of VWP countries' compliance with the new VWP requirements and establish a time frame for each VWP country to reach full compliance as part of each country's next formal review. However, as of April 2017, DHS needs to provide documentation to GAO to support all of these actions. GAO will continue to monitor DHS efforts to fully address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To strengthen DHS's ability to fulfill legislative requirements for the VWP and protect the security of the United States and its citizens, the Secretary of Homeland Security should take steps to improve DHS's timeliness in reporting to Congress, within the statutory time frame, the department's determination of whether each VWP country should continue participating in the program and any effects of the country's participation on U.S. law enforcement and security interests.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: Since 2016, DHS has issued several reports on VWP countries to Congress that have addressed several of the overdue reports identified in 2016, but some gaps remain. As of April 2017, DHS reported plans to deliver additional reports in 2017 to address these gaps. In its initial response, DHS reported that the department had taken steps to ensure timely reporting to Congress and committed to providing Congress with advance notification of any delays in delivering future reports. To fully address this recommendation, DHS needs to issue reports to Congress on VWP countries that have not been covered within the last two years. GAO will continue to monitor DHS efforts.
    Director: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    6 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To enable AFRICOM's component commands to better plan, advise, and coordinate for OCS, the AFRICOM Commander, as part of AFRICOM's ongoing efforts to update related guidance and emphasize the importance of OCS integration at the subordinate command level, should direct the service components to designate elements within their respective staffs to be responsible for coordinating OCS, and consider the establishment of an OCS Integration Cell or similar structure with these dedicated OCS personnel, as needed.

    Agency: Department of Defense: U.S. Africa Command
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, AFRICOM officials stated that there are clear advantages and benefits to establishing an OCSIC at Service-component level. USAFRICOM, as a geographic combatant command, assigns operational missions to subordinate commands for execution, including operational contract support (OCS) tasks. Joint Pub 4-10, as augmented by AFRICOM Command Instruction (ACI) 4800.01 A, specifies the tasks and functions in support of OCS that Service Components must execute. Service Components determine the most appropriate organizational structure best suited to meet its assigned mission. i.e. establishment of an OCSlC as deemed necessary. However, service components have indicated that guidance clarifying the circumstances under which they should establish OCSICs would be helpful. As such, this recommendation will remain open at this time.
    Recommendation: To enable AFRICOM's component commands to better plan, advise, and coordinate for OCS, the AFRICOM Commander, as part of AFRICOM's ongoing efforts to update related guidance and emphasize the importance of OCS integration at the subordinate command level, should clarify under what conditions a subordinate joint force command, such as Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, should establish an OCS Integration Cell.

    Agency: Department of Defense: U.S. Africa Command
    Status: Open

    Comments: AFRICOM officials told us that USAFRICOM J4 conducted a staff assistance visit (SA V) at CJTF-HOA from 16-19 August 2015. It was recommended that ClTF-HOA establish an OCS Working Group (OCSWG) that is owned b) the ClTF-HOA J4. The OCSWG is a doctrinal working group and would contain designated cross-functional staff members to enable OCS planning and policy generation as well as Oversee contractor management issues. Other OCS recommendations were made to the CJTF-HOA J4 that included adding permanent OCS billets to the J4 and executing OCSIC tasks. This recommendation will remain open at this time.
    Recommendation: To enable AFRICOM to better identify, address, and mitigate OCS readiness gaps at its component commands before inaccurate information is incorporated into formal defense readiness reporting systems, the AFRICOM Commander should clarify the scorecard process, including assessment standards, for OCS Readiness Scorecards to ensure that evaluators can accurately assess subordinate commands' OCS capabilities.

    Agency: Department of Defense: U.S. Africa Command
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, AFRICOM officials stated that while the OCS score card may be considered a best practice in the OCS execution in the AFRICOM AOR, it is not a replacement for the Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) to report OCS. This recommendation will remain open at this time.
    Recommendation: To enable AFRICOM to comprehensively and consistently account for contractor personnel in Africa, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should direct Joint Staff to clarify what types of contractor personnel should be accounted for in its guidance on personnel status reports.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has taken steps to clarify what types of contractor personnel should be accounted for in its guidance on personnel status reports, but revision of that guidance is ongoing. According to Joint Staff officials in August 2016, USAFRICOM has not yet incorporated its local policies and standards into the CJCSM 3150.13C as the manual is up for review by the Joint Staff and is projected to be completed by Spring 2017. Additionally, in February 2016, a class deviation became effective for the USAFRICOM area of responsibility (AOR). This deviation superseded Class Deviations 2014-O0005, and 2015-O0003. The deviation stated that contracting officers shall incorporate clause 252.225-7980, Contractor Personnel Performing in the United States Africa Command Area of Responsibility, in lieu of the clause at DFARS 252.225-7040, Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States, in all solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items that will require contractor personnel to perform in the United States Africa Command (USAFRICOM) area of responsibility. In addition, to the extent practicable, contracting officers shall modify current, active contracts with performance in the USAFRICOM AOR to include the clause 252.225-7980. The USAFRICOM Commander has identified a need to utilize the Synchronized Pre-deployment and Operational Tracker for all contracts performed in the AOR during all operational phases (including Phase 0), not limited to declared contingency operations. However, until guidance clarifying what types of contractor personnel is finalized, this recommendation will remain open.
    Recommendation: To enable AFRICOM to comprehensively and consistently account for contractor personnel in Africa, the AFRICOM Commander should develop area of responsibility-wide contractor personnel accountability guidance on or before December 2015, when the current guidance expires, that clarifies which types of contractor personnel should be accounted for using SPOT, and when SPOT accountability requirements should be incorporated into contracts.

    Agency: Department of Defense: U.S. Africa Command
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, AFRICOM officials told us Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.225-7980 (Class Deviation 2016-00008), Contractor Personnel Performing in the United States Africa Command Area of Responsibility was published in June 2016. This clause requires the use of the Synchronized Pre-Deployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) to account for all Contractor Authorized to Accompany the Force (CAAF), United States and third-country national contractors (TCNs), all private security contractors. and all other contractor personnel authorized to carry weapons when performing in the AFRICOM AOR on all DoD contracts, regardless of the contract amount or period of performance. Furthermore. the DoD contractor is required to submit to the cognizant contracting officer for SPOT reporting and aggregate count of all local national employees performing in the AFRICOM AOR. by country of performance, for 30 days or longer under a contract valued at or above $150.000. This recommendation will remain open at this time.
    Recommendation: To ensure that combatant commands are not contracting with entities that may be connected to or supporting prohibited organizations, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should develop guidance that clarifies the conditions under which combatant commands should have a foreign vendor vetting process or cell in place to determine whether potential vendors actively support any terrorist, criminal, or other sanctioned organizations, including clarifying when combatant commands should develop procedures for transmitting the names of any vendors identified through this process for inclusion in prohibited entities lists in the appropriate federal contracting databases, such as the System for Award Management.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of October 2016, DOD has taken steps to develop foreign vendor vetting guidance, but that guidance is in the process of being drafted. According to Joint Staff officials in August 2016, as required by NDAA for FY2015, Section 841(d)(1), the Director, Defense Procurement & Acquisition Policy, issued Class Deviation 2015-O0016, Prohibition on Providing Funds to the Enemy and Authorization of Additional Access to Records, effective September 15, 2015. Also, Joint Staff has drafted a Directive Type Memorandum (DTM)on foreign vendor vetting. When issued, the DTM will assign responsibility to each of the Combatant Commanders to establish a foreign vendor program in their respective Areas of Responsibility in accordance with NDAA for FY2015, Sections 841, 842 and 843. However, until the DTM is issued, this recommendation will remain open.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to help ensure consistent, effective oversight of DHS's acquisition programs, and to make the CASR more useful, starting with the report reflecting fiscal year 2015 program data, the Secretary of DHS should adjust the CASR to do the following: (1) report an individual rating for each program's cost, schedule, and technical risks; (2) report a best estimate of procurement quantities or indicate why this is not applicable, as appropriate; (3) report all programs' significant changes in acquisition cost, quantity, or schedule from the previous CASR report by determining a means to account for programs that lack acquisition program baselines; (4) report major program events that are included in acquisition program baselines, such as scheduled acquisition decision events; and (5) report the level at which the program's life-cycle cost estimate was approved.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation, and took some actions to address it. The Office of Program Accountability and Risk Management (PARM) updated its template for the Comprehensive Acquisition Status Report (CASR) to reflect the following changes: individual ratings for each program's cost, schedule, and technical risks; significant changes in programs' acquisition cost, quantity, or schedule; and major events included in the acquisition program baselines. In addition, PARM intended to revise the reporting information for the level at which a program's life-cycle cost estimate was approved and its estimate of procurement quantities. However, the 2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act discontinued the requirement to submit the CASR with future budget requests and DHS did not submit one for 2017. Recently introduced legislation would reestablish the CASR requirement and we will revisit this recommendation pending the outcome of that legislation.
    Director: Jennifer A. Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To assess the progress of the Secure Flight program toward achieving its goals, the Transportation Security Administration's Administrator should develop additional measures to address key performance aspects related to each program goal, and ensure these measures clearly identify the activities necessary to achieve progress toward the goal.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions that DHS TSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information. Status last confirmed on 10/26/15.
    Director: Crosse, Marcia G
    Phone: (202)512-3407

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that HHS is adequately and comprehensively assessing HPP and PHEP awardees' performance and progress in meeting the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct ASPR and CDC to develop objective and quantifiable performance targets and incremental milestones that correspond to the new HPP and PHEP performance measures, against which HHS can gauge progress toward the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements and direct technical assistance, as needed.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: Since we examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR had developed few targets for the HPP program measures or their corresponding indicators that were contained in the HPP performance measurement guidance documents issued for Budget Periods (BP) 2-5, ending June 30, 2017. Additionally, the new HPP performance measure implementation guidance for the 5-year project cycle from 2017-2022 introduces 28 performance measures, with few having targets?the guidance notes that corresponding goals or targets may be set at a later date after data from the first budget period of this new project cycle has been reviewed. Regarding PHEP, CDC had developed performance targets for about half of the performance measures as of the PHEP BP5 performance measurement guidance (BP5 ended June 30, 2017). These performance measures generally remain the same, with existing targets, for BP1 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018) of the new 5-year budget cycle. GAO recognizes that it may not be appropriate to develop performance targets for every performance measure depending on the desired process or outcome; however, both agencies still have work to do in this area.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that HHS is adequately and comprehensively assessing HPP and PHEP awardees' performance and progress in meeting the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should ensure that performance measures and targets remain consistent across the 5-year project cycle and that any future measures be comparable to determine whether awardees are making progress toward meeting short- and long-term medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: Since we first examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR and CDC had made efforts to maintain consistency in their performance measures, particularly in the last 3 years of the prior project cycle which ended June 30, 2017. However, because part of the recommendation includes consistency of performance measures into future project cycles, we also examined whether both cooperative agreements continued to use basically the same performance measures into the current 5-year cycle, which began July 1, 2017. ASPR's HPP has made a significant change in its performance measures, introducing a new set of 28 performance measures for this new 5-year cycle. CDC's PHEP performance measures generally remained consistent in the last two budget periods of the prior 5-year cycle, and remained generally the same for the first year of the new 5-year cycle (some measures were "retired," though key components from a measure may continue to be used by CDC in other types of reviews). As a result of the change to HPP's measures, GAO anticipates keeping this recommendation open at least for the next few budget periods, in order to determine whether HPP maintains consistency with its new performance measures during the new project cycle.
    Director: Martin, Belva M
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better inform management and resource allocation decisions, effectively manage limited export control enforcement resources, and improve the license determination process, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, as they implement efforts to track resources expended on export control enforcement activities, should use such data to make resource allocation decisions.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOJ had identified plans to make continual improvements to the investigative and prosecutorial data to allow better tracking and refined resource allocation decisions going forward. However, we have not been able to obtain status information from Justice despite our attempts.
    Recommendation: To better inform management and resource allocation decisions, effectively manage limited export control enforcement resources, and improve the license determination process, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the departmental representatives of the Export Enforcement Coordination Center, including Commerce, Justice, State, and the Treasury should (1) leverage export control enforcement resources across agencies by building on existing agency efforts to track resources expended, as well as existing agency coordination at the local level; (2) establish procedures to facilitate data sharing between the enforcement agencies and intelligence community to measure illicit transshipment activity; and (3) develop qualitative and quantitative measures of effectiveness for the entire enforcement community to baseline and trend this data.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: To help track resources expended and coordination of enforcement resources, the E2C2 has ratified and implemented the investigative deconfliction protocol. The Export Enforcement Coordination Center (E2C2) has also ratified and implemented the dispute resolution protocol and it is being used by all E2C2 partners. These are two of seven standard operating procedures planned to be in use by the E2C2. The Intelligence Community engagement/information protocols are being addressed through the E2C2 Export Enforcement Intelligence Working Group to help facilitate data sharing, and ICE, through the E2C2, is still in the process of establishing interagency agreement on procedures to facilitate data sharing between the enforcement agencies and intelligence community to assist in measuring illicit transshipment activity. The E2C2 Intel Cell White Paper is complete, but the Cell is not staffed or operational. This Cell is to serve as the primary interagency conduit for defining, establishing, and implementing protocols and facilitating information sharing between the IC and export enforcement community. The white paper outlines the E2C2 Intel Cell's mission, general roles and functions, recommended tasks and structure to facilitate enhanced coordination and intelligence sharing. When established, the Cell will develop standard operating procedures but this has not yet occurred. In late August 2016, the Department of Commerce assigned a new Assistant Director and one analyst to the E2C2. Efforts to formalize an intelligence analytical unit and draft a corresponding SOP are ongoing as of the summer of 2017.
    Director: Gambler, Rebecca S
    Phone: (202)512-8816

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should establish internal controls for management oversight of the accuracy, consistency, and completeness of checkpoint performance data.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Border and Transportation Security: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
    Status: Open

    Comments: In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found inconsistencies in the way field agents collected and entered performance data into the checkpoint information system. As a result, data reported in the system were unreliable. We recommended that Border Patrol establish internal controls to ensure the accuracy, consistency, and completeness of checkpoint performance data. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported internal control solutions were underway, which would primarily involve upgrading its existing checkpoint data systems and creating a checkpoint data oversight protocol. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that it was developing a redesigned checkpoint information system that should address the data errors and issues identified by our report. The agency also noted that it was exploring ways to implement a data oversight procedure and training on the importance of accurate data collection. In October 2014, the Border Patrol reported that the recommendation was being addressed in various phases, with a new expected completion date of March 2015. In June 2015, Border Patrol revised the expected completion date to September 2015. In September 2016, Border Patrol officials stated that the agency had not yet updated its checkpoint data system or created a data oversight protocol. Without established internal controls, the integrity of Border Patrol's performance and accountability system with regard to checkpoint operations remains uncertain.
    Recommendation: To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should implement the quality of life measures that have already been identified by the Border Patrol to evaluate the impact that checkpoints have on local communities. Implementing these measures would include identifying appropriate data sources available at the local, state, or federal level, and developing guidance for how data should be collected and used in support of these measures.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Border and Transportation Security: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
    Status: Open

    Comments: In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that the Border Patrol had identified some measures to evaluate the impact that checkpoints have on local communities in terms of quality of life, but Border Patrol had not implemented the measures. As a result, the Border Patrol lacked information on how checkpoint operations could affect nearby communities. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported that it was reevaluating its checkpoint performance measures, including quality of life measures. In June 2012, Border Patrol reported that the University of Arizona and the University of Texas, El Paso had completed a study for CBP on checkpoints. This study made several recommendations to Border Patrol on evaluating the impact of checkpoints on local communities using quantitative measures and with maintaining regular contact with the public to elicit opinions on experiences with the checkpoint, both positive and negative. At the time, the Border Patrol noted it intended to develop quantitative measures on community impact, such as on public safety and quality of life, using information collected in the new checkpoint information system it was planning. Border Patrol also noted that it was considering the budgetary feasibility of (1) conducting a survey of checkpoint travelers to gather detailed information about the community and impact metrics that are of highest importance to the public and (2) implementing an expedited lane for regular and pre-approved travelers. In July 2014, the Border Patrol revised the expected completion date for this recommendation to March 2015, noting that it planned to request ideas from the field commanders on what the agency could measure that would accurately depict the impact of checkpoints on the community. In June 2015, Border Patrol revised the expected completion date to September 2015. In September 2016, officials from Border Patrol's Checkpoint Program Management Office said quality of life measures had not been implemented and they were not aware of any plans to develop and implement such measures.
    Recommendation: To improve the reliability and accountability of checkpoint performance results to the Congress and the public, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should use the information generated from the quality of life measures in conjunction with other relevant factors to inform resource allocations and address identified impacts.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Border and Transportation Security: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
    Status: Open

    Comments: In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that while the Border Patrol's national strategy cites the importance of assessing the community impact of Border Patrol operations, the implementation of such measures was lacking in terms of checkpoint operations. We recommended that Border Patrol implement such measures in areas of community concern to provide greater attention and priority in Border Patrol operational and staffing decisions to address any existing issues. In October 2009, the Border Patrol reported that once it had completed an upgrade of its existing checkpoint data systems and had reevaluated its checkpoint performance measures, the agency would begin using information garnered by these performance measures to inform future resource allocation decisions. This was originally expected to be completed by September 30, 2010, but due to budgetary and other issues, the checkpoint system upgrades were not yet completed as of June 2013. Border Patrol reported to us in June 2013 that the redesigned and upgraded checkpoint information system was expected to be implemented in September 2014. In July 2014, however, Border Patrol revised its expected completion date to March 2016. In June 2015, Border Patrol reported that it was on target to meet this March 2016 completion date. However, in September 2016, officials from Border Patrol's Checkpoint Program Management Office stated that they were not aware of any planned or completed actions to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To ensure that the checkpoint design process results in checkpoints that are sized and resourced to meet operational and community needs, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection should, in connection with planning for new or upgraded checkpoints, conduct a workforce planning needs assessment for checkpoint staffing allocations to determine the resources needed to address anticipated levels of illegal activity around the checkpoint.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Border and Transportation Security: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
    Status: Open

    Comments: In our review of Border Patrol traffic checkpoints, we found that Border Patrol's checkpoint strategy to push illegal aliens and smugglers to areas around checkpoints-which could include nearby communities-underscores the need for the Border Patrol to ensure that it deploys sufficient resources and staff to these areas. We recommended that Border Patrol conduct a needs assessment when planning for a new or upgraded checkpoint in order to better ensure that officials consider the potential impact of the checkpoint on the community and plan for a sufficient number of agents and resources. In October 2009, Border Patrol reported that the agency was evaluating its checkpoint policy regarding the establishment of a new checkpoint or the upgrade of an old checkpoint, and checkpoint policy changes would be finalized by September 30, 2010. Border Patrol also reported that checkpoint system upgrades that capture data on checkpoint performance would help management determine future resource needs at checkpoints. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that due to budget and other issues, the checkpoint system upgrade had not been completed, and the rewritten checkpoint data protocol had not been approved. In June 2013, Border Patrol reported that as part of the checkpoint study conducted by the DHS Centers of Excellence, the Centers created checkpoint simulation tools that would help inform resource allocations when determining the number of inspection lanes on current or new checkpoints. The Border Patrol agreed with the utility of such a model, but noted that the Border Patrol would need to purchase modeling software--a cost-prohibitive measure in the current budget environment. In the interim, Border Patrol is developing a formal workforce staffing model to identify staffing strategies for all Border Patrol duties. Border Patrol expected to implement this model for checkpoint staffing assignments in fiscal year 2014. However, in July 2014, Border Patrol reported that the Border Patrol Personnel Requirements Determination project was still being developed and would not be complete until 2015. That process will inform staffing at checkpoints. As a result, Border Patrol revised its expected implementation date to September 2015. In June 2015, Border Patrol reported that it was on target to implement this recommendation by September 2015. In September 2016, Border Patrol officials reported that the agency's Personnel Requirements Determination process would not provide information on staffing needs until fiscal year 2017 or 2018, and also noted that this effort is not specifically examining staffing needs at checkpoints. Officials said there could be additional ways to address the recommendation, but that there were no ongoing efforts to do so apart from any information that may be available from the Personnel Requirements Determination process.