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: "Program implementation"

    20 publications with a total of 55 open recommendations including 12 priority recommendations
    Director: Paula M. Rascona
    Phone: (202) 512-9816

    2 open recommendations
    including 2 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: The Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Treasury should establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs, to help inform full implementation of the act's requirements across government.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Treasury stated it will establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs. Treasury also stated these mechanisms will inform Treasury's efforts on whether and how to tailor its future outreach efforts to help agencies meet their DATA Act requirements. We will continue to assess Treasury's efforts to address this recommendation as IGs plan to issue their required reports in November 2017.
    Recommendation: The Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Treasury should establish mechanisms to assess the results of independent audits and reviews of agencies' compliance with the DATA Act requirements, including those of agency OIGs, to help inform full implementation of the act's requirements across government.

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

    Comments: OMB stated that it reviewed available IG readiness review reports in its assessment of agency implementation efforts, and it also relied on other, more up-to-date sources of information from agencies including data obtained from one-on-one meetings and agency self-assessments. We will continue to assess OMB's efforts to address this recommendation as IGs plan to issue their required reports in November 2017.
    Director: Brenda S. Farrell
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that program staff are being used in an effective and efficient manner, and to facilitate the consideration and identification of total force solutions for staffing sexual assault prevention and response and Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) programs throughout the Department of the Army, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the Chiefs of the National Guard Bureau and the Army Reserve, to conduct an evaluation of staffing approaches used to administer the sexual assault prevention and response program, and consider opportunities to leverage resources across all Army components. This evaluation should include an assessment of the number and allocation of full-time and collateral-duty personnel, the fill rates for program positions, and the types of positions used.

    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 that Army National Guard and Army Reserve program staff have the necessary information to develop their budgets and to help ensure the efficient and effective use of program funds, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Army National Guard SHARP Program Office to communicate and disseminate its guidance on budget development and execution for the SHARP program to all full-time SHARP program personnel.

    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 that Army National Guard and Army Reserve program staff have the necessary information to develop their budgets and to help ensure the efficient and effective use of program funds, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Army Reserve SHARP Program Office to develop clear guidance on budget development and execution for the SHARP program and disseminate this guidance to its full-time SHARP program personnel.

    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 that Army National Guard and Army Reserve program staff have the necessary information to develop their budgets and to help ensure the efficient and effective use of program funds, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Director of the Army SHARP Program Office to expand the scope of the midyear review to include monitoring and providing oversight of SHARP program expenditures at the Army National Guard state and Army Reserve command level.

    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 that sexual assault crimes involving Army National Guard members are investigated in a timely manner, with a full investigation of the offense regardless of the reserve component or duty status of the victim, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, in collaboration with the secretaries of the military departments as appropriate, to reassess the Office of Complex Administrative Investigation's (OCI) timeliness and resources to determine how to improve the timeliness of processing sexual assault investigations involving members of the Army National Guard, and identify the resources needed to improve the timeliness of these investigations.

    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 that victims of sexual assault in the Army Reserve have timely access to medical and mental health-care services without having to pay for their care upfront, if they are eligible for care paid for or provided by DOD, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Chief of the Army Reserve to develop and implement an expedited line-of-duty determination process for Army Reserve sexual assault victims, along with a method for tracking the length of time to make the determinations. When developing this process, the Chief should ensure that it allows soldiers who wish to file a confidential or restricted report to go through the determination process without disclosing their circumstances to the chain of command.

    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: Brenda S. Farrell
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide greater assurance that the Interagency Rotation Program for national security personnel will be implemented as provided in section 1107 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in collaboration with the Committee on National Security Personnel, should establish a clear leadership and oversight structure to guide future implementation efforts.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    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 greater assurance that the Interagency Rotation Program for national security personnel will be implemented as provided in section 1107 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in collaboration with the Committee on National Security Personnel, should work with the departments and agencies to identify and take action on necessary next steps to proceed with the program's implementation, including developing and issuing required guidance for implementation within identified timeframes.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

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

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Administrator of the General Services Administration should develop a legislative proposal to enhance accountability for government-wide implementation of the Act. GSA should consider including the following in its proposal: (1) establishing authorities for a single agency to monitor and enforce implementation of the Act; (2) establishing agency responsibilities for reporting progress on implementation of the Act; (3) establishing agency responsibilities for assessing employee skill levels related to the Act and identifying training that allows employees to develop and retain skills required by the Act; and (4) establishing an interagency group to further government-wide collaboration on implementation of the Act.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In response to our recommendation, GSA agreed to work with other agencies to evaluate whether additional legislative changes would improve the speed and efficiency of implementation. In October 2017, GSA informed us they intend to submit a legislative proposal to Congress as part of the FY 2019 budget process. We will continue to monitor GSA actions.
    Director: Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: If, in the next authorization for FAA, Congress chooses to mandate that FAA take actions to streamline and reform the agency, Congress may wish to consider requiring FAA to (1) track measures of and (2) report to Congress on the actual results of such efforts.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: FAA's authorization expired at the end of Fiscal Year 2015. As of May 2017, Congress has passed several FAA authorization extensions that did not include any actions related to this matter. We will continue to monitor legislation, and when we determine what steps the Congress has taken regarding this matter, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To better enable FAA to track, aggregate, and report on the results of its streamlining and reform initiatives, the Secretary of Transportation should direct FAA to develop a mechanism to capture the results of its efficiency initiatives in its planned database for process improvements. Measures of results might include, for example, cost savings, timeliness, or customer service metrics, which may be common to several types of process improvement efforts and therefore facilitate aggregation across improvements.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, FAA expanded its existing data repository to include results of the efficiency initiatives, but no realized results or benefits have yet been entered into the data repository. GAO will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
    Director: John Pendleton
    Phone: (404) 679-1816

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to ensure that BMD capabilities can be used as intended when they are delivered, the Secretary of Defense should, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, direct U.S. Strategic Command to identify and develop a plan to resolve implementation issues prior to deploying and operating future BMD capabilities in Europe. U.S. Strategic Command should work in consultation with U.S. European Command and the services to resolve implementation issues such as infrastructure, resolving policies and procedures to address potential overlapping operational priorities if radars are integrated across geographic combatant commands, completing host-nation implementing arrangements, and any other key implementation issues.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation stating that U.S. Strategic Command does not have the authority or mission to resolve implementation issues, but the services and MDA will work to identify and resolve implementation issues for future BMD capabilities in Europe. DOD stated in July 2015 that, due to the ongoing BMDS development, MDA continues to engage on materiel, logistics, and operational support even beyond the fielding and capability delivery phase. Also, DOD stated that U.S. Strategic Command continues to advise cross-Geographic Combatant Command capability optimization/sharing through several venues. Finally, DOD indicated that U.S. European Command may have developed operational criteria for EPAA Phase 2. In December 2015, DOD reached Technical Capability Declaration (TCD) based, in part, on meeting specified operational criteria. We will continue to follow up with DOD to identify and assess what additional steps, if any, have been taken to support a US European Command/US Strategic Command warfighter acceptance of EPAA Phase 2 which may complete implementation of this recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a business-case analysis for the forward-based radar to support a decision on the long-term support strategy, and updating the joint MDA and Army estimate for long-term operating and support costs after a decision on the support strategy is made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. MDA contracted with the Army and Missile Command Logistic Center to conduct a business case analysis (BCA) to identify the most cost effective long term support strategy. As of July 2015, DOD stated that the BCA has been completed and is being reviewed by MDA with an estimated completion in the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2015. As of March 2016, DOD stated that, as the BCA was going through review, it was determined that additional efforts were required. The [revised] BCA completion date is now the first quarter fiscal year 2017. After the projected completion date, we will follow up with DOD and assess whether the Army and DOD have updated the joint cost estimate for long-term operating and support costs based on the results of the BCA and whether their actions meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a business-case analysis for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to support a decision on the long-term support strategy, and updating the joint MDA and Army long-term operating and support cost estimate after this and other key program decisions, such as where the THAAD batteries are likely to be forward-stationed, are made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2015, DOD stated that the Army and MDA will initiate an independent business case analysis (BCA) to explore the transfer of THAAD from MDA to the Army. DOD also stated that the BCA is expected to be completed in the 2nd quarter of fiscal year 2016. As of March 2016, DOD stated that the Army and MDA initiated an independent BCA joint study in July 2015 to be completed in March 2016 by RAND Corporation. The study was expanded to include transfer of the AN/TPY-2 radar. The study is now tentatively scheduled to end with a final review between the MDA and the Army Acquisition Executive in late first quarter fiscal year 2017. After the projected completion date, we will follow up with DOD and assess whether the Army and MDA have updated the joint cost estimate for long-term operating and support costs based on the results of the BCA and whether their actions meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a joint MDA and Navy estimate of the long-term operating and support costs for the Aegis Ashore two sites, and updating the estimates after key program decisions are made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2015, DOD stated that MDA and the Navy have developed a joint operating and support cost estimate for the Aegis Ashore operational sites which is awaiting Navy approval. In January 2016, the Navy and MDA approved a joint cost estimate for the long-term operating and support costs for the first Aegis Ashore site in Romania. The completion of this estimate partially meets the intent of this recommendation. We will keep this recommendation open until we obtain documentation that DOD has taken action to complete a joint cost estimate of the long-term operating and support costs of the second Aegis Ashore site in Poland. A completed cost estimate for both sites would meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Director: Farrell, Brenda S
    Phone: (202)512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with more-complete information on the planned implementation, management, and oversight of DOD's newly created DHA, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to develop and present to Congress a comprehensive timeline that includes interim milestones for all reform goals that could be used to show implementation progress.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2015, DOD has not submitted a comprehensive timeline that includes interim milestones for all reform goals. Further, as we reported in September 2015, DOD's plan for assessing the personnel requirements of the DHA lacks a detailed timeline with milestones and interim steps. Until DOD develops a comprehensive timeline for its reform, this recommendation should remain open. June 2017 Update: The DHA strategic plan/CONOPS showing a comprehensive timeline for all of its reform goals has yet to be released.
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with more-complete information on the planned implementation, management, and oversight of DOD's newly created DHA, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to monitor implementation costs to assess whether the shared-services projects are on track to achieve projected net cost savings or if corrective actions are needed.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As we reported in September 2015, DOD has taken some action on this recommendation for 8 of its 10 shared services. The DHA's internal leadership briefings now identify the major types of implementation costs where relevant, or otherwise address their potential impact. For example, information technology costs are identified as one primary type of costs for the Health Information Technology and Medial Logistics shared services, while contract costs are identified for the Budget and Resource Management, Medical Logistics, and Health Information Technology shared services. By identifying the major types of implementation costs, decision makers are better able to gauge the sensitivity of areas of uncertainty as they make decisions concerning future investments in shared services. MAY 2016 UPDATE: DHA reported and we verified financial savings of $722 million for FY14 and FY15 due to shared services implementation. June 2017 Update: DHA reported and we verified financial savings of $686.6 million for FY 16 due to shared services implementation.
    Director: Lepore, Brian J
    Phone: (202)512-4523

    14 open recommendations
    including 5 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to increase the fidelity of the initial cost estimates that DOD submits with its recommendations to the BRAC Commission for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to work with the military services, defense agencies, and other appropriate stakeholders to improve the process for fully identifying recommendation-specific military construction requirements and ensuring that those requirements are entered into the COBRA model and not understated in implementation costs estimates prior to submitting recommendations to the BRAC Commission.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation and as of June 2017, DOD stated that no action is expected.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to increase the fidelity of the initial cost estimates that DOD submits with its recommendations to the BRAC Commission for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to establish a process for ensuring that information technology requirements associated with candidate recommendations that are heavily reliant on such technology have been identified to the extent required to accomplish the associated mission, before recommendations and cost estimates are submitted to the BRAC Commission.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD partially concurred. As of June 2017, DOD stated that this action on this recommendation is awaiting authorization of a future BRAC round, and Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to increase the fidelity of the initial cost estimates that DOD submits with its recommendations to the BRAC Commission for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to ensure that, during the development and comparison of BRAC scenarios, all anticipated BRAC implementation costs--such as relocating personnel and equipment--are considered and included in the COBRA model when comparing alternatives and generating cost estimates.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD did not concur and as of June 2017 stated that no action is expected.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to increase confidence in the fidelity of the cost estimates that DOD submits to the BRAC Commission for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to take steps to ensure that COBRA's standard factor for information technology is updated and based on technological developments since the most recent COBRA update.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2017, DOD stated that this action on this recommendation is awaiting authorization of a future BRAC round, and Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to increase confidence in the fidelity of the cost estimates that DOD submits to the BRAC Commission for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to update COBRA guidance to require users to provide a narrative explaining the process, sources, and methods used to develop the data entered into COBRA to develop military personnel positionelimination savings.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2017, DOD stated that this action on this recommendation is awaiting authorization of a future BRAC round, and Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to improve planning for measuring the results of implementing the BRAC recommendations for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to identify appropriate measures of effectiveness and develop a plan to demonstrate the extent to which the department achieved the results intended from the implementation of the BRAC round.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation and as of June 2017, DOD stated that no action is expected.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to improve planning for measuring the results of implementing the BRAC recommendations for a future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to establish a target for eliminating excess capacity in its initiating guidance to high-level department-wide leadership, consistent with the BRAC selection criteria chosen for a future BRAC round.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation and as of June 2017, DOD stated that no action is expected.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to provide more-complete information and increased visibility into the expected costs and savings for individual BRAC closures or realignments, when planning any potential future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to limit the practice of bundling many potentially stand-alone realignments or closures into single recommendations.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation and as of June 2017, DOD stated that no action is expected.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to provide more-complete information and increased visibility into the expected costs and savings for individual BRAC closures or realignments, when planning any potential future BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) to if DOD determines that bundling multiple realignments or closures into one recommendation is appropriate, itemize the costs and savings associated with each major discrete action in its report to the BRAC Commission.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred. As of June 2017, DOD stated that this action on this recommendation is awaiting authorization of a future BRAC round, and Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: Contingent on the authorization of a future BRAC round, and to ensure that the BRAC Commission receives timely access to information supporting BRAC recommendations for its review, the Secretary of Defense should develop a process to ensure that any data-security issues are resolved in time to provide all information to the BRAC Commission in a timely manner by conducting a security review of all BRAC data during DOD's recommendation development process, to include a review of the aggregation of unclassified data for potential security concerns and possible classification if necessary.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2017, DOD stated that this action on this recommendation is awaiting authorization of a future BRAC round, and Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: If cost savings are to be a goal of any future BRAC round, Congress may wish to consider amending the BRAC statute by elevating the priority DOD and the BRAC Commission give to potential costs and savings as a selection criterion for making base closure and realignment recommendations.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: All the Matters for Congressional Consideration are contingent on the implementation of another round of BRAC. As of July 2017, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: If Congress authorizes additional BRAC rounds, it may wish to consider amending BRAC legislation by requiring the Secretary of Defense to formally establish specific goals that the department expects to achieve from a future BRAC process.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: All the Matters for Congressional Consideration are contingent on the implementation of another round of BRAC. As of June 2017, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: If Congress authorizes additional BRAC rounds, it may wish to consider amending BRAC legislation by requiring the Secretary of Defense to propose selection criteria as necessary to help achieve those goals, if necessary and appropriate.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: All the Matters for Congressional Consideration are contingent on the implementation of another round of BRAC. As of June 2017, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Recommendation: If Congress decides to authorize a future base closure round, it may want to consider whether to limit or prohibit the BRAC Commission from adding a contingent element to any recommendation and, if permitted, under what conditions.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: All the Matters for Congressional Consideration are contingent on the implementation of another round of BRAC. As of June 2017, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.
    Director: Powner, David A
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should designate a senior agency official who has departmentwide responsibility, accountability, and authority for geospatial information issues. The Secretary of Transportation direct the designated senior official for geospatial information to prepare, maintain, publish, and implement a strategy for advancing geographic information and related geospatial data activities appropriate to its mission.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, a Transportation official told GAO that the department had completed a draft of the geospatial strategic plan that month. According to a Transportation official, as of March 1, 2017, the draft was under review. On September 8, 2017, a Transportation official stated that the department plans to issue the plan by November 1, 2017.
    Recommendation: To improve OMB oversight of geospatial information and assets, and minimize duplication of federal geospatial investments, the Director of OMB should develop a mechanism, or modify existing mechanisms, to identify and report annually on all geospatial related investments, including dollars invested and the nature of the investment.

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

    Comments: OMB has made progress in developing a way to identify and report annually on all geospatial-related investments, but has not completed its efforts. In March 2014, the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) issued its National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA) Management Plan. The plan was developed in conjunction with OMB officials. One of the objectives of the plan is to develop and apply a standard definition of a geospatial investment in order to facilitate reporting on budgeted geospatial data investments, due to the fact that different definitions are being used by OMB, the FGDC community, and individual agencies. There are two supporting actions for this objective. The first action was completed with the finalization and issuance of the FGDC's Geospatial Investment Definitions for Tracking and Reporting Geospatial Investment Costs document in April 2016. The document contains a set of geospatial definitions with specific examples for each. The second action is for the geospatial community to apply the definitions in submissions to OMB during the annual federal government budget planning and reporting process. According to FGDC officials, they expect this to be challenging for a number of reasons, including the need for agencies to determine how they can align their investment tracking systems to accommodate the new definitions and the extent to which agencies will be able to use a common reporting capability. As a result, a two-pronged approach is being used. First, FGDC developed a reporting method using the theme implementation plans to support federal geospatial data investment tracking. For example, in February 2017, an official provided an implementation plan from January 2017 which included an estimate of the amount of time federal employees spent on NGDA work, and reported this as a percentage of full-time equivalents. Second, OMB worked with FGDC to revise geospatial investment reporting guidance found in OMB Circular No. A-11. Starting with fiscal year 2018 allocations (Circular No. A-11 revised July 2016), agencies are required to report on annual aggregated geospatial data investments of $100,000 or greater using the Marketplace feature of the Geospatial Platform. According to an agency official, this approach leverages existing, federal government-wide reporting methods already in place and minimizes the potential for agencies to implement separate, potentially duplicative reporting mechanisms that are not integrated with existing OMB reporting procedures. According to OMB officials as of September 7, 2017, OMB anticipates that since fiscal year 2018 will be the first year of implementation, some agencies may have challenges identifying and reporting their data. As a result, OMB states that the content and completeness of the reported information will need to be evaluated prior to determining its fitness and application for overseeing geospatial investments.
    Director: Trimble, David C
    Phone: 202-512-9338

    5 open recommendations
    including 4 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure the credibility of IRIS assessments by enhancing their timeliness and certainty, the EPA Administrator should require the Office of Research and Development to assess the feasibility and appropriateness of the established time frames for each step in the IRIS assessment process and determine whether different time frames should be established, based on complexity or other criteria, for different types of IRIS assessments.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of Fall 2017, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program officials told GAO that IRIS assessments that support policy and regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, and state agencies, are being consolidated into a new portfolio to optimize the application of best available science and technology. According to IRIS Program officials, the IRIS workflow will be reoriented and timelines and resources will be tailored to fit the intended purpose of the IRIS assessment. This approach was presented to EPA's Science and Technology Policy Council in July 2017 and was presented to the Science Advisory Board's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee in September 2017 for their consideration and evaluation. In addition, according to EPA IRIS officials, there were improvements in project management for IRIS assessments, such as working with IRIS assessment chemical managers individuals who manage IRIS assessments to develop timelines and a system that tracks the portfolio of IRIS products in development, to allow the IRIS Program to more effectively use resources across assessment projects and ensure timely delivery of products. GAO continues to believe that these efforts show important progress, but that EPA needs to continue to determine whether different time frames should be established for different types of assessments, and the feasibility and appropriateness of the established time frames.
    Recommendation: To better ensure the credibility of IRIS assessments by enhancing their timeliness and certainty, the EPA Administrator should require the Office of Research and Development, should different time frames be necessary, to establish a written policy that clearly describes the applicability of the time frames for each type of IRIS assessment and ensures that the time frames are realistic and provide greater predictability to stakeholders.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of Fall 2017, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program officials told GAO that they met with the Science Advisory Board's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee in September 2017 to discuss responses to this recommendation. After the meeting, EPA's IRIS Program officials expect to issue a public statement that will emphasize the new portfolio approach to chemical evaluation and reflect that IRIS milestones will be varying based on the scale and type of assessment needed. EPA's IRIS Program officials told GAO that these activities will also provide the Program an opportunity to evaluate whether additional training on project management has provided the consistency in planning and delivery that was expected. GAO continues to believe that EPA has made progress and we will continue to review information provided by EPA as the agency works to ensure that the time frames are realistic and provide greater predictability to stakeholders.
    Recommendation: To ensure that current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through IRIS is available to IRIS users--including stakeholders such as EPA program and regional offices, other federal agencies, and the public--the EPA Administrator should direct the Office of Research and Development to annually publish the IRIS agenda in the Federal Register each fiscal year.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of Fall 2017, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program officials told GAO that starting in 2017, on an annual basis, the IRIS Program is reviewing the information in the December 2015 Multi-Year Agenda to ensure that it remains responsive to GAO's recommendation. According to IRIS Program officials, this process was informal in 2017 but will be formalized starting in 2018 and updates to the Multi-Year Agenda will be published on the IRIS website and disseminated appropriately. GAO continues to believe that current and accurate information on the chemicals EPA plans to assess through IRIS should be made available to IRIS users. As the program continues its work, GAO will monitor EPA's progress to determine if information is provided annually in the Federal Register.
    Recommendation: To ensure that current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through IRIS is available to IRIS users--including stakeholders such as EPA program and regional offices, other federal agencies, and the public--the EPA Administrator should direct the Office of Research and Development to indicate in published IRIS agendas which chemicals EPA is actively assessing and when EPA plans to start assessments of the other listed chemicals.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of Fall 2017, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program officials told GAO that starting in 2017, on an annual basis, the IRIS Program is reviewing the information in the December 2015 Multi-Year Agenda to ensure that it remains responsive to GAO's recommendation. According to IRIS Program officials, this process was informal in 2017, but will be formalized starting in 2018, and updates to the Multi-Year Agenda will be published on the IRIS website and disseminated appropriately. EPA IRIS Program officials stated that they received feedback from the Science Advisory Board's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee in September 2017. IRIS officials intend to publish an updated Agenda that will list which chemicals EPA is actively assessing and when EPA plans to start assessments of the other listed chemicals. GAO continues to believe that annually providing current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through the IRIS program is critical for IRIS users as well as specifically identifying which chemicals EPA is actively assessing and when EPA plans to start assessments of the other listed chemicals.
    Recommendation: To ensure that current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through IRIS is available to IRIS users--including stakeholders such as EPA program and regional offices, other federal agencies, and the public--the EPA Administrator should direct the Office of Research and Development to update the IRIS Substance Assessment Tracking System (IRISTrack) to display all current information on the status of assessments of chemicals on the IRIS agenda, including projected and actual start dates, and projected and actual dates for completion of steps in the IRIS process, and keep this information current.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of August 2017, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program officials stated that starting in 2017, on an annual basis, the IRIS Program is reviewing the information in the December 2015 Multi-Year Agenda to ensure that it remains responsive to GAO's recommendation. According to EPA IRIS Program officials, this process was informal in 2017 but will be formalized starting in 2018, and updates to the Multi-Year Agenda will be published on the IRIS website and disseminated appropriately. EPA IRIS Program officials stated that they received feedback from the Science Advisory Board's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee in September 2017. Officials indicated that after the feedback is received, the IRIS website will be updated with information consistent with GAO's recommendation, such as projected and actual start dates. GAO will monitor EPA's progress, and consider whether updates are annually providing current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through the IRIS program, as necessary for IRIS users.
    Director: Farrell, Brenda S
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve leadership's commitment to preventing and responding to incidents of sexual harassment, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop a strategy for holding individuals in positions of leadership accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing the department's sexual harassment policies and programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has updated its guidance on sexual harassment, but it has not yet implemented the recommendation. DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would collaborate with the military services to systematically review existing accountability methods, with the goal of developing an overarching strategy. According to DOD, a 2013 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense on sexual assault prevention and response outlined requirements addressing leadership accountability for preventing sexual harassment. The Secretary of Defense also issued a memorandum addressing prevention and response of sexual harassment in 2014, and DOD updated its guidance on sexual harassment in 2015. In 2016, DOD stated that further revisions to guidance were forthcoming to provide a framework for oversight of sexual harassment. This framework, among other things, would address standards for holding leaders accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing sexual harassment policies. As of January 2017, those revisions had not been issued. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
    Recommendation: To improve implementation of the department's sexual harassment policies and programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the service secretaries to verify or track military commanders' compliance with existing requirements that commanders periodically determine their organizational health and functioning effectiveness by periodically assessing their equal opportunity climate through "command climate" assessments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has updated its guidance on sexual harassment, including a requirement for sharing the results of command climate assessments with the next higher level of command, but has not yet implemented an oversight mechanism to verify and track commanders' compliance with requirements to conduct such assessments. DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would implement the recommendation through revisions to its guidance. According to DOD, a 2013 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense on sexual assault prevention and response outlined requirements addressing leadership accountability for preventing sexual harassment. The memorandum included a requirement that the results of command climate surveys be provided to the next level up in the chain of command, and it directed service chiefs, through their respective military department secretaries, to develop methods to assess the performance of commanders in establishing command climates of dignity and respect. The Secretary of Defense also issued a memorandum addressing prevention and response of sexual harassment in 2014, and DOD updated its guidance on sexual harassment in 2015. In 2016, DOD stated that further revisions to guidance were forthcoming to provide a framework for oversight of sexual harassment. This framework, among other things, would address standards for holding leaders accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing sexual harassment policies. As of January 2017, those revisions had not yet been issued. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
    Director: Wise, David J
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To establish accountability for meeting the programs' goal of increasing the participation of traditionally underrepresented groups in the highway construction workforce, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FHWA Administrator to create and implement an oversight mechanism that (1) holds states accountable for meeting federal training criteria and (2) clearly stipulates how FHWA will assess state program effectiveness, including what type of program achievement data states are to submit and how such data will be used. This oversight mechanism should include assessing the effectiveness of its division offices in overseeing state activities.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: FHWA has taken steps to implement an oversight mechanism that may address this recommendation. FHWA officials anticipate completing their work in response to this recommendation in mid- to late 2017.
    Director: Melvin, Valerie C
    Phone: (202)512-6304

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the development and implementation of IDR and One PI are successful in helping the agency meet the goals and objectives of its program integrity initiatives, the Administrator of CMS should implement and manage plans for incorporating data in IDR to meet schedule milestones.

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

    Comments: While CMS has incorporated shared systems Medicare Part A (insurance for hospital and other inpatient services), Part B (insurance for hospital outpatient, physician, and other services), and three states' Medicaid data into IDR, it has not yet implemented and managed plans for incorporating all states' Medicaid data, as GAO recommended in June 2011. As a result, the repository does not yet include all the data that were planned to be incorporated by the end of 2012, and efforts to add the remaining states' Medicaid data to IDR continue to be behind schedule. As of March 2017, agency officials are working to develop plans to integrate all states' data into IDR as part of ongoing program integrity initiatives.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the development and implementation of IDR and One PI are successful in helping the agency meet the goals and objectives of its program integrity initiatives, the Administrator of CMS should define any measurable financial benefits expected from the implementation of IDR and One PI.

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

    Comments: As of March 2017, CMS officials reported that they have identified areas of potential cost savings to be achieved by requiring program integrity contractors to use IDR and One PI, as GAO recommended in June 2011. CMS is awarding new contracts to include this requirement, which is expected to result in the agency no longer funding contractors' efforts to establish and maintain their own data warehouses and analytical tools. However, not all of the contracts have been awarded and, therefore, the requirement has not been fully implemented. Until all the new contracts have been awarded that require the contractors to use IDR and One PI for program integrity purposes, CMS will not have reasonable assurance that using the systems will help improve CMS's ability to detect fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and to achieve the $21 billion in financial benefits program officials projected.
    Director: Grover, Jennifer A
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    3 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To identify effective and cost-efficient methods for meeting TWIC program objectives, and assist in determining whether the benefits of continuing to implement and operate the TWIC program in its present form and planned use with readers surpass the costs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should perform an internal control assessment of the TWIC program by (1) analyzing existing controls, (2) identifying related weaknesses and risks, and (3) determining cost-effective actions needed to correct or compensate for those weaknesses so that reasonable assurance of meeting TWIC program objectives can be achieved. This assessment should consider weaknesses we identified in this report among other things, and include: (1) strengthening the TWIC program's controls for preventing and detecting identity fraud, such as requiring certain biographic information from applicants and confirming the information to the extent needed to positively identify the individual, or implementing alternative mechanisms to positively identify individuals; (2) defining the term extensive criminal history for use in the adjudication process and ensuring that adjudicators follow a clearly defined and consistently applied process, with clear criteria, in considering the approval or denial of a TWIC for individuals with extensive criminal convictions not defined as permanent or interim disqualifying offenses; and (3) identifying mechanisms for detecting whether TWIC holders continue to meet TWIC disqualifying criminal offense and immigration-related eligibility requirements after TWIC issuance to prevent unqualified individuals from retaining and using authentic TWICs.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: We reported that internal control weaknesses governing the enrollment, background checking, and use of TWIC potentially limit the program's ability to provide reasonable assurance that access to secure areas of MTSA-regulated facilities is restricted to qualified individuals. We further reported that TSA did not assess the internal controls designed and in place to determine whether they provided reasonable assurance that the program could meet defined mission needs for limiting access to only qualified individuals, and that internal control weaknesses in TWIC enrollment, background checking, and use could have contributed to the breach of selected MTSA-regulated facilities during covert tests conducted by our investigators. We recommended that DHS perform an internal control assessment of the TWIC program by (1) analyzing existing controls, (2) identifying related weaknesses and risks, and (3) determining cost-effective actions needed to correct or compensate for those weaknesses so that reasonable assurance of meeting TWIC program objectives can be achieved. In April 2013, DHS reported that it had taken a number of steps to address our recommendations. For example, it had refreshed and reissued fraudulent document detection training to enrollment personnel; created a mechanism for enrollment personnel to send detailed information of suspected fraud to adjudication personnel; benchmarked TWIC enrollment processes with passport enrollment processes; and defined guidance for adjudicators on the application of discretionary authority. As we reported in May 2013, to determine if the internal control weaknesses identified in our May 2011 report still exist, we conducted limited covert testing in late 2012. Our investigators again acquired an authentic TWIC through fraudulent means and were able to use this card and counterfeit TWIC cards to access areas of ports or port facilities requiring a TWIC for entry at four ports. In February 2014, TSA reported that it, in coordination with Coast Guard and DHS subject matter experts, had established an Executive Steering Committee to address recommendations from the May 2011 report on the TWIC program's internal controls (GAO-11-657). GAO recommended that the internal control assessment be the basis of the effectiveness assessment. In response, the Executive Steering Committee developed an internal control action plan that lists TWIC program control issues GAO identified, along with actions that TSA and the Coast Guard would or would not take to address them. However, based on our review of the internal control action plan and associated documents, and further discussing with TSA officials the methodology used to arrive at the internal control action plan, we determined that the internal control assessment we recommended has not been implemented. Specifically, there is no evidence of a detailed mapping of each policy and process in the program, their interrelationships, and clear linkage to show how actions in one step may enhance or reduce the effectiveness of the TWIC program achieving its stated mission needs. In January 2017 TSA awarded a contract for an internal control assessment of the TWIC program, including the TWIC program?s internal controls of the enrollment, background checking, and credential issuance processes. The assessment, however, is to exclude an assessment of Coast Guard?s role in TWIC enforcement. The project held a kickoff meeting in March of 2017 and is expected to produce final recommendations by August 2017. We believe that this is a positive step towards addressing our recommendation. However, the assessment does not include an evaluation of the use of TWIC, including Coast Guard's role in TWIC enforcement. We continue to believe that the internal control assessment inclusive of TWIC use and the interrelationship between acquiring a TWIC and using it in the maritime environment is needed. For the reasons noted above, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To identify effective and cost-efficient methods for meeting TWIC program objectives, and assist in determining whether the benefits of continuing to implement and operate the TWIC program in its present form and planned use with readers surpass the costs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should conduct an effectiveness assessment that includes addressing internal control weaknesses and, at a minimum, evaluates whether use of TWIC in its present form and planned use with readers would enhance the posture of security beyond efforts already in place given costs and program risks.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: We reported that DHS had not assessed the program's effectiveness at enhancing security. We recommended that DHS conduct an effectiveness assessment that includes addressing internal control weaknesses and, at a minimum, evaluates whether use of TWIC in its present form and planned use with readers would enhance the posture of security beyond efforts already in place given costs and program risks. In March 2012, DHS reported that it agreed that the results and progress of the internal control actions should be used to further evaluate the effectiveness of the TWIC program. They further noted that as the different long term actions progress, DHS will develop specific plans to address this action. In May 2013 (see GAO-13-198), we reported that DHS had not addressed this recommendation. On January 17, 2014, the explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, directed DHS to complete the assessment that we recommended within 90 days after enactment (April 17, 2014). In February 2014, TSA reported that it, in coordination with Coast Guard and DHS subject matter experts, had established an Executive Steering Committee to address recommendations from the May 2011 report on the TWIC program's internal controls (GAO-11-657). GAO recommended that the internal control assessment be the basis of the effectiveness assessment. In response, the Executive Steering Committee developed an internal control action plan that lists TWIC program control issues GAO identified, along with actions that TSA and the Coast Guard would or would not take to address them. However, based on our review of the internal control action plan and associated documents, and further discussing with TSA officials the methodology used to arrive at the internal control action plan, we determined that the internal control assessment we recommended has not been implemented. Specifically, there is no evidence of a detailed mapping of each policy and process in the program, their interrelationships, and clear linkage to show how actions in one step may enhance or reduce the effectiveness of the TWIC program achieving its stated mission needs. As of March 2017, the internal control assessment we recommended as the basis for initiating the effectiveness assessment had not been completed. However, on January 15, 2016, Coast Guard reported that it had completed its effectiveness assessment. Specifically, DHS completed an effectiveness assessment titled "Security Assessment of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential and Readers." However, the effectiveness assessment did not substantively address the risk concerns identified in our report. For example, the effectiveness assessment lacked the internal control assessment we deem to be the critical first step for fully understanding the TWIC program's controls, costs, and risks. Further, while the effectiveness assessment presented a comparison of alternative credentialing approaches, the assessment did not fully consider, as discussed in our 2011 and 2013 reports, an approach wherein federal security threat assessments could be leveraged in concert with site-specific credentials. The analysis did consider the benefits of updating the TWIC credential to new federal credentialing standards. However, absent from the analysis is a risk-informed basis for disallowing site-specific credentials. While TWIC credentials are developed based on standards aligned with those used by federal entities, each federal entity continues to use site-specific credentials that have varying appearances, rather than a single credential for granting access to all federal entities. This is important, especially because Coast Guard's risk assessment does not include an evaluation of the security benefits and shortfalls that a single credential used nation-wide provide. Absent effectiveness assessment that meets the intent of our recommendation, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To identify effective and cost-efficient methods for meeting TWIC program objectives, and assist in determining whether the benefits of continuing to implement and operate the TWIC program in its present form and planned use with readers surpass the costs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should use the information from the internal control and effectiveness assessments as the basis for evaluating the costs, benefits, security risks, and corrective actions needed to implement the TWIC program in a manner that will meet stated mission needs and mitigate existing security risks as part of conducting the regulatory analysis on implementing a new regulation on the use of TWIC with biometric card readers.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: We reported that prior to issuing the regulation on implementing the use of TWIC as a flashpass, DHS conducted a regulatory analysis, which asserted that TWIC would increase security. The analysis included an evaluation of the costs and benefits related to implementing TWIC. We further reported that as a proposed regulation on the use of TWIC with biometric card readers is under development, DHS is to issue a new regulatory analysis. Conducting a regulatory analysis using the information from the internal control and effectiveness assessments as the basis for evaluating the costs, benefits, security risks, and needed corrective actions could better inform and enhance the reliability of the new regulatory analysis. Moreover, these actions could help DHS identify and assess the full costs and benefits of implementing the TWIC program in a manner that will meet stated mission needs and mitigate existing security risks, and help ensure that the TWIC program is more effective and cost-efficient than existing measures or alternatives at enhancing maritime security. We therefore recommended that DHS use the information from the internal control and effectiveness assessments we recommended as the basis for evaluating the costs, benefits, security risks, and corrective actions needed to implement the TWIC program in a manner that will meet stated mission needs and mitigate existing security risks as part of conducting the regulatory analysis on implementing a new regulation on the use of TWIC with biometric card readers. In March 2012, DHS reported that upon completion of the internal control and effectiveness assessments, DHS will evaluate the results to determine any subsequent actions, and that any applicable data or risks will be communicated to the Coast Guard for consideration during their regulatory analysis. However, DHS has not implemented the internal control assessment we recommended, which is to be the basis for the effectiveness assessment and addressing this recommendation. Further, the January 15, 2016 effectiveness assessment titled "Security Assessment of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential and Readers" did not substantively address the risk concerns identified in our report. Given shortfalls that remain in addressing our internal control assessment and effectiveness assessment recommendations, this recommendation remains open pending DHS taking corrective actions. As of March 2017, no further action has been taken.
    Director: Wise, David J
    Phone: (202)512-5731

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve FTA's ability to determine the extent to which transit grants, current formula incentives, and FTA program activities have had a positive effect on local transit agency performance--and to the extent that FTA finds current data sources to be appropriate and reliable for such purposes-- the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FTA Administrator to further analyze and use data submitted to FTA by local transit agencies. As part of this analysis, FTA may want to identify and evaluate, when applicable, (1) the extent to which transit grant programs are accomplishing their established goals; (2) the areas of performance in which FTA should concentrate its program activities to increase the performance of local transit agencies and the federal transit program in general; and (3) the extent to which formula incentives and other performance accountability mechanisms have influenced the activities and performance of local transit agencies.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of November 2017, FTA had published the final National Safety Plan and a final rule on state of good repair for transit assets. However, the final Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan rule is under additional review per the transition in administration. FTA does not expect publication until Spring 2018. We will continue to monitor DOT actions pertaining to this rulemaking.
    Director: Currie, Christopher
    Phone: (404)679-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to help build and maintain a national biosurveillance capability---an inherently interagency enterprise---the Homeland Security Council should direct the National Security Staff to, in coordination with relevant federal agencies, charge this focal point with the responsibility for developing, in conjunction with relevant federal agencies, a national biosurveillance strategy that: 1) defines the scope and purpose of a national capability; 2) provides goals, objectives and activities, priorities, milestones, and performance measures; 3) assesses the costs and benefits associated with supporting and building the capability and identifies the resource and investment needs, including investment priorities; 4) clarifies roles and responsibilities of leading, partnering, and supporting a national capability; and 5) articulates how the strategy is integrated with and supports other related strategies' goals, objectives, and activities.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Homeland Security Council
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2012, the White House released the National Strategy for Biosurveillance to describe the U.S. government's approach to strengthening biosurveillance. A strategic implementation plan was to be completed within 120 days of the strategy issuance. As we testified in September 2012, the strategy did not fully meet the intent of our recommendation; however, when the implementation plan is complete, it may meet our recommendation. Specifically, the strategy did not provide the mechanism GAO recommended to identify resource and investment needs, including investment priorities. As of September 2015, GAO has not received a copy of the implementation plan for review and has not been able to confirm that it has been finalized and is considered operational by the White House and the key interagency partners.
    Director: Cosgrove, James C
    Phone: (202)512-7029

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

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

    Comments: In March 2010, we recommended that the Administrator of CMS monitor the access to and quality of dialysis care for groups of beneficiaries, particularly those with above average costs, under the new bundled payment system to help ensure that changes in the Medicare payment methods for dialysis care do not adversely affect. We further specified that such monitoring begin as soon as possible once the new bundled payment system is implemented. CMS implemented the expanded bundled payment system for dialysis care in January 2011. As of August 2011, CMS is collecting data on dialysis care utilization that could be used to examine access to and quality of dialysis care by groups of beneficiaries. Although CMS anticipates using these data to identify potential problems in dialysis care, the agency has not begun using these data to examine access to and quality of care by groups of beneficiaries, nor has finalized plans to do so.
    Director: Williamson, Randall B
    Phone: (206)287-4860

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

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates.
    Director: Iritani, Katherine M
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the oversight of states' Medicaid supplemental payments, the Administrator of CMS should develop a strategy to identify all of the supplemental payment programs established in states' Medicaid plans and to review those programs that have not been subject to review under CMS's August 2003 initiative.

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

    Comments: As of July 2016, HHS officials reported that they have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
    Director: Dillingham, Gerald L
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: Because of the importance of the successful planning and implementation of NGATS and the need for effective collaboration between diverse organizations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct JPDO to better ensure the involvement of all key stakeholders in the NGATS planning process, by determining whether key stakeholders and expertise are not represented on JPDO's integrated product teams, divisions, or elsewhere within its organization. For example, JPDO should consider the addition of active, subject matter expert air traffic controllers to its integrated product teams.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: In multiple reports and testimonies on Air Traffic Control Modernization and subsequently the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) GAO has reported that a lack of stakeholder or expert involvement early and throughout a project can lead to cost increases and delays. We also found that the Joint Planning and Development Office within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had not adequately involved air traffic controllers or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) in NextGen planning efforts, and have since reported on challenges facing FAA in involving controllers and other stakeholders as they begin to implement various NextGen improvements. GAO recommended that the Secretary of Transportation consider various actions to better ensure the involvement of all key stakeholders in planning and implementing NextGen and specifically recommended further involvement of active, subject matter expert air traffic controllers. Article 114 of the recently signed contract between the FAA and NATCA addresses this recommendation by directing full participation by NATCA to further the development and implementation of NextGen. The specifics of the agreement between FAA and NATCA regarding how and in what manner controllers will be included has yet to be determined, but the inclusion of Article 114 is a step in the right direction to ensuring active involvement. With greater active participation from air traffic controllers and NATCA, issues that cause cost increase and delays can be identified earlier and their effects mitigated.
    Recommendation: Given the technical complexity of the implementation of NGATS and FAA's past experiences, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA to undertake a formal exploration of FAA's strengths and weaknesses with regard to the technical expertise and contract management expertise that will be required to define, implement, and integrate the numerous complex programs and systems inherent in the transition to NGATS. For example, FAA should work to determine whether it will need to contract with an LSI, federally-funded not-for-profit corporation, or other technical or managerial entity to assist in the implementation of NGATS.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Vice President for Planning, FAA, on June 13, 2007, FAA awarded a contract to the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) to do an independent assessment of FAA's technical and program management (i.e., contract management) skills required for NextGen implementation. The Vice President directly attributed FAA's ability to move the contract award to GAO's recommendation.