Skip to main content

Recommendations Database

Jump To:

As of May 14, 2024, there are 5128 open recommendations that still need to be addressed. 412 of these are priority recommendations, those that we believe warrant priority attention. Learn more about our priority designation on our Recommendations page.

Search for open recommendations by agency, topic, subject, or keyword/phrase below, or view all open recommendations by agency.

Clear All Filters
4901 - 4920 of 5128 Recommendations, including 412 Priority Recommendations

Health Care Transparency: Actions Needed to Improve Cost and Quality Information for Consumers

GAO-15-11
Linda Kohn
Show
1 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Department of Health and Human Services To improve consumers' access to relevant and understandable information on the cost and quality of health care services, the Secretary of HHS should direct the Administrator of CMS to develop specific procedures and performance metrics to ensure that CMS's efforts to promote the development and use of its own and others' transparency tools adequately address the needs of consumers.
Open

As of August 2023, CMS has stated that it uses Objectives & Key Results to measure performance, but it had not provided details such as what measures are used, or how the measures show whether transparency tools address the needs of consumers. Without specific procedures and performance measures, CMS lacks a way to ensure that its transparency tools address the needs of consumers.

Individual Retirement Accounts: IRS Could Bolster Enforcement on Multimillion Dollar Accounts, but More Direction from Congress Is Needed

GAO-15-16
James (Jay) R. McTigue, Jr, Charles Jeszeck
Show
2 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Congress To promote retirement savings without creating permanent tax-favored accounts for a small segment of the population, Congress should consider revisiting the use of IRAs to accumulate large balances and consider ways to improve the equity of the existing tax expenditure on IRAs. Options could include limits on (1) the types of assets permitted in IRAs, (2) the minimum valuation for an asset purchased by an IRA, or (3) the amount of assets that can be accumulated in IRAs and employersponsored plans that get preferential tax treatment.
Open – Partially Addressed

No legislation enacted limiting retirement account owner accumulations, as of March 2024. The Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019, enacted in December 2019 as division O of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, amended a number of requirements related to retirement accounts (Pub. L. No. 116-94, 133 Stat. 2534, 3137). Section 401 limits inherited beneficiaries' ability to continue tax deferral to 10 years beyond the account owner's death. This provision somewhat reduces the long-term financial benefits of accumulating large balances in IRAs. However
Internal Revenue Service To help taxpayers better understand compliance risks associated with certain IRA choices and improve compliance, the Commissioner of Revenue should, building on research data on IRAs holding nonpublic assets, identify options to provide outreach targeting taxpayers with nonpublic IRA assets and their custodians, such as reminder notices that engaging in prohibited transactions can result in loss of the IRA's tax-favored status.
Open – Partially Addressed

IRS had taken some action to provide general outreach. In June 2016, IRS published information on IRS.gov outlining the new information to be reported for nonmarketable IRA assets and included a general caution that IRAs with nonmarketable investments or assets under direct taxpayer control may be subject to a heightened risk of committing prohibited transactions. This caution is similar to those that IRS added to its publications about IRA contributions and distributions. It is a step toward helping taxpayers better understand which investments pose greater risks. In February 2018, IRS

Federal Paid Administrative Leave: Additional Guidance Needed to Improve OPM Data

GAO-15-79
Yvonne Jones
Show
2 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Office of Personnel Management To help ensure that agencies report comparable and reliable data to Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI), the Director of OPM, in coordination with agencies and payroll service providers, should develop guidance for agencies on which activities to enter, or not enter, as paid administrative leave in agency time and attendance systems.
Open

To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the
Office of Personnel Management To help ensure that agencies report comparable and reliable data to EHRI, the Director of OPM, in coordination with agencies and payroll service providers, should provide updated and specific guidance to payroll service providers on which activities to report, or not report, to the paid administrative leave data element in EHRI.
Open

To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the

F-35 Sustainment: Need for Affordable Strategy, Greater Attention to Risks, and Improved Cost Estimates

GAO-14-778
Cary Russell
Show
3 Open Recommendations
2 Priority
Agency Recommendation Status
Department of Defense
Priority Rec.
To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to enable DOD to better identify, address, and mitigate performance issues with the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) that could have an effect on affordability, as well as readiness, to establish a performance-measurement process for ALIS that includes, but is not limited to, performance metrics and targets that (1) are based on intended behavior of the system in actual operations and (2) tie system performance to user requirements.
Open

DOD concurred with our recommendation. In January 2020, DOD announced that it intended to replace ALIS with a future system that it has named the F-35 Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN). As part of the development of ODIN, DOD developed "Capability Performance Measures" (performance metrics and targets) to assess the performance of ODIN. These performance metrics and targets were finalized in September 2020. Furthermore, in November 2021, DOD released its ALIS Redesign Strategy which lists goals, identifies system performance metrics, and outlines a transition plan from ALIS to ODIN
Department of Defense To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to develop a high level of confidence that the aircraft will achieve its R+M goals, to develop a software reliability and maintainability (R+M) assessment process, with metrics, by which the program can monitor and determine the effect that software issues may have on overall F-35 R+M issues.
Open

DOD concurred with our recommendation; however, as of January 2023 has not implemented it. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, the department and the Joint Program Office, as part of their focus on agile software development, are working to incorporate software reliability and maintainability metrics into future software development and sustainment contracts. Some of the proposed metrics under consideration include: change failure rate; number of errors in developmental/user/operational testing; time to fix on critical errors; and mean time to restore. As of January 2023, DOD
Department of Defense
Priority Rec.
To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to promote competition, address affordability, and inform its overarching sustainment strategy, to develop a long-term Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy to include, but not be limited to, the identification of (1) current levels of technical data rights ownership by the federal government and (2) all critical technical data needs and their associated costs.
Open

DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, the F-35 program's Joint Program Office has been working for years on developing an Intellectual Property Strategy for the F-35; however, the development of an Intellectual Property Strategy depends on the program having a clear understanding of what sustainment work the government will perform, and what sustainment work contractors will perform. As of January 2023, the division of government and contractor F-35 sustainment responsibilities is still in dispute among the customers of the F-35 program. Until DOD resolves these

Federal Real Property: DHS and GSA Need to Strengthen the Management of DHS Headquarters Consolidation

GAO-14-648
Diana Maurer, David Wise
Show
2 Open Recommendations
2 Priority
Agency Recommendation Status
Department of Homeland Security
Priority Rec.
In order to improve transparency and allow for more informed decision making by congressional leaders and DHS and GSA decision-makers, before requesting additional funding for the DHS headquarters consolidation project, after revising the DHS headquarters consolidation plans, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Administrator of the General Services Administration should work jointly to develop revised cost and schedule estimates for the remaining portions of the consolidation project that conform to GSA guidance and leading practices for cost and schedule estimation, including an independent evaluation of the estimates.
Open – Partially Addressed

The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation
General Services Administration
Priority Rec.
In order to improve transparency and allow for more informed decision making by congressional leaders and DHS and GSA decision-makers, before requesting additional funding for the DHS headquarters consolidation project, after revising the DHS headquarters consolidation plans, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Administrator of the General Services Administration should work jointly to develop revised cost and schedule estimates for the remaining portions of the consolidation project that conform to GSA guidance and leading practices for cost and schedule estimation, including an independent evaluation of the estimates.
Open – Partially Addressed

The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation

Federal Rulemaking: Agencies Included Key Elements of Cost-Benefit Analysis, but Explanations of Regulations' Significance Could Be More Transparent [Reissued on September 12, 2014]

GAO-14-714
Michelle Sager
Show
1 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Office of Management and Budget To improve transparency in the rulemaking process, provide agencies and the public with information on why regulations are considered to be significant regulatory actions, and promote consistency in the designation of rules as significant regulatory actions, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should work with agencies to clearly communicate the reasons for designating a regulation as a significant regulatory action. Specifically, OMB should encourage agencies to clearly state in the preamble of final significant regulations the section of Executive Order 12866's definition of a significant regulatory action that applies to the regulation.
Open

In a May 14, 2015 letter to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Director of OMB stated that nothing in the Executive Order 12866 prevents agencies from identifying the particular relevant definition of significance in rules, and that some rules do contain this information. The letter also stated that OMB believes it is appropriate to leave agencies flexibility in how they comply with Executive Order 12866, since such specific procedures for including such information is not a requirement of the Executive Order itself. However, in written

Personnel Security Clearances: Additional Guidance and Oversight Needed at DHS and DOD to Ensure Consistent Application of Revocation Process

GAO-14-640
Brenda S. Farrell
Show
7 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Department of Defense To help ensure independence and the efficient use of resources, and, if the General Counsel determines that there are no legal impediments and that other obstacles to consolidation can be addressed, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Defense Legal Services Agency to take steps to implement the Secretary of Defense's direction to consolidate DOD's PSABs.
Open

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. DOD stated that some DOD components disagreed with PSAB consolidation. Specifically, DOD stated that of the eleven components that provided responses to the draft report, eight concurred or had no issues or comments, while the remaining three components noted that the PSABs should remain at the component level and not be consolidated. One of these three components also commented that the perceived efficiencies from consolidation described in our report should be validated and that all models for consolidation should be evaluated before a
Department of Defense To help ensure that all employees within DOD receive the same rights during the revocation process, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to revise Army Regulation 380-67 to specify that any information collected by the Army PSAB from the employee's command or by the Army PSAB itself will be shared with the employee, who will also be given the opportunity to respond to any such information provided.
Open

DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2018, DOD stated that the Army updated its PSAB guidance in 2016 to include the GAO-recommended verbiage regarding new information. Similar language will also be incorporated in Army Regulation 380-67, which is currently under revision. As of August 2023, this recommendation remains open pending a finalized version of Army Regulation 380-67. According to a DOD update to this recommendation, a major revision to Army Regulation AR 380-67, "Army Personnel Security Program," incorporates the Personnel Security Appeal Boards (PSAB's) requirement to
Department of Defense To facilitate coordination between personnel security and human capital offices regarding how a security clearance revocation should affect an employee's employment status, and to help ensure that individuals are treated in a fair and consistent manner, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, to review and revise policy regarding coordination between the personnel security and human capital offices to clarify what information can and should be communicated between human capital and personnel security officials at specified decision points in the revocation process, and when that information should be communicated.
Open

DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2023, this recommendation remains open pending the department's issuance of pertinent guidance. According to DOD, changes to DOD Manual 5200.02, Procedures for the DOD Personnel Security Program" are being drafted and coordinated to revise policy and identify the appropriate intersections for the exchange of information between human capital offices and security officials. As of February 2022, DOD officials said that the revision of DOD Manual 5200.02 was expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of FY2023; the update had not been
Department of Defense To help ensure that the respective DHS and DOD data systems contain sufficiently complete and accurate information to facilitate effective oversight of the personnel security clearance revocation and appeal process, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence to take steps to ensure that data are recorded and updated in the Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS) and the department's new systems, so that the relevant fields are filled.
Open – Partially Addressed

DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2023, this recommendation remains open pending receipt of information from DOD about the department's fielding of an updated Defense Information System for Security (DISS), which became the system of record in March 2021. According to an update provided by DOD, DISS contains an Appeals application that includes a variety of data fields to capture revocation and appeals related data. GAO is in the process of validating the fields and processes in DISS to ensure that fields in DISS related to revocations will be filled. GAO has requested
Department of Defense To help ensure independence and the efficient use of resources, the Secretary of Defense should direct the DOD General Counsel to first, resolve the disagreement about the legal authority to consolidate the PSABs (Personnel Security Appeals Board) and, in collaboration with the PSABs and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, address any other obstacles to consolidating DOD's PSABs.
Open – Partially Addressed

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. DOD agreed with us to review legal or other impediments to consolidation, and stated that the DOD Office of General Counsel will address any unresolved disagreements about legal authority for consolidation of PSABs. DOD further commented that the DOD Office of General Counsel will work closely with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence to address other issues concerning consolidation of PSABs. However, DOD commented that some DOD components disagreed with PSAB consolidation. Specifically, DOD stated that of the eleven
Office of the Director of National Intelligence To facilitate department-wide review and assessment of the quality of the personnel security clearance revocation process, the DNI should, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security, develop performance measures to better enable them to identify and resolve problems, and direct the collection of related revocation and appeals information.
Open

ODNI concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI stated that review proceedings considerations have been a focus of the ongoing Trusted Workforce 2.0 discussions with a view toward whether policy changes were necessary. ODNI further stated that one key to further examination of this issue is to gather metrics which can inform any subsequent adjustment to the current Executive Branch revocation and review proceedings area. They stated that metrics collection has begun with a January 2019 data call which includes the capture of metrics on denials, revocations, and national
Office of the Director of National Intelligence To help ensure that similarly situated individuals are treated consistently, and to facilitate oversight and help ensure the quality of the security clearance revocation process, the DNI should review whether the existing security clearance revocation process is the most efficient and effective approach. In this review, the DNI should consider whether there should be a single personnel security clearance revocation process used across all executive-branch agencies and workforces, with consideration of areas such as the timing of the personal appearance in the revocation process, and the ability to cross-examine witnesses. Further, to the extent that a single process or changes to the existing parallel processes are warranted, the DNI should consider whether there is a need to establish any policies and procedures to facilitate a more consistent process, and recommend as needed any revisions to existing executive orders or other executive-branch guidance.
Open

ODNI concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI stated that there is not currently an ongoing effort to review the security clearance revocation process across all executive branch agencies and workforces. Instead, the Trusted Workforce 2.0 efforts is conducting an end-to-end review of the current security clearance process for the executive branch and ODNI is currently gathering metrics on adverse security actions which can inform any subsequent determination on whether the revocation process requires policy adjustment by the DNI. As of August 2023, GAO had not received an

Crop Insurance: Considerations in Reducing Federal Premium Subsidies

GAO-14-700
Anne-Marie Fennell
Show
1 Open Recommendations
Agency Recommendation Status
Congress To reduce the cost of the crop insurance program and achieve budgetary savings for deficit reduction or other purposes, Congress should consider reducing the level of federal premium subsidies for revenue crop insurance policies. In doing so, Congress should consider whether to make the full amount of this reduction in an initial year, or to phase in the full amount of this reduction over several years. In addition, Congress should consider directing the Secretary of Agriculture to monitor and report on the impact, if any, of the reduction on farmer participation in the crop insurance program.
Open

As of February 2024, Congress has not taken action to implement this matter.

Medicare Advantage: CMS Should Fully Develop Plans for Encounter Data and Assess Data Quality before Use

GAO-14-571
James Cosgrove
Show
1 Open Recommendations
1 Priority
Agency Recommendation Status
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Priority Rec.
To ensure that MA encounter data are of sufficient quality for their intended purposes, the Administrator of CMS should complete all the steps necessary to validate the data, including performing statistical analyses, reviewing medical records, and providing MAOs with summary reports on CMS's findings, before using the data to risk adjust payments or for other intended purposes.
Open – Partially Addressed

HHS generally agreed with this recommendation. As of February 2024, CMS has made progress in examining the completeness and accuracy of Medicare Advantage encounter data, but more work remains to fully validate these data. For example, CMS has established some performance metrics for MA encounter data completeness and accuracy and conducted associated analyses. CMS has communicated findings from these analyses to MAOs, with the expectation that MAOs provide plans within 60 days to address identified concerns. In addition, CMS stated in February 2024 that the agency has conducted various
Note: the list of open recommendations for the last report may continue on the next page.

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.