Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should establish and implement formal policies to use quality information (e.g., linking decisions to mission-related goals) in the three centers' planning for their personal property needs, consistent with key characteristics integral to asset management leading practices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should establish and implement formal policies to use quality information (e.g., tracking condition, and maintenance and repair costs) in the three centers' operations and maintenance of personal property, consistent with key characteristics integral to asset management leading practices. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should establish and implement formal policies to use quality information (e.g., measuring and documenting performance) in the three centers' reviews of personal property performance, consistent with key characteristics integral to asset management leading practices. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should take steps to ensure that the condition of all White Oak facilities that FDA occupies are assessed, including limited access areas and tenant improvements that are above the standard services and facilities that GSA provides. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should assign authority to an office or other entity to oversee use of the Compliance Program across program offices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should collect and analyze data to monitor use of the Compliance Program across all program offices. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should conduct an evaluation of the Compliance Program to assess the effectiveness of the program in meeting its goals. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of BOP should update its program evaluation plan to set a new timeline for conducting an evaluation of FPI. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Prisons
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: In order to help promote a meaningful program assessment, the Director of BOP should develop a goal for FPI related to recidivism reduction and measure progress toward meeting that goal.(Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Prisons
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should ensure that DOL has a procedure to help the agency analyze reasons for delays in processing National Dislocated Worker Grant applications and grant modifications. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should identify and implement additional mechanisms to allow EAA grantees to share information about innovative and best practices with each other, such as DOL hosting an in-person or virtual national convening for grantees. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should work with the Federal Co-Chair of the ARC to identify and implement mechanisms that allow for information sharing between the two agencies regarding their EAA programs, including sharing grant decisions. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Federal Co-Chair of the ARC should work with the Secretary of Labor to identify and implement mechanisms that allow for information sharing between the two agencies regarding their EAA programs, including sharing grant decisions. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Appalachian Regional Commission
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Federal Co-Chair of the ARC should develop a plan for addressing issues related to performance data for POWER Initiative grants. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Appalachian Regional Commission
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should, as part of the Department's evidence building processes, prioritize improving the quality of evidence on the impact of job training for dislocated workers. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should identify the expected time frame for providing the first report to Congress that is responsive to the WIOA requirement for an annual report that includes research and evaluation findings. In addition, the agency should communicate this time frame to relevant congressional committees. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, develops procedures to help ensure that it will incorporate depot stakeholder input into the new metrics framework for the Army's organic industrial base through iterative and ongoing processes. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Marine Corps should ensure that the Marine Corps Logistics Command establishes a complete baseline schedule, which includes all planned depot maintenance work for the fiscal year, against which to measure performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, develops guidance that synchronizes the Army's timelines for required inputs from Army depot maintenance customers who use funds from the Procurement; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; and Operations and Maintenance budgets with the depots' timelines for development of their finalized budget estimate submissions to AMC. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, provides its non-Army customers with guidance that will help ensure that the depots have all updated maintenance needs in sufficient detail from non-Army customers prior to the depots' finalized budget estimate submissions to AMC. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Army Organic Industrial Base Corporate Board oversees a study that includes a recurring, comprehensive, and systematic analysis of Army depot data to identify trends and causes behind changes in depot maintenance schedules; and that it uses this analysis to recommend actions to reduce unplanned maintenance work, as appropriate and necessary. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should document measurable objectives for using data in selecting exempt organization returns for examination. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should document and consistently use clear criteria and decision rules on assigning point values to queries, using categories and sliding scales. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should require a regular review of query descriptions and programming to ensure their accuracy and minimize queries that flag the same or similar compliance issue. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop procedures and criteria to test new queries prior to implementation in the models. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should more fully document how TE/GE processes data and uses data to make examination selection decisions for sources outside of the model such as research projects and other projects that use queries. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should conduct an analysis to identify the optimal interval between model runs. (Recommendation 6)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should establish a process for regularly evaluating selection decisions and related outcomes for the models and other processes that use data to select returns for examinations. (Recommendation 7)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should document consideration or action on recommendations from its 2018 and 2020 contractor assessments. (Recommendation 8)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should document how score and query data for all returns in the models will continue to be saved over the long term. (Recommendation 9)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that historical data on examination outcomes are consistently defined and used when doing analysis of examination outcomes. (Recommendation 10)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should routinely analyze the reasons for not examining selected returns and identify any necessary actions to address the reasons. (Recommendation 11)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should annually review and update procedures as needed in relevant IRM sections on examination selection and issue interim guidance until the affected IRM sections are updated. (Recommendation 12)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should document why TE/GE has not identified any risks in its risk register for using data to select exempt organization returns for examination. If risks are subsequently identified, TE/GE should document how it plans to analyze and address them. (Recommendation 13)

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

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The NNSA Administrator should incorporate additional management controls to better oversee and coordinate NNSA's microelectronics activities. Such management controls could include investing the microelectronics coordinator with increased responsibility and authority, developing an overarching management plan, and developing a mission need statement and a microelectronics requirements document. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In a May 2020 letter signed by the NNSA Administrator that provided agency comments on our draft report, NNSA neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. However, NNSA stated that by December 2020 the agency plans to complete a strategic management plan that will more clearly articulate the integration of management controls for the various components of its microelectronics activities. NNSA stated that it believes this action is consistent with our recommendation. We are encouraged by this planned action and will evaluate the completed strategic management plan to determine if it meets the intent of our recommendation.

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should provide additional information, such as best practices, about how VA medical centers and service providers participating in Coordinated Entry can collaborate with local partners on key activities (for example, making referrals and sharing data) and ensure that this information and other resources are accessible to VA medical center staff and service providers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for DOL's Veterans' Employment and Training Service should document its data quality validation processes for performance data for the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program and disseminate these processes to service providers. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should clearly communicate with local VA staff and service providers about how it measures performance and how to obtain and provide feedback about performance measures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: GSA should assess and address the reliability of the information used to calculate reported cost savings for the broker program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June 2020, GSA said the agency would validate system data through regional and broker outreach and fully utilize validated system data to manage the broker program. The agency also said it will develop a quality control plan and follow-up on outcomes. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: GSA should develop outcome-based metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of using brokers to supplement the GSA's leasing workforce. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: Although GSA initially did not concur with this recommendation, the agency stated in June 2020 that it agrees with the recommendation and will take steps to implement it. Specifically, GSA plans to revise the broker performance standards and document broker effectiveness through lease cost avoidance, timely lease replacement, and earned commission credits. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries should work with the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico councils, and other councils as appropriate, to develop documented processes for conducting allocation reviews. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.

Recommendation: The NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries should work with the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico councils, and other councils as appropriate, to specify how the councils will document their allocation reviews, including the basis for their allocation decisions, whether fishery management plan objectives are being met, and what factors were considered in the reviews. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, provide updated guidance for the oversight of privatized military housing, to include oversight objectives for each service to monitor the physical condition of privatized homes over the remaining duration of the ground leases. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD (S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance requiring the military departments to monitor work order completion for housing privatized under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative based on a combination of resident input, timeliness of work order completion, and number of repeat work orders for the same repair. The guidance also required increased tracking of MHPI project work orders by installation staff. Moving forward, the ASD(S) plans to issue quarterly program review guidance that establishes oversight objectives for the military departments to monitor the physical condition of MHPI housing over the duration of their project ground leases, formalizing the requirement that the data be monitored by the Chief Housing Officer. DOD expects this to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should take steps, in collaboration with the Army's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 2

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Secretary of the Army has taken several steps toward addressing this recommendation. For example, the Army published the Portfolio and Asset Management Handbook creating a multi-tiered assessment approach of performance metrics to measure the health of each privatized home through inspection, assessment, satisfaction, and feedback. The Army and the private housing partners revised the Incentive Fee Performance Management Plan, placing increased emphasis on resident satisfaction and work order/maintenance management. The Army also put Commanders in charge, ensuring Army leadership at every Army installation is tracking housing quality and safety. In late 2020, the Army plans to review and evaluate these actions and make a determination by 31 Jan 2021 if any changes or revisions are needed to best implement the recommendation. As such, we will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should take steps, in collaboration with the Air Force's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Air Force is engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the Air Force tasked each of the Military Housing Offices to inspect all move-in, move-out, and change of occupancy maintenance events and all emergency, urgent, and life, health, and safety work orders, which is outlined in Air Force guidance. The Air Force is also engaging in several ongoing actions. In response to a memo to the military departments to provide consistency of performance incentive fees, the Air Force was negotiating with the privatized housing project owners to update performance incentive fee metrics in accordance with ASD directed categories and weightings. As of August 2020, agreements had been finalized with 2 partners and work was ongoing with the remaining partners. In addition, the Air Force was working with the project owners to deploy Satisfacts, a survey tool to independently measure resident satisfaction with projects' work order performance, across all Air Force projects with an expected completion by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these recommendations.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should take steps, in collaboration with the Navy and Marine Corps' private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy and Marine Corps are engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, the Navy and Marine Corps have developed a centralized electronic data warehouse, which receives data from privatized housing partner maintenance systems to display work order and survey performance dashboards. By February 2021, the Navy expects to complete the development of metrics displayed by the data warehouse to include key service call performance metrics and resident feedback data. The Navy and Marine Corps are also developing a web-based monitoring matrix tool housing officials can use to evaluate the performance of privatized housing partners. The tool is intended to provide improved tracking capabilities and improved accessibility to information, thus providing more consistent oversight and improved advocacy service members and their families. The Navy is also working to hire 247 additional Navy and Marine Corps housing staff to review and analyze private partner provided recurring maintenance and customer satisfaction reports in an effort to strengthen oversight and monitoring, with an estimated completion of September 2020. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor the status of these and other efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments and private housing partners, establish minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for work order data collection for comparability across installations and projects and to track trends over time. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: e Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD stated that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, plans to issue a policy directing the military departments to establish, to the maximum extent practical, minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for MHPI housing unit work order collection to aid in comparability across installations and projects, and for tracking trends over time. However, DOD noted that the department cannot mandate changes to existing MHPI project legal documents. DOD estimates that this effort will be completed by December 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment require the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by the private housing partners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance directing the military departments to exercise proper oversight to ensure Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) projects perform in accordance with legal agreements, to include due diligence in monitoring and auditing project maintenance records and other project performance data. The guidance also required military departments to review their entire portfolios of MHPI projects to ensure accurate and appropriate work order management processes. In response to the new guidance, DOD noted that the military departments put in place appropriate oversight measures and undertook the required reviews, though the investigations of project business practices were ongoing in some cases. As another step, the ASD(S) plans to issue guidance directing the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by their respective MHPI Project Owners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. DOD expects this to be completed by the end of September 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, develop a process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data from the military departments to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation based on the fact that the draft report listed the incorrect office as the source for addressing the deficiency, but subsequently changed its response to concur after the recommendation was directed to the appropriate office in the final report. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) plans to issue guidance establishing a department-wide process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way effective with the survey collection effort in Fiscal Year 2021. The department expects this effort to be completed by October 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment provides additional explanation of the data collected and reported in future reports to Congress, such as explaining the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data, among other things. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) would provide additional explanation of the MHPI resident satisfaction data collected and reported in future annual Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) reports to Congress, effective with the annual report covering fiscal year 2019. DOD noted that the additional information will include, among other things, an explanation of the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data. As of August 2020, the annual MHPI report covering fiscal year 2018 was in final coordination and the department noted that the report would addresses a vast majority, but not all, of the requirements identified in our recommendation. DOD noted that the additional information would be provided in the next annual MHPI report. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Army housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Army housing office officials. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its response, DOD noted that the Army developed a "Plain Language" briefing as required by the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that included the Army Housing Office's roles, responsibilities, location, and contact information at each privatized housing project site. DOD noted that the intent of the briefing was to ensure that all residents were aware of their ability to directly contact Army Housing Office and/or the Garrison Commanders. DOD stated that the briefing was disseminated to all of the Military Housing Offices, who are using it in newcomer briefings, and stated that the briefing would be provided to all current residents of privatized military housing, but that measure would not be tracked due to attrition. In addition, DOD noted that Headquarters, Department of the Army was tasking Army Materiel Command to develop a more detailed plan to communicate to residents the difference between the Army Housing Office and the private housing partner. The Army's intent is to not only capture residents upon their arrival at an installation, but making the services of the MHO known over the duration of a resident's time on at installation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Navy housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Navy housing office officials. (Recommendation 11)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy has taken various steps to address this recommendation, with additional steps planned. For example, the Navy has ensured that each installation has a specific issue resolution process description marketing flyer available, both in hard copy and on the public housing websites, with a reminder that residents can contact both the privatized housing property manager and the Navy housing office with any issues. Moreover, every housing unit has been provided with a refrigerator magnet reminding residents that they can and should contact the Navy housing office if they have any issues with their home. In addition, the Navy and Marine Corps have established a requirement to contact each privatized housing resident not later than 15 days after move-in and again 60 days after move-in to provide an opportunity to request assistance and remind them of available support. Moving forward, the Navy has an ongoing effort to require private housing companies to market the same messaging as the service issue resolution processes for the MHOs that they support, for consistent advocacy messaging to the tenants. The information will be added to PPV partner websites, printed material and resident handbooks. The Navy also plans to use its annual survey to tracks resident satisfaction and awareness of the Navy's issue resolution process, with expected completion by October 2020. In addition, the Marine Corps has identified a near-term initiative to procure name tags for all MHO employees to wear, identifying themselves as distinct and separate from privatized housing property management company, which will be standardized across all USMC installations. The Marine Corps also plans to develop a standard welcome aboard package to include magnets and other items with key point of contact information. The Marine Corps expects these efforts to be completed by the end of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, assess the risks of proposed initiatives aimed at improving the privatized military housing program on the financial viability of the projects. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, as the Chief Housing Officer, planned to issue a policy establishing the assessment of Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) project financial viability as part of quarterly program reviews as a long-term requirement. The department noted that the program review data would be augmented by input from the MHPI companies, who are assessing the likely impact of proposed initiatives in conjunction with their third party lenders. The department expected this effort to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the Board should require the Safety Recommendation and Communication team to fully document its evaluations when assessing items to propose for Most Wanted List consideration (Recommendation 1).

Agency: National Transportation Safety Board
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the Board should take steps to publicly and fully communicate the selection rationale, such as including why NTSB believes an issue is "ripe for action" to its documentation on its website (Recommendation 2).

Agency: National Transportation Safety Board
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to take steps to ensure that the details of the pilot program's data protections are incorporated into the existing agreements. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will require the Primary Sponsor for each applicable federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) to provide documentation that shows that the details of the pilot program's data protections have been incorporated into existing sponsoring agreements and contracts, and estimated these actions would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to take steps to ensure that the FFRDCs and sponsors are implementing the pilot program's protections for sensitive data. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will task the Primary Sponsor for each applicable federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) to provide a report detailing the FFRDC's plan for implementing the pilot program's protections for sensitive data and confirming that the FFRDC is adhering to that plan. OUSD(R&E)/L&PO estimated these actions would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to establish a monitoring and oversight mechanism to ensure that primary sponsors submit complete information on pilot projects, as required by DOD's guidance for the pilot program. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will develop a monitoring and oversight plan, and estimated it would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to develop a plan that outlines the methodology by which DOD will assess the pilot and how and when information collected will be analyzed to evaluate the pilot program. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will develop and coordinate a plan that outlines the methodology by which DOD will assess the pilot as well as the methodology for collecting and analyzing information to evaluate the pilot program. OUSD(R&E)/L&PO estimated these actions would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to develop a plan to identify and evaluate lessons learned from the pilot program. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will develop a plan to identify and evaluate lessons learned from the pilot program, and estimated the plan would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering should direct the Laboratories and Personnel Office to develop a plan for obtaining input from stakeholders on the pilot program. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
Status: Open

Comments: The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSD(R&E)), Laboratories and Personnel Office (L&PO) concurred with this recommendation. In May 2020, OUSD(R&E)/L&PO stated it will develop a plan to obtain stakeholder inputs for use in evaluating the pilot program, and estimated the plan would be completed in early Fall 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of the Navy, determine whether it can assign the required number of Navy officers to the other military departments' JPME programs, consistent with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff guidance. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the military services, develop policy concerning actions, if any, the military services can take to mitigate JPME seminar student mix shortfalls and still meet the intent of the OPMEP's joint acculturation requirement. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff, develop and issue a department-wide mission statement for PME that will explain the program's purpose and goals, and serve as a basis for performance measures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issue and implement performance measures—to include the tracking of costs—that align with the department-wide mission statement for PME. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, require the military services to periodically report information to its office about the military services' PME and JPME programs—such as results of program reviews. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense(Comptroller) updates the DOD Financial Management Regulation to require the Marine Corps to include a budget request data exhibit for the Marine Corps War College in support of DOD's annual budget request. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military services and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issue guidance to standardize the cost data that the military services should include in their annual PME budget request data submissions. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary 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: The Secretary of Homeland Security should identify the information about family members apprehended together that its components collectively need to process those family members and communicate that information to its components. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: According to DHS, in June 2020, DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics launched a Family Status Data Standards Community of Interest (COI) under the purview of the DHS Immigration Data Integration Initiative. In August 2020, DHS reported that the Family Status COI includes subject matter experts and data system managers from DHS components, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The COI's mandate includes drafting common DHS-wide and interagency data standards (common codes, common definitions, common formats) for all topics related to family status, including codes to identify the reasons for family separation, members apprehended together, and unaccompanied children. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Identifying and communicating department-wide information needs with respect to family members who have been apprehended together should help provide DHS with greater assurance that its components are identifying all individuals who may be eligible for relief from removal from the United States based on their family relationships.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that, at the time of apprehension, CBP collects the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members apprehended together. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) will work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on the Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. As of August 2020, DHS reported that DHS OIS continues to work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that CBP documents the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members apprehended together on the Form I-213. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that, upon implementation of the steps the department plans to take in response to our second recommendation, CBP will issue guidance to the field to ensure that CBP agents and officers document the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members. In August 2020, DHS reported that component agencies continue to collaborate to define the process of family members apprehended together, as will be reflected on CBP Form I-213. DHS estimates issuing this guidance by March 31, 2021. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.immigration or other proceedings.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should evaluate options for developing a unique identifier shared across DHS components' data systems to link family members apprehended together. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) plans to work with relevant components to develop a unique shared identifier linking family members apprehended together. According to DHS, DHS OIS launched the Family Status Community of Interest (COI) in June 2020, and the COI has since established a bi-weekly meeting schedule. The COI's initial focus is on standard codes describing the reasons for family separations. Upon completing the family separation reason standard, DHS reported that the COI will prioritize developing common codes to identify family members apprehended together. DHS estimates completing these actions by March 31, 2021. Evaluating options for developing a shared unique family member identifier across components that would allow each component access to certain information about family members apprehended together would help bridge the information gaps about family relationships between components caused by DHS's fragmented data systems.

Recommendation: The TSA Administrator should direct T&D and Security Operations to monitor for instances of TSO non-compliance by individual commercial airports across fiscal years that could potentially warrant corrective action at the headquarters level. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In January 2020, TSA's formal comment letter in response to our draft report stated that T&D will begin recording instances of noncompliance and work with Security Operations to monitor trends at individual airports and with specific courses. TSA also reported that T&D had developed a repository in its iShare database for this information at the end of 2019 and the agency is currently testing various options for reporting and pulling data. Once options are chosen and incorporated into its standard operating procedures, TSA reports that T&D will begin sharing the reports with Security Operations on a monthly basis. In July 2020, TSA officials told us that T&D had begun sharing training compliance reports from their database with Security Operations and discussing the results with them on a monthly basis. This database allows T&D to recognize trends at individual airports and specific courses throughout the fiscal year. Going forward, this process will enable T&D to identify noncompliance trends across fiscal years. We will continue to montior these efforts to verify that the T&D is montioring trends across fiscal years and work with TSA towards closure of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance should clearly document in guidance to the regional offices how they should use the definition of informal enforcement actions to collect data on these actions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation. In July 2020, EPA stated that in a September 30, 2019 guidance document, the agency defined an informal enforcement action. However, on March 24, 2020, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) suspended the September guidance because informal enforcement actions as defined appear to be inconsistent with Section 6 of the White House's Executive Order (EO) 13892, Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication, issued on October 9, 2019. EPA said that it would amend the September 2019 guidance to be consistent with the Executive Order. Our recommendation focused on guidance on how regional offices should use the definition of informal enforcement action and we will continue to monitor EPA's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance should clearly document in guidance to the regional offices that they should collect data on compliance assistance activities and specify which mechanism to use to maintain the data, such as ICIS. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation and would collect data on compliance assistance for each of the National Compliance Initiatives and maintain those data in ICIS. Specifically, in July 2020, the agency stated that in order to further its compliance assistance efforts, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance (OECA) is including a compliance assistance tool as an important part of each of EPA's National Compliance Initiatives. According to EPA, data on compliance assistance efforts that are part of the NCI will be collected and tracked for management review in the Integrated Compliance Information System. In addition, EPA stated it has collected data in the past on webpage visits related to its national Compliance Assistance Centers and would continue to do so in the future. We will continue to monitor the status of EPA's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance should include the known limitations of data in its annual reports and provide information on the intended use of EPA's data. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In written comments reproduced in appendix I of this report, EPA stated that it agreed with this recommendation and acknowledged the importance of providing information about a dataset to facilitate proper interpretation. For that reason, EPA said that, in time for its fiscal year 2020 report, the agency will create a webpage to describe how best to interpret the data presented in its "Fiscal Year EPA Enforcement and Compliance Annual Results" report and include a reference to that webpage in the report itself as well as the "Year in Review" report. In July 2020, EPA reiterated its written comments on the report. We will update the status of EPA's implementation of this recommendation upon the release of its annual reports.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should clarify policies and procedures to remind staff that a diagnosis of a substance use disorder is not necessary to conduct a Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that it had revised related policies in February 2020, and had planned to issue guidance and video-on-demand training to further clarify policies and procedures in this area. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed further implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should ensure that staff document their rationale for decisions involving the Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation process. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency said it had planned to issue guidance reinforcing its policy on properly documenting decisions involving the Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation process. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy (1) to incorporate into its guidance approaches or practices that agencies could use to assess utilization of and the ongoing need for property—approaches such as recommendations for periodic justifications, data analytics, and utilization reviews—and (2) to develop a plan and timelines for communicating the guidance to agencies government-wide. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it had published on its website draft guidance in response to the Federal Personal Property Management Act of 2018. In addition, GSA identified several actions it planned to take in the coming months, such as publishing a comprehensive plan and timelines to address GAO's recommendation, publishing a request for information in the Federal Register to seek comments and suggestions, and engaging additional subject matter experts and related associations and standards group to improve upon the draft guidance. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Advanced Exploration Systems division to define and determine a schedule for synchronization reviews, including the role of the proposed Lunar Exploration Control Board, to help ensure that requirements between mission and program levels are reconciled. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that the Advanced Exploration Systems division will review program life-cycle review plans to ensure enterprise and program requirements are reconciled across the mission. NASA is in the process of determining the organizational structure of the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. Following this completion, NASA officials stated that the appropriate control board and division structures for review and program direction will become active.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Gateway program to conduct a joint cost and schedule confidence level at the program level for the Artemis III mission. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated it would conduct a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent. The Gateway program is planning to conduct a series of project- and program-level reviews and assessments aligned with key decision point reviews. This includes conducting a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent of the Gateway initial configuration to support a program key decision point planned for fall 2021. NASA has not yet taken action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Gateway program to update its overall schedule for 2024 to add a KDP II to occur before system integration. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken action on it. NASA stated that it would provide a schedule for future reviews, including whether there will be a Key Decision Point (KDP) II, at the KDP-I review currently scheduled for fall 2021.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations creates a life-cycle cost estimate for the Artemis III mission. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA agreed with the recommendation and stated that the agency will provide a preliminary cost estimate for the Artemis III mission by the end of 2020. Further, NASA stated that it will provide an updated cost estimate for the Artemis III mission after it establishes cost and schedule commitments for some of the projects that compose the lunar mission, currently planned for the Spring of 2021. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to provide a cost estimate.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Advanced Exploration Systems division to commit to a completion date and finalize a cohesive document outlining the rationale for selecting its current lunar architecture and lunar programs. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that it is developing a document that will summarize the trades and architectural studies, but the document is not yet complete.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the Office of the Chief Engineer determines under what conditions it is appropriate to complete an analysis of alternatives, particularly when there are multiple pathways—including architectures or programs—that NASA could pursue in the future, and document the justification for not completing an analysis. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken any action on it. NASA stated that it will provide additional clarifying guidance for conducting analyses of alternatives for new programs in the next update to NASA Procedural Requirements 7120.5E, "NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements." NASA plans to complete the update of the procedural requirement in September 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the GSA should report for Congress and the public—for example, on GSA's prospectus website—the extent to which completed projects' construction costs and schedules were rebaselined and final construction costs, to include any additional funding tenant agencies may have provided to GSA for changes. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) partially concurred with this recommendation. On February 6, 2020, GSA stated that it will publish summary schedule and budget results for completed projects on GSA's public-accessible prospectus website. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the GSA should update its 2005 Commissioning Guide—or replace it with appropriate industry-recognized standards and guidance—to be consistent with GSA's current design standards and industry practices. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation, and on February 6, 2020, stated that GSA will publish updated Commissioning Guidance. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the GSA should identify and communicate—such as through policy, guidance, or other appropriate mechanism—(a) when and how Post Occupancy Evaluations should be conducted for completed projects considering resource constraints and (b) how recommendations or lessons learned from those evaluations are effectively communicated to future project teams. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation, and on February 6, 2020, stated that GSA will publish program guidance on how and when Post Occupancy Evaluations are conducted and communicate recommendations or lessons learned to future project teams. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of VA should ensure that the Director of VR&E assesses the consistency of VR&E plans among counselors and takes mitigating steps if results warrant. For example, as part of its training efforts, VA could have counselors respond to identical hypothetical veteran cases and, if unfair inconsistencies in plans result, the agency could enhance training on plan development. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In February and March 2020, VA's Vocational Rehabilitation & Employment (VR&E) conducted a consistency study of VR&E plan development. The study identified areas that warrant refresher training for counselors. VR&E plans to roll out this training to all counselors by August 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when VR&E completes this effort.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should develop an approach to ensure that all relevant participants are involved in the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were proposed changes to CNCS's approach for involving key participants from across the agency in the process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) assess the extent to which they address our recommendation and (2) confirm that these proposed changes were approved. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should define roles and responsibilities for all relevant participants involved in the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were workforce planning and hiring based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for CNCS to address its evidence priorities. The letter stated that once those actions were completed, CNCS would revisit the roles and responsibilities of participants involved in the agency's evidence-building activities. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should revise written guidance for the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs to ensure it identifies all relevant participants and their respective roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendations and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) confirm that these proposed changes were approved and (2) assess the extent to which written guidance for the revised process addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should develop an approach to ensure that all relevant participants are involved in the department-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should revise written guidance for the department-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs to ensure it identifies all relevant participants and their respective roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works should direct the Chief of Engineers and the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to strengthen the Corps' internal review process for feasibility studies by including steps to ensure consistency with best practices for transparency, such as verifying that all of the important assumptions and limitations in models and their implications for the economic analysis are consistently, clearly, and fully described. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Assistant Secretary (Civil Works)
Status: Open

Comments: In its letter dated January 14, 2020, the Department of Defense concurred with GAO's recommendation and provided a corrective action plan in response to the recommendation. According to the corrective action plan, the Corps estimates that guidance will be issued to ensure that Corps reports adequately describe and justify the models, analytical choices, assumptions, and data used such that it is consistent with best practices by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of OCS, in developing the new performance management approach for the CSBG program, should ensure that its performance framework includes information on (1) details for how the national measure is linked to and used to assess the three national program goals, (2) descriptions of how the updated state and local performance outcome measures align with national program goals, and (3) a written plan for how OCS will assess the reliability of state performance outcome data. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of Community Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation and and stated that it plans to take actions to better align its performance measures with the three national performance goals outlined in the new CSBG Theory of Change. We commend HHS for its plans to address this recommendation, but encourage the agency to focus on aligning its performance outcomes with the three national goals of the CSBG program as established by the CBBG Act, which are similar but not identical to the three goals outlined in the new CSBG Theory of Change. HHS also stated that it would implement additional actions to assess the reliability of state performance outcome data.

Recommendation: We recommend that the Secretary of the Navy ensure that the Commander, Naval Surface Forces, in coordination with Surface Warfare Officers School Command, develop a method to regularly collect feedback from SWOs across the fleet, such as in a survey, regarding the quality of their classroom, simulator, and at-sea training on Division Officer performance; and evaluates trends in the feedback received for the purpose of improving SWO training. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with our recommendation. In March 2020, the Navy provided an estimated implementation date of March 2023, noting that it was considering a fleet-wide survey, timed for a later date when more Surface Warfare Officers have completed new training courses and implemented their training. In addition, the Navy listed other means it employs to collect feedback, such as student surveys at the end of training courses, leadership visits and conferences, and Commanding Officer updates. Our emphasis on collection of fleet-wide feedback from all Surface Warfare Officers and trend analysis remains critical to help the Navy understand the value of its training programs at various career stages and in the diverse operating environments across the fleet.

Recommendation: We recommend that the Secretary of the Navy ensure that the Commander, Naval Surface Forces, routinely conduct regular Officer of the Deck competency assessments using samples of sufficient size and using selection methods to gauge the level of fleet-wide ship-driving proficiency trends following the implementation of the planned ship-driving training programs. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with our recommendation. In March 2020, the Navy provided an estimated implementation date of March 2023, noting that it was conducting the planned fleet-wide Officer of the Deck competency checks in 2020, and that it intends to use a system of ten career milestone assessments for future performance measurement. The Navy stated that it may or may not hold subsequent rounds of the Officer of the Deck competency assessments depending on performance indicated in other career milestone assessments. In our report we identified the importance of continuing the current Officer of the Deck competency assessments through at least 2024 because that is when new officers that complete the full set of new initial ship-driving training courses will be eligible for assessment. The Navy used the Officer of the Deck competency assessments in 2018 to establish a performance baseline, and we believe that the Navy should apply the same standard to measure performance changes for Surface Warfare Officers that complete new training courses moving forward.

Recommendation: We recommend that the Secretary of the Navy ensure that the Commander, Naval Surface Forces, in coordination with Surface Warfare Officers School Command, provide Commanding Officers with standard criteria to inform their evaluation of candidates for their Officer of the Deck qualification and incorporates these criteria into surface fleet guidance. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with our recommendation. In March 2020, the Navy provided an estimated implementation date of March 2023. However, in its official comments on the report and in subsequent correspondence, the Navy indicated that its existing policies already meet the intent of the recommendation. Specifically, the Navy stated that its Officer of the Deck Underway Personnel Qualification Standards provide standard evaluation criteria for Officer of the Deck qualification. In our report, we noted that while the Personnel Qualification Standards provide a common list of required experiences, they do not provide a common understanding of proficiency in completing these experiences. Instead, proficiency determination is left to the discretion of the ship's Commanding Officer, which has led to wide variation in ship-driving proficiency across the fleet. Therefore, we continue to believe that the Navy should provide Commanding Officers with standard criteria to inform their evaluation of candidates for their Officer of the Deck qualification and incorporate these criteria into surface fleet guidance.

Recommendation: We recommend that the Secretary of the Navy ensure that the Commander, Naval Surface Forces, in coordination with Surface Warfare Officers School Command, develop a plan to analyze and use Mariner Skills Logbook information to inform decision-making. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with our recommendation. In March 2020, the Navy provided an estimated implementation date of March 2023. In official comments on the report and in subsequent correspondence the Navy stated that its Surface Warfare Career Manual establishes guidance for the implementation and use of the Mariner Skills Logbook, and that the logbook will contribute information to allow proficiency trend analysis over time. However, while the Surface Warfare Career Manual identifies the offices responsible for logbook activities, it does not include a specific plan for the use of logbook data to analyze proficiency trends over time or to benefit individual officers. Our emphasis that the Navy develop a plan to analyze and use Surface Warfare Mariner Skills Logbook data to aid decision-making remains valid, and when implemented should assist the Navy in determining the relationship between SWO experience and ship-driving proficiency.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of FTA to identify and develop controls, such as methods to more easily identify transit expenses within applications submitted by larger entities, such as a city, county, or state government, to address the risk of duplicate funding. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Administrator of FEMA to identify and develop controls, such as methods to more easily identify transit expenses within applications submitted by larger entities such as a city, county, or state government, to address the risk of duplicate funding. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary for Homeland Security should direct the Director of OTE to revise T&E policy or guidance as necessary to fully meet the key practice for programs to test that components and subsystems work together as a system in a controlled setting before finalizing a system's design. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to update its T&E policy to specify that acquisition programs demonstrate that components and subsystems work together before finalizing a system's design. In July 2020, DHS Test and Evaluation Division (TED) officials said they were in the process of updating the policy and that it was undergoing management review with an anticipated completion in fall 2020. Once finalized, GAO will evaluate the revised policy to determine whether DHS has met the intent of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary for Homeland Security should direct the Director of OTE, in coordination with OCPO, to develop an assessment process-including establishing performance measures-to help ensure T&E training achieves desired results. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report, DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to assess the knowledge and skill requirements for the T&E workforce and establish performance goals for the training. DHS Test and Evaluation Division (TED), in coordination with OCPO, also plan to develop strategies to address any deficiencies with the current training that do not meet the identified requirements. In April 2020, TED officials said that they developed a new survey process to obtain recurring feedback from participants on the training's impact on their ability to perform T&E duties as assigned over time to inform the annual review of the T&E curriculum. However, this effort is still in a piloting stage so the extent to which this information is used to assess the training is still unknown at this time. As of July 2020, TED was still in the process of executing these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary for Homeland Security should direct the Director of OTE to revise T&E policy or guidance as necessary to specify when in the acquisition life cycle a major acquisition program manager should designate a level III certified T&E manager. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to update its T&E policy to specify when in the acquisition lifecycle acquisition program managers should designate a qualified T&E manager. In July 2020, DHS Test and Evaluation Division (TED) officials said they were in the process of revising the policy to include this specification and that it was undergoing management review with an anticipated completion in fall 2020. Once finalized, GAO will evaluate the revised policy to determine whether DHS has met the intent of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary for Homeland Security should direct the Director of OTE to establish an internal control process to ensure that data collected and maintained on major acquisition programs' T&E managers are reliable. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report, DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to establish an internal control process to reliably collect and maintain data on acquisition programs' assigned test and evaluation managers. In April 2020, DHS Test and Evaluation Division (TED) reported taking steps to ensure the validity of this data including establishing points of contacts within each component to cross-check collected information for accuracy and having the Director review collected data on a quarterly basis beginning in third quarter fiscal year 2020. As of July 2020, TED was still in the process of improving its internal collection process, but had not completed these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary for Homeland Security should direct the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to assess OTE's workforce to ascertain the extent to which it has the appropriate number of staff with the necessary skills to fulfill its responsibilities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report, DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to assess the Test and Evaluation Division's (TED) workforce by reviewing current staffing levels and vacancies against the division's roles and responsibilities. The Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary for Science and Technology plans to use the results of this review to inform strategic hiring in future years, if needed. In February 2020, DHS released its fiscal year 2020 strategic guidance memorandum for the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate which included a statement pertaining to resourcing S&T's test and evaluation capabilities. However, as of July 2020, S&T had not yet conducted its review of TED's workforce.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should develop a department-wide succession plan for leadership and mission-critical occupations that incorporates key leading practices for succession planning. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VA reported that it is developing a department-wide succession plan for leadership positions and mission-critical occupations. VA estimated it would complete this plan by September 30, 2020. When VA provides us a copy of the completed plan, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should incorporate key leading practices into VHA's succession planning processes, including monitoring and evaluating VHA's succession planning. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VHA reported that it is developing guidance and metrics, developing a process to assess field-based succession planning actions, and incorporating evaluations and updates of implementation strategies into its succession plan. VHA also indicated that it is developing a new VHA Executive Succession Plan. VHA plans to complete these actions by December 2021. When we receive VHA's updated plans and guidance, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Benefits should develop a succession planning process for all leadership positions and incorporate key leading practices into VBA's succession planning for leadership positions and mission-critical occupations. These practices include aligning the plans with strategic goals, identifying strategies to close workforce gaps, and monitoring and evaluating VBA's succession planning. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Benefits Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VBA reported that it is developing succession plans that align with VBA's strategic goals and identify succession planning strategies. VBA also indicated that it plans to review, assess, and update the plans annually. According to VBA, its plans will cover mission-critical occupations as well as leadership positions within those mission-critical occupations. However, VBA stated that VA's Corporate Senior Executive Management Office (CSEMO) is responsible for planning related to VBA's senior executives and that VBA will coordinate with CSEMO on succession planning for senior executives. To implement our recommendation, VBA will need to demonstrate that VBA, or CSEMO in coordination with VBA, has developed succession planning processes that cover all leadership positions (including senior executives) and mission-critical occupations. VBA expects to complete its succession plans by September 30, 2020. When we receive VBA's completed plans, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should update VA's 2003 directive on workforce and succession planning to incorporate relevant legal requirements, including Office of Personnel Management strategic human capital management regulation requirements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VA reported that its updated directive is going through the Department's internal review and concurrence process. VA estimated it would complete the directive by July 31, 2020. When VA provides us a copy of the directive, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State, working with the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, should collaborate with the Departments of Defense and Agriculture and other Departments as necessary, to develop a comprehensive approach to the monitoring and evaluation of projects that directly support the objectives of prosperity, governance, and security, and incorporate this approach into the Strategy monitoring and evaluation plan.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State did not concur with the recommendation, indicating that it continues to collaborate with agencies regarding U.S. government activities in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. However, in May 2020, State noted that, to the extent possible, it would seek to include agencies, such as the Departments of Defense and Agriculture, into the Progress Report for the U.S. Strategy for Central America's Plan for Monitoring and Evaluation. When we confirm what actions State has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management of Budget should update the Guidelines to include GAO's leading practices of developing monitoring plans that are based on risks, ensuring that monitoring staff have appropriate qualifications, establishing procedures to close-out programs, developing staff skills regarding evaluations, and establishing mechanisms for following up on evaluation recommendations. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: OMB disagreed with the recommendation and suggested it would be more effective to remind agencies that, in addition to the guidelines, they should follow all other relevant OMB guidance affecting monitoring and evaluation. OMB asserted that this guidance contains provisions relevant to our leading practices not included in the Foreign Assistance Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines. However, we believe it is important for OMB to incorporate this other guidance into the Foreign Assistance Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines, if only by reference, to emphasize the importance of these practices in the context of monitoring and evaluation of foreign assistance. As of April 28, 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not implemented this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor this issue.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should update the Department's monitoring and evaluation policies to require the agency to conduct impact evaluations on all pilot programs before replicating or expanding, or conduct performance evaluations for those programs and provide a justification for not conducting an impact evaluation. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation and noted that impact evaluations require a significant resource investment beyond what would be appropriate for more programs. However, DOD is in the process of updating its evaluation guidelines to allow for, but not require, impact evaluations in appropriate cases at all levels of evaluation activities.

Recommendation: The Department of State's U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator, in collaboration with HHS and other implementing agencies, should update the PEPFAR monitoring and evaluation policies to require these agencies to conduct impact evaluations on all pilot programs before replicating or expanding, or conduct performance evaluations for those programs and provide a justification for not conducting an impact evaluation. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the intent of the recommendation (see appendix V for written comments). State explained that impact evaluations are often not feasible in the context of assistance provided under PEPFAR and described its alternative approach to evaluating new initiatives. State indicated it would update appropriate PEPFAR policies to clarify when agencies should conduct impact and/or performance evaluations. These clarifications will reflect how State evaluates PEPFAR programs in practice in accordance with OMB guidance and legislation, according to State.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to develop an implementation plan that includes resource estimates to address the remaining WRRDA 2014 acceleration provisions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. This implementation plan is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to develop a plan to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of the agency's feasibility study acceleration reforms. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of the agency's feasibility study acceleration reforms. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this evaluation, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to clarify its policy to help ensure district officials enter data on all key milestones for feasibility studies into its central data system. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to clarify the Army's policy on entry of key study data to include milestone dates. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this effort, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Sustainment) develop and adopt a depot maintenance carryover metric that provides reliable, complete, consistent, and appropriate information. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with the recommendation. Specifically, DOD stated that the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and Sustainment) and the Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) will coordinate with the Military Departments to promulgate regulations implementing GAO's recommendation, and collaborate to develop a new budgetary exhibit to coincide with the Fiscal Year 2022 budget estimate submission. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) should improve how FNS gathers information on the effectiveness of SNAP-Ed interventions, in order to ensure that these interventions are meeting program goals. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA generally agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that FNS has efforts underway to comply with the 2018 Farm Bill requirement that the department report annually on the level of coordination between its nutrition education programs.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretaries for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services and for Research, Education, and Economics to develop a formal mechanism, such as a designated individual or group of individuals, for providing cross-department leadership for USDA's nutrition education efforts and facilitating cross-program information sharing. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA generally agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that FNS has efforts underway to comply with the 2018 Farm Bill requirement that the department report annually on the level of coordination between its nutrition education programs.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretaries for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services and for Research, Education, and Economics to identify and implement mechanisms to fully leverage the department's nutrition expertise for its nutrition education efforts. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA generally agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that FNS has efforts underway to comply with the 2018 Farm Bill requirement that the department report annually on the level of coordination between its nutrition education programs.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB, after consulting with key stakeholders (e.g., the Chief Financial Officers Council), should develop a strategy for ensuring that agencies communicate sufficient and timely internal control plans for effective oversight of disaster relief funds. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) disagreed with our recommendation. In the agency's comment section of the GAO report, OMB staff stated that OMB did not believe the sufficiency or timeliness of control plans present material issues that warranted OMB action. While OMB acknowledged that almost all agency control plans were submitted after the statutory deadline, OMB staff stated that this delay in itself neither indicated the absence of controls nor the effectiveness of those controls. Further, OMB staff stated that it is agency management and not OMB that has responsibility for ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations. While agencies were responsible for submitting their internal control plans, federal law placed the responsibility of establishing the criteria for the internal control plans with OMB. Therefore, we believe that our recommendation is warranted. In January 2020, OMB informed us that there are no additional updates at this time regarding status, actions, or timelines to develop a strategy. We will continue to monitor agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of DOL should develop and publish a multi-year strategic research plan for evaluation of its employment and training programs that includes assessing the completeness and results of efforts to coordinate among E&T programs to address overlap and fragmentation. In developing this plan, DOL should also consult with other federal agencies and key stakeholders on ways to address gaps in information on how multiple programs are serving the employment and training needs of specific populations, such as Native Americans, youth, and refugees. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that it actively plans and makes public the research and evaluation topics for these evaluations, but it did not identify a timeline or measures it would take to augment these basic steps. DOL also stated that it will consult with stakeholders regarding the employment and training needs of specific populations. We will consider closing this recommendation when DOL completes these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (OUSD (Policy)), the Joint Staff, and the Office of the Director, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation—in consultation with the services—determine the analytic products needed and the level of detail that is sufficient to serve as a common starting point but flexible to allow for variation of analysis to support senior leader decisions, and update these products to reflect current strategy and intelligence estimates, as well as the anticipated operational approaches needed to address future threats. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and, as of January 2020, has taken some steps to address it. Specifically, in May 2019, DOD sent a follow up letter to our final report that said that the Department's position on the report has not substantially changed and that the actions identified in the Department's initial response remain underway. DOD also noted that the FY 2021-2025 Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) signed in April 2019 directly addresses many of the report's recommendations and that the Joint Staff is leading an aggressive effort on joint force innovation and experimentation, with Tri-Chair oversight. In September 2019, we reviewed the DPG and found that it partially addressed our recommendation. In the DPG, DOD identified analytic products that would serve as the department's starting point for analysis in fiscal years 2021-2025. DOD has also begun developing some of these analytic products, including several defense planning scenarios that it developed in December 2018 to reflect some of the threats outlined in the National Defense Strategy. To fully implement this recommendation, DOD will need to develop the additional products it needs for the remaining key threats identified in the National Defense Strategy. Additionally, keeping these products updated will require sustained attention by the department, but the direction provided by DOD was limited to budget guidance for fiscal years 2021-2025. The direction would more closely adhere to the intent of our recommendation if it were provided in an enduring guidance or policy document. We will continue to monitor DOD actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that OUSD (Policy) provide specific guidance requiring the services to explore a range of innovative force structure approaches relevant to the key threats identified in the National Defense Strategy, including identifying key assumptions on which the services must conduct sensitivity analyses. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and, as of January 2020, has taken some steps to address it. Specifically, in May 2019, DOD sent a follow up letter to our final report that said that the Department's position on the report has not substantially changed and that the actions identified in the Department's initial response remain underway. DOD also noted that the FY 2021-2025 Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) signed in April 2019 directly addresses many of the report's recommendations and that the Joint Staff is leading an aggressive effort on joint force innovation and experimentation, with Tri-Chair oversight. In September 2019, we reviewed the DPG and found that it directed some actions relevant to our recommendation regarding the need to explore a range of innovative force structure approaches. However, it did not directly address the need to require the services to conduct sensitivity analysis on key assumptions. The defense planning scenarios that DOD developed in December 2018 identify critical parameters for analytical exploration and encourage DOD components to conduct excursions and sensitivity analysis of assumptions, which we found has not been sufficient to spur this type of analysis in the past. To fully implement this recommendation, DOD needs to require the services to conduct this analysis. We will continue to monitor DOD actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should establish an approach for comparing competing analyses and conducting joint analyses for force structure to support senior leaders as they seek to implement the National Defense Strategy. This could include establishing a separate body with these capabilities and/or specifying the organizational responsibilities and processes for conducting these comparisons and analyses. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and, as of January 2020, has taken some steps to address it. Specifically, in May 2019, DOD sent a follow up letter to our final report that said that the Department's position on the report has not substantially changed and that the actions identified in the Department's initial response remain underway. DOD also noted that the FY 2021-2025 Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) signed in April 2019 directly addresses many of the report's recommendations and that the Joint Staff is leading an aggressive effort on joint force innovation and experimentation, with Tri-Chair oversight. In September 2019, we reviewed the DPG and found that it included steps that could lay the groundwork for DOD to compare competing analyses and conduct joint force structure analyses. To fully implement this recommendation, DOD needs to establish an approach for doing so, which could include establishing a body or process for conducting comparisons or joint analyses. We will continue to monitor DOE actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy should ensure that the Build America Bureau develop a detailed implementation plan that sets goals and a timeline for the Bureau's continued efforts, fills vacancies in the Bureau, and prioritizes and sequences work to carry out the multiple responsibilities given to the Bureau in the FAST Act. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, DOT is planning to develop a strategy with goals and objectives to guide the Bureau's work and to complete this action by August 2020. DOT stated it does not plan to create a detailed implementation plan as that would detract from higher priority efforts. We will continue to monitor DOT's actions and the extent to which they fulfill our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy should ensure that the Build America Bureau develop performance indicators to assess the Bureau's progress toward meeting its guiding principles or mission as a "one-stop shop." (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, DOT is planning to establish a baseline that tracks the average amount of time that projects spend in each of the key developmental phases to assess how long projects take to reach financial close and to complete this action by August 2020. This planned baseline and measure would align with one of the Bureau's four guiding principles, but additional measures would be needed to gauge its overall progress in meeting the Bureau's other guiding principles. We will continue to monitor DOT's actions and the extent to which they fulfill our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy should ensure that the Build America Bureau develop a mechanism to assess the Bureau's application evaluation process for TIFIA and RRIF and identify and address opportunities to improve and further streamline the process. This evaluation should include mechanisms to solicit feedback from project sponsors that sought financing. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, the Bureau is planning to develop a survey to solicit feedback from project sponsors on their experience with the Bureau and to have an approved survey ready for use by August 2020. We will continue to monitor DOT's actions and the extent to which they fulfill our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy should ensure that the Build America Bureau develop and adopt a public statement that outlines DOT's and the Bureau's policy goals and appetite for risk for the TIFIA and RRIF financing programs. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, DOT is planning to develop a strategy that outlines the Bureau's policy goals, but does not intend to issue a public statement that outlines DOT's and the Bureau's appetite for risk. According to DOT, a risk appetite statement would not be feasible given that the loan programs in the Bureau cover a diverse portfolio of publicly and privately funded projects covering a range of transportation modes that range widely in size, complexity, and financial structure. We informed DOT that we continue to believe that a risk appetite statement is both feasible and needed. DOT plans to provide an updated response in October 2020. We will review the Department's response and continue to monitor its actions and determine the extent to which they fulfill our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should revise HHS's process for conducting improper payment risk assessments for Head Start to help ensure that it results in a reliable assessment of whether the program is susceptible to significant improper payments. This should include preparing sufficient documentation to support its risk assessments. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with this recommendation. In fiscal year 2019, HHS reported that it utilized Microsoft SharePoint to facilitate and begin to automate the Improper Payment Risk Assessment process. According to HHS, the SharePoint risk assessment form included the added ability to track the status of submissions and collect any applicable supporting documentation. Also, HHS stated that the Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources staff discussed the importance of maintaining supporting documentation during the fiscal year 2019 Improper Payment Risk Assessment Kick-Off meeting with HHS's operating divisions, and also built this feature into the SharePoint form. In fiscal year 2020, HHS reported that the implementation of the long-term solution to conducting improper payment risk assessments, the Risk Assessment Portal (previously called the Automated Improper Payment Framework), is underway and went into production in March 2020. Additionally, HHS indicated that it has revised its improper payment questionnaire and scoring process to ensure HHS performs a reliable assessment of susceptibility to significant improper payments. Also, HHS stated that it will leverage the Risk Assessment Portal, new questionnaire, and revised scoring process in the fiscal year 2020 risk assessment reporting period. Further, HHS stated that it is reviewing GAO reports and resources, capturing best practices from other agencies, and soliciting feedback from HHS's operating divisions to further improve its processes. Last, HHS stated that it will continue to develop policies, procedures, and supporting tools throughout calendar year 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should revise HHS's procedures for conducting improper payment risk assessments to help ensure that all programs and activities are assessed for susceptibility to significant improper payments at least once every 3 years, as required by IPIA. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with this recommendation. In fiscal year 2019, HHS reported that it utilized DATA Act information to create an inventory of programs and activities that could potentially be subject to improper payment risk assessment requirements. According to HHS, it developed a risk-based methodology for selecting programs and activities for review using the DATA Act files. Data fields within the DATA Act files allow HHS to further analyze the program and activity inventory. For example, the object class data enabled HHS to categorize the program's spending to provide insight into each program's unique risks. HHS stated that this methodology was used and documented in fiscal year 2019 but HHS plans to further refine and finalize this approach. In fiscal year 2020, HHS reported that its Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is currently reviewing the methodology as part of the Annual Inspector General review of HHS's improper payment reporting under the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2020. HHS stated that it will implement any feedback from the OIG, as well as lessons learned from the fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2020 risk assessment reporting period, in fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Attorney General should revise DOJ's process for conducting improper payment risk assessments for Law Enforcement to help ensure that it results in a reliable assessment of whether the program is susceptible to significant improper payments. This should include preparing sufficient documentation to support DOJ's risk assessments. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Justice (DOJ) did not concur with this recommendation. In January 2020, DOJ reiterated that it continues to not concur with the recommendation. DOJ stated that its risk assessment methodology provides DOJ management with a reasonable basis for determining whether the law enforcement program, as well as DOJ's other four mission-aligned programs, are susceptible to significant improper payments. In addition, DOJ reiterated that it continues to not concur with GAO's conclusion that DOJ's risk assessment documentation is not adequate. DOJ stated that its documentation meets all of the requirements in the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA), as amended, and the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) implementing guidance. Therefore, DOJ stated that it does not believe it would be a prudent use of limited resources to expand on the documentation that already exists. DOJ stated that notwithstanding its differences from GAO on the recommendation, it will continue to examine its risk assessment methodology. Finally, DOJ stated that its goal has been, and continues to be, meeting the requirements of IPIA, as amended, and OMB's implementing guidance in a cost effective manner. We continue to believe this recommendation is appropriate because DOJ's risk assessment documentation did not adequately demonstrate how DOJ determined the weighting of the risk factors or the numerical risk level ranges or whether a program is or is not susceptible to significant improper payments. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should ensure that the Director of the Census Bureau identifies and implements changes to align census field supervisor screening, authorities, and information flows to allow greater use of the census field supervisor position to provide supervisory support to enumerators. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In its February 2019 action plan, the Bureau indicated having updated the Census Field Supervisor hiring assessment to include questions on supervisory experience, in line with draft documentation provided near the end of our engagement. The Bureau also indicated that, by June 2019, it would communicate as part of supervisor training increased supervisory responsibilities and the need to more actively work with enumerators in answering casework questions. In August 2020, the Bureau informed us that the Bureau would not be altering the information flows for 2020 operations to ensure that census field supervisors receive the same guidance and procedural updates that managers within the area census office receive. To fully implement this recommendation for future fieldwork, the Bureau's planned or other actions will also need to demonstrate how the census field supervisors will have the information they need to carry out their responsibilities to provide supervisory support to enumerators.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should ensure that the Director of the Census Bureau enables area census offices to prepare targeted, mid-operation training or guidance as needed to address procedural changes or implementation issues encountered locally during Non-Response Follow-Up. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: In its February 2019 action plan, the Bureau indicated that it plans, by June 2019, to give area census offices (ACOs) the ability to distribute training and informational updates to their local workforces through the Operational Control System. As of January 2020, we are reviewing updated Bureau training documentation on planned mid-operation procedural changes. In April 2020, the Bureau informed us that ACOs would not be empowered during 2020 operations to deliver to their workforces standardized, mid-operation guidance that would be targeted to specific issues being observed locally in the field. Officials noted that they would revisit this issue after 2020 operations have concluded. To fully implement this recommendation for future fieldwork, the Bureau will need to demonstrate the ability of ACOs to identify procedural or other implementation issues encountered locally and develop some form of actionable guidance disseminated systematically to its workforce in near-real time.

Recommendation: The Administrator of USAID should establish additional controls to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information that USAID uses to monitor counter-trafficking in persons projects. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: USAID concurred with GAO's recommendation and has begun to take corrective action in response. In a March 11, 2019 letter to congressional committees, USAID noted its commitment to address GAO's recommendation through implementing additional controls for the agency's counter-trafficking in persons projects. Specifically, USAID commented that it was implementing data systems and taking additional steps intended to strengthen data management, improve record-keeping, increase data quality, and build capacity of local partners, with a target completion date of April 2020. As of January 2020, USAID officials noted that the agency has piloted its information management system, the Development Information Solution (DIS), in 7 USAID missions and is considering a strategy to deploy the DIS agency-wide by the end of 2021. According to USAID officials and documents, work has been completed to build DIS features that will help to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information, such as the ability to create and centrally manage customized indicators within DIS as well as centrally track and manage project activities, targets, and results. USAID has also updated its performance monitoring policy to require the completion of Performance Management Plans, within 3 months of completion of the mission's Country Development Cooperation Strategy, instead of the previously required 6 months. In addition, according to USAID officials and documents GAO reviewed, USAID and the Department of State's (State) Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources have developed additional administrative reports and processes that encourage increased ownership and review of data in the FACTSinfo NextGen system, the system of record for performance information related to the expenditure of foreign assistance funds. According to USAID officials and documents GAO reviewed, in order to improve quality control for this data, USAID and State will conduct a high level administrative review of the performance reporting process, including of the participation of key stakeholders in this process, beginning in March 2020. Once USAID provides additional information to GAO, including information on steps to more fully deploy the DIS and implement changes resulting from its review of the PPR process under its new grants management data system, GAO will determine whether USAID has established additional controls to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the CMO, with input from the human resources management team, requires that all DOD human resources providers adopt consistent time-to-hire measures, as one process for assessing performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and noted planned actions. DOD's Human Resources Reform Team has 3 objectives as part of its reform agenda, including civilian hiring improvements. DOD issued its initial plan for business operations reform in April 2019, which includes detailed information and timelines for actions carried out and planned for this reform team. It stated that the team would conduct an annual review of components' time-to-hire plans and work towards establishment of common DOD process and metrics for civilian hiring and establishing baselines and goals for quality metrics through the end of fiscal year 2019. Further, quarterly assessment of survey data using baseline quality metrics is planned to begin in early fiscal year 2020. DOD officials stated that a departmentwide Time-to-Hire Workgroup was established in March 2019 and conducted six workshops to develop a reengineered process map for civilian hiring and an associated implementation plan. Implementation is to occur along with a new IT system for civilian human resources that is expected to be deployed in fiscal year 2021, but we have not received documentation of the specific requirements for implementation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the CMO, through the human resources management reform team, identifies time frames and deliverables for identifying and adopting optimal IT solutions for human resources and fully assessing, identifying, and implementing the most effective and efficient means of human resources service delivery. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and noted planned actions. In its written comments, DOD stated the department is on track to achieve substantial savings through its reform team efforts and CMO emphasis on strong management practices, integrated processes, and best value business investments. DOD issued its initial plan for business operations reform in April 2019, which included detailed information regarding the department's plans for reforming its human resources service delivery. Subsequently, DOD identified 3 human resources management IT system reform projects aimed as identifying and adopting optimal IT systems for its overall civilian human resource management, the defense travel program, and overall training and learning. The reform management group has overseen these reform projects. DOD officials stated that it expects these optimal IT systems to be fully operational later in fiscal year 2020 and 2021. Further, DOD has identified timeframes throughout fiscal year 2023 for identifying and implementing an effective and efficient shared service delivery model for human resources. DOD has made considerable progress in identifying optimal IT systems and service delivery model for its human resources services, and we will continue to monitor the assessment and implementation of these systems and delivery models.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the CMO, through the human resources management reform team, collects information on the overhead costs charged by all DOD human resources service providers to assist in determining the most effective, economical, and efficient model of human resources service delivery within the department. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and noted planned actions. In its written comments, DOD stated the department is on track to achieve substantial savings through its reform team efforts and CMO emphasis on strong management practices, integrated processes, and best value business investments. DOD issued its initial plan for business operations reform in April 2019, which included detailed information regarding the department's plans for reforming its human resources service delivery. As part of this effort, DOD officials stated that the department has collected data and information on services, performance, and pricing to provide basis for common definitions and standards as they determine the most effective, economical, and efficient model of human resources service delivery. Further, efforts are continuing to develop a standardized costing model for human resources service delivery, which officials estimate will be approved for use by early fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the CMO routinely and comprehensively monitors and evaluates ongoing efficiency initiatives within the department, including those related to the reform teams. This monitoring should include establishing baselines from which to measure progress, periodically reviewing progress made, and evaluating results. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD submitted to Congress its initial plan for business operations reform. It included an initial plan, schedule, and cost estimate for conducting these reforms. The plan states that a reform initiative framework was implemented to track and report progress of initiatives, and that financial savings will be monitored by a validation process. In December 2019, DOD issued a follow-up report providing additional baseline estimates related to the four areas. DOD officials stated that a reform initiative framework has been implemented to track and report progress of initiatives and that financial savings will be monitored by a validation process. The charter for the Reform Management Group, issued February 2019, directs the governance body to reform and align business functions of the department as well as tracking the progress of those reform efforts. Further, DOD reported on baselines in its January 2020 report to Congress to fulfill the requirements of Section 921 from the FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act. As of June 2020, DOD provided a corrective action plan that details plans to further evaluate results and financial savings associated with its efficiency initiatives. We will continue to review DOD's efforts throughout the year to ensure this monitoring and evaluation is occurring.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense ensures that the Offices of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment in coordination with the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force take interim steps to help ensure that standardized aviation mishap data elements are collected by the safety centers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. According to a corrective action plan that DOD updated in July 2020, the department has taken some steps to implement this recommendation. According to the plan, DOD is developing standards for mishap data through the Safety and Information Management Working Group and is making progress towards finalizing mishap data element standards. DOD's internal tracking indicates that the draft business process model has been completed, but standardizing the DOD data elements is a work in-progress. DOD's estimated completion date for this effort is June 2021. Completing these actions would allow the military services' safety centers to collect relevant training-related data as part of the update of aviation mishap data elements, as GAO recommended in August 2018.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense ensures that the Offices of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment in coordination with the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force update department-wide and service instructions and policies to clarify the responsibility of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for conducting analysis and its access to the military services' information on human factors that contributed to aviation mishaps. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. According to a corrective action plan that DOD updated in July 2020, the department has taken some steps to implement this recommendation. According to the plan, DOD is revising DOD Instruction 6055.07, which will clarify the department's policy that it is the responsibility of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for conducting analysis and its access to the military services' information on human factors that contributed to aviation mishaps. DOD's estimated completion date for this effort is July 2021. Completing this action would clarify the Office of the Secretary of Defense's role for conducting analyses and access to the military services' safety centers' data on aviation mishaps, as GAO recommended in August 2018.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense ensures that the DOD Chief Management Officer in coordination with the offices of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force identify relevant training-related data to collect as part of any update of the aviation mishap data elements and incorporate these data into future analyses. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. According to a corrective action plan that DOD updated in July 2020, the department has taken some steps to implement this recommendation. According to the plan, DOD is developing standards for mishap data through the Safety and Information Management Working Group and is making progress towards finalizing mishap data element standards. DOD's internal tracking indicates that the draft business process model has been completed, but standardizing the DOD data elements is a work in-progress. DOD's estimated completion date for this effort is June 2021. Completing these actions would allow the military services' safety centers to collect relevant training-related data as part of the update of aviation mishap data elements, as GAO recommended in August 2018.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should establish numeric enrollment targets for healthcare.gov, to ensure it can monitor its performance with respect to its objectives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS does not concur with this recommendation. In October 2018, the agency noted that there are numerous external factors, such as the state of the economy and plan premiums, that may affect the number of people who decide to enroll in coverage. HHS also stated that it does not believe that numeric enrollment targets are relevant to assess the performance of objectives related to a successful open enrollment period. We continue to believe that the development of numeric enrollment targets is important for effective monitoring of the program and management of its resources. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided any additional information about steps to implement this recommendation. The status of this recommendation will be reconsidered once relevant action is taken.

Recommendation: Should the agency continue to focus on enhancing the consumer experience as a goal for the program, the Secretary of HHS should assess other aspects of the consumer experience, such as those it previously identified as key, to ensure it has quality information to achieve its goal. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurs with this recommendation, and in October 2018, stated that as it is looking for ways to improve the consumer experience, it will consider focusing its assessment on other aspects of the consumer experience as needed. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided evidence of any additional steps it had taken to improve the consumer experience. The status of this recommendation will be reconsidered once relevant action is taken.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in conjunction with the Secretaries of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Commanding General of SOCOM, clarify its guidance on perstempo thresholds as long as the statutory thresholds are waived by either establishing specific and measurable department-wide perstempo thresholds in DOD policy or ensuring that the Army, the Air Force, and the Marine Corps establish and follow their own service-specific guidance on thresholds. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department concurred with this recommendation. In July 2019, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD/P&R) issued a memo that, among other things, directed the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs to (1) direct the Military Departments to comply with reporting of the military personnel data and reporting requirements necessary to support the measurement and reporting of the perstempo of the military forces as laid out in DoDI 1336.07; and (2) develop threshold policies for perstempo events. In addition, it stated that the OUSD/P&R will chair a working group to refine optempo and perstempo policy proposals for inclusion into a formal policy document(s). In November 2019, the OUSD/P&R issued another memo that provided broad perstempo policy and emphasized adherence to modified guidance codified in DODI 1336.07, which as of July 2020 is undergoing DOD directives review for issuance. The OUSD/P&R memo further directed the military departments to provide service-level perstempo guidance, to include thresholds and compliance measures, for their components. We will continue to monitor these actions and update the status of our recommendation as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in conjunction with the Secretaries of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Commanding General of SOCOM, take steps to emphasize the collection of complete and reliable perstempo data so that DOD, the services, and SOCOM can monitor perstempo. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department concurred with this recommendation. In July 2019, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD/P&R) issued a memo that, among other things, directed the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) to develop policies for the accurate measurement and reporting of unit operational deployment data. In addition, the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) will (1) conduct department-wide coordination to develop the necessary technical capabilities for DOD to collect, monitor, and evaluate optempo and perstempo data; (2) develop procedures for perstempo and operational deployment data validation to ensure quality checks are conducted regularly and feedback mechanisms to the military departments for error detection and correction are in place, if necessary; and (3) ensure coordination efforts for optempo and perstempo data collection efforts do not duplicate or interfere with current systems collecting such information. In November 2019, the OUSD/P&R issued another memo that provided broad perstempo policy and emphasized adherence to modified guidance codified in DODI 1336.07, which as of July 2020 is undergoing DOD directives review for issuance. This memo and draft instruction provide direction on the reporting of perstempo events and emphasize the collection of complete and reliable perstempo data. Additionally, to enhance data processing and rectify data quality issues, DOD has drafted Uniformed Services Human Resources Information System Procedures, which is also undergoing DoD directives review for official issuance, and DMDC has worked with the services to make specific data improvements. We will continue to monitor for the issuance of the draft DODI and System Procedures and update the status of our recommendation as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should develop performance metrics and use them to evaluate the implementation of the least burdensome requirements, such as during its planned audits of medical device deficiency letters. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, FDA reported on efforts to increase device staff knowledge of least burdensome requirements and the implementation of a "least burdensome flag," which allows the submitter to flag a submission for FDA if it believes that the agency's request is not the least burdensome or that it was being held to an inappropriate review standard. In August 2020, FDA described its analysis of the flags, including the number of times it was used and the time it took to resolve them relative to FDA's goal. FDA indicated that it will continue to monitor the usage of the flag program to identify signals or trends that should be addressed. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should establish a milestone for the completion of government-wide performance measures for the quality of investigations. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. In August 2019, ODNI officials pointed to the Quality Assessment Reporting Tool as the mechanism to measure the quality of background investigations. However, officials also stated that they had not finalized collection of all required data to establish performance measures and, while QART contains a significant data sample size, the data call issued in January 2019 will provide additional information for comparative analysis to develop performance measures for the entire Executive Branch. Officials agreed that since DOD does not use QART, there needed to be ongoing discussions with them to ensure quality standards are met. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of OMB in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should conduct an evidence-based review of the investigation and adjudication timeliness objectives for completing the fastest 90 percent of initial secret and initial top secret security clearances.(Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. ODNI officials stated in August 2019 that Trusted Workforce 2.0 is specifically developing timeliness goals which are achievable and based on empirical evidence. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of OMB in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should develop a government-wide plan, including goals and interim milestones, to meet those timeliness objectives for initial personnel security clearance investigations and adjudications. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. In its August 2019 response on the status of this recommendation, ODNI officials stated that the transfer of background investigations from NBIB to DOD will provide an opportunity for the Executive Agents to reassess and address investigative timeliness issues and strengthen management of sensitive information. Moreover, they stated that Trusted Workforce 2.0 will give them the ability to significantly reduce the timelines required to deliver a Secret and Top Secret clearance. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should establish and follow a sound air station optimization process similar to its process for analyzing boat stations to allow it to comprehensively analyze its need for air stations and air facilities and determine what changes may be needed. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In 2017, GAO reported that a 2014 Coast Guard contracted analysis of selected air stations and air facilities identified overlap and unnecessary duplication but it did not comprehensively review all air stations and air facilities. The analysis determined that certain air facilities (Newport, Oregon, and Charleston, South Carolina) provided overlapping search and rescue coverage, some of which was unnecessarily duplicative. Coast Guard officials used the results of this analysis to support proposed closures of the air facilities in the President's Fiscal Year 2014 Budget. However, shortly before their planned closure date, the Coast Guard encountered strong opposition to the closures at the local, state, and Congressional levels, and did not close them. The Coast Guard agreed with GAO's recommendation that it establish and follow a sound air station optimization process and comprehensive analysis to determine what changes may be needed. In its December 2017 60-Day letter response, DHS said the Coast Guard will utilize the FY 2020 Planning, Programming, Budget, and Execution cycle to identify efficiencies in air station optimization and that the cycle is proceeding as planned. However, the response did not say whether the Coast Guard will act on findings and permanently close stations identified as overlapping, unnecessarily duplicative, and unnecessary, if any are identified. As of March 2020, the agency has identified the need for further analysis and estimates completion of these analyses in March 2021.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should establish a plan with target dates and milestones for closing boat stations that it has determined, through its 9-step process and subsequent analysis, provide overlapping search and rescue coverage and are unnecessarily duplicative. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In 2017, GAO reported that the Coast Guard has a sound process for analyzing its boat stations that includes clear and specific steps for analyzing the need for stations using terms that can be readily defined and measured. A 2013 analysis of Coast Guard stations identified unnecessary duplication and recommended certain stations that could be permanently closed without negatively affecting the Coast Guard's ability to meet its 2-hour search and rescue response standard and other mission requirements; however, as of August 2017 the Coast Guard had not closed any stations, nor developed a plan with time frames for closing stations even though leaders said the results of the analysis remain valid. Closing unneeded stations has historically been difficult due to public concern about the effect of closures on local communities and other factors. In some cases over the years, Congress has intervened and enacted federal laws that have affected Coast Guard's proposed closures. Nevertheless, the Coast Guard agreed with GAO's recommendation that it establish a plan with target dates and milestones for closing stations. In its December 2017 60-Day letter response, DHS said the Coast Guard Office of Boat Forces continues to evaluate the optimal number, location, and configuration of stations to better meet mission requirements, and is finalizing analysis of operational needs in Coast Guard Districts One (D1) and Five (D5). As of December 2019, the agency had completed additional analyses and reported that it was considering changes in operations for several stations. The Coast Guard estimated that it will continue to consider changes until spring 2020. However, the Coast Guard did not establish target dates or milestones for closing stations. By developing a plan with target dates and milestones for closing stations that are unnecessarily duplicative, the Coast Guard would be better positioned to improve operations and achieve cost savings over time.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should take action to close the stations identified according to its plan and target dates. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: In 2017, GAO reported that the Coast Guard has not taken action to implement the results of its analyses which recommended station closures even though it has completed requirements to pursue some station closures. For example, a 2013 analysis of Coast Guard stations identified unnecessary duplication and recommended certain stations that could be permanently closed without negatively affecting the Coast Guard's ability to meet its 2-hour search and rescue response standard and other mission requirements. However, as of August 2017 the Coast Guard had not closed any stations, nor developed a plan with time frames for closing stations even though Coast Guard leaders said the results of the analysis remain valid. GAO reported that the Coast Guard had not closed stations because past efforts to close stations (eight attempts since 1973) were met with resistance from affected communities and instances where the Congress intervened. Nevertheless, the Coast Guard agreed with GAO's recommendation that it establish a plan with target dates and milestones for closing stations. In its December 2017 60-Day letter response, DHS said that once analyses of the need for and locations of boat stations are completed for Coast Guard Districts One and Five, the Coast Guard will commence Congressional engagement and public outreach regarding any operational changes to D1 and D5 stations, if any, including processing feedback from stakeholders before making final decisions on recommended changes. As of December 2019, the Coast Guard reported that it was considering changes in operational status for several stations. The Coast Guard estimated that it will continue to consider changes until spring 2020, which, if implemented, will be more than 7 years after it proposed station closures. By closing unnecessarily duplicative stations, the Coast Guard could be better positioned to improve its operations and achieve cost savings over time.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to expand its performance measures for the 21st Century program to address all program objectives. Specifically, Education should establish performance measures related to key behavioral, including student attendance and disciplinary incidents, and socio-emotional outcomes.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations; rather, it generally noted that it will keep our recommendations in mind as it continues to implement changes in the program as a result of ESSA. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to conduct federal-level data checks on the accuracy of 21st Century program data submitted by states. Such checks could test for logical relationships between fields. Education should also publicly disclose and address any data limitations it identifies, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but stated that it was taking some actions to enhance program data. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to provide written, non-regulatory guidance to states on developing and conducting high-quality 21st Century state evaluations to help address the difficulties states face in measuring program performance and effectiveness.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but identified steps it plans to take to implement it. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to use the information it collects from its monitoring visits and ongoing interactions with states to share effective practices across states for sustaining their 21st Century programs once program funding ends. This information could be shared using existing mechanisms such as Education's meetings with 21st Century state coordinators.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but identified steps it plans to take to implement it. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: To mitigate the risk of poor acquisition outcomes and strengthen the department's investment decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Undersecretary for Management to update the acquisition policy to require that major acquisition programs' technical requirements are well defined and key technical reviews are conducted prior to approving programs to initiate product development and establishing Acquisition Program Baselines, in accordance with acquisition best practices.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments on this report, DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to initiate a study to assess how to better align its processes for technical reviews and acquisition decisions. Upon completion of the study, DHS updated its acquisition policy instruction in May 2019, which adjusted the acquisition life cycle. Specifically, the updated instruction requires programs to conduct key technical reviews--including a preliminary design review--prior to establishing the program's Acquisition Program Baseline. As of July 2020, DHS was in the process of updating the related policies and guidance for its Systems Engineering Life Cycle, which govern the department's technical reviews. GAO will review these policies and guidance once complete to confirm alignment with the changes made to the acquisition management instruction and will monitor DHS's implementation of its new acquisition life cycle to ensure the department's actions meet the intent of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the reliability and usefulness of program evaluations for agency program and budget decisions, the Chief Executive Officer of MCC, the Administrator of USAID, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in cooperation with State's Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and Health Diplomacy) should each develop a plan for improving the quality of evaluations for the programs included in our review, focusing on areas where our analysis has shown the largest areas for potential improvement.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In response to the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act (FATAA), the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) - Food Assistance Division (FAD) updated its Monitoring and Evaluation policy in February 2019. In addition, in May 2019, USDA provided GAO with a draft evaluation quality checklist (EQC) that the FAS - FAD will use to review draft evaluations. The checklist includes specific questions about the evaluation's design, methodology, findings, and conclusions, among other items. USDA FAS-FAD indicated that the criteria used in the checklist were developed in alignment with our report, the quality checklist developed for an assessment of USAID evaluations, and its own internal criteria. As of July 2019, the EQC was in internal clearance. In November 2019, USDA stated that it was piloting a draft of the EQC, however, a re-organization within USDA had affected the timetable for implementing it. USDA stated that it would wait to finalize the EQC until it was able to potentially adjust it to reflect any new duties or priorities under the agency re-organization. We will continue to follow-up with USDA FAS-FAD to determine whether the checklist has been finalized and implemented.

Recommendation: To better ensure that the evaluation findings reach their intended audiences and are available to facilitate incorporating lessons learned into future program design or budget decisions, the Chief Executive Officer of MCC should adjust MCC evaluation practices to make evaluation reports available within the timeframe required by MCC guidance.

Agency: Millennium Challenge Corporation
Status: Open

Comments: MCC concurred with the recommendation but noted that its then-forthcoming revised policy on monitoring and evaluation would state that "MCC expects to make each interim and final evaluation report publicly available as soon as practical after receiving the draft report." This revised guidance did not set a specific time frame for the reviews. In a letter provided to GAO in May 2017, MCC stated that it had initiated a re-design of its evaluation monitoring information system to provide MCC with detailed timelines of each component of the evaluation review and publication process. MCC provided additional information regarding actions taken in follow-up to our recommendations in April 2018. In December 2018, MCC provided GAO with a list of evaluation reports that had been released in calendar years 2017 and 2018. Of the 18 reports that were released in 2017 and 2018, 9 were released in six or fewer months after the date of the report and 9 were released more than six months after the date of the report. These review times represented only a modest improvement over what we found at the time of our report. In our report, we found that 6 of the 16 reports we examined were released within six months of MCC receiving the report, and 10 were released more than six months after MCC received the report. We requested an updated list of evaluation reports from MCC in January 2020 and will continue to review the timelines for release of reports.

Recommendation: To better ensure that the evaluation findings reach their intended audiences and are available to facilitate incorporating lessons learned into future program design or budget decisions, the Secretary of Agriculture should implement guidance and procedures for making FAS evaluations available online and searchable on a single website that can be accessed by the general public.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) - Food Assistance Division (FAD)'s updated Monitoring and Evaluation policy required that all final versions of USDA evaluation reports be made publicly available on the FAS website and that evaluators provide a copy of the evaluation reports that is free of personally identifiable and proprietary information. As of May 2019, USDA has published seven non-sensitive evaluations on the publicly available Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) website. As of July 2019, FAS was drafting internal standard operating procedures (SOPs) for making future and past evaluations publicly available on the DEC. In November 2019, USDA stated that it was piloting a draft of the SOPs, however, a re-organization within USDA had affected the timetable for implementing them. USDA stated that it would wait to finalize the SOPs until it was able to potentially adjust them to reflect any new duties or priorities under the agency re-organization. We will continue to follow-up with USDA FAS-FAD to determine whether the SOPs have been finalized and implemented.

Recommendation: Given DOT's new discretionary grant programs and similar challenges we have found with previous DOT programs, the Secretary of Transportation should issue a directive that governs department-wide and modal administration discretionary grant programs. Such a directive should include requirements to: (1) develop a plan for evaluating project proposals in advance of issuing a notice of funding availability that defines the stages of the process, including how the process will be overseen to ensure a consistent review of applications; (2) document key decisions, including the reason for any rating changes and the officials responsible for those changes, and how high-level concerns raised during the process were addressed; and (3) align stated program purpose and policy priorities with the evaluation and selection process.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and, in March 2019, issued a memo directing secretarial offices and operating administrations involved in awarding discretionary grants to implement our recommendations and to include them in their policies and procedures. In June 2019, we reported that, due to a number of issues, it is unclear how this action will address our recommendation. For example, we found that the memo was essentially limited to a repetition of our recommendation and that DOT did not take steps to ensure that the various affected offices consistently interpret and implement the recommendation. DOT officials told us they wanted to provide the affected offices flexibility to implement the recommendation, but that the Department would assess the need for additional guidance based on revisions to its Financial Assistance Guidance Manual. DOT completed these revisions effective January 2020, and all affected offices are expected to complete developing their policies and procedures by May 2020. We will continue to monitor the Department's actions and assess the extent to which they address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To determine whether CSA interventions influence motor carrier safety performance, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to identify and implement, as appropriate, methods to evaluate the effectiveness of individual intervention types or common intervention patterns to obtain more complete, appropriate, and accurate information on the effectiveness of interventions in improving motor carrier safety performance. In identifying and implementing appropriate methods, FMCSA should incorporate accepted practices for designing program effectiveness evaluations, including practices that would enable FMCSA to more confidently attribute changes in carriers' safety behavior to CSA interventions.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: FMCSA has reviewed the methodology for its effectiveness model and identified many of the same limitations GAO discussed in its report. FMCSA also identified several approaches to address these limitations, including modifying its model to measure individual intervention types. However, as of July 2020, FMCSA had not implemented any of its proposed approaches.

Recommendation: To enable FMCSA management to monitor the agency's progress in achieving its effectiveness and efficiency outcomes for CSA interventions and balance priorities, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to establish and use performance measures to regularly monitor progress toward both FMCSA's effectiveness outcome and its efficiency outcome.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) plans to establish an inventory of effectiveness and efficiency measures and monitor performance on an ongoing basis. FMCSA is working to modify its model to measure the effectiveness of individual intervention types. However, as of July 2020, it had not implemented any of its proposed modifications.

Recommendation: To help ensure Interior can hire, retain, and train staff it needs to provide effective oversight of oil and gas activities on federal lands and waters, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget to annually evaluate the bureaus' training programs, including: (1) staff training needs, (2) training effectiveness, and (3) potential opportunities for the bureaus to share training resources.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2017, Interior officials said the bureaus were developing, or had developed, the means by which they would assess their training needs and review, evaluate, and update their training programs for technical staff. Interior also told GAO that as part of its quarterly review of performance data, the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget will ensure that BLM, BSEE and BOEM are coordinating their training needs. Interior officials said that their Office of Strategic Employment and Organizational Development will validate the bureaus' active engagement in this activity and provide support in the fulfillment of this recommendation where needed. In February 2018, Interior officials said the agency had examined results from the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey to gauge how the bureaus' training program activities were being perceived by their workforce. In July 2019, Interior officials said they were looking at opportunities to share training resources, and that they would add in their scope an evaluation of training needs and effectiveness. However, as of March 2020, Interior had not provided us with evidence that it has conducted an evaluation of training needs, training effectiveness and sharing training resources.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of Commerce did not meet the following software application inventory practice: regularly updates the inventory with quality controls to ensure reliability. Specifically, the department did not provide evidence of a process to regularly update its inventory or quality controls to ensure the reliability of the data collected. In October 2017, the department reported that application inventory information will be captured through the Department of Commerce Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) system, as part of its regular updating of investment information. Further, the department stated that it will update its CPIC handbook to provide guidance on quality control to ensure reliability of the data collected. In November 2018 and November 2019 we followed-up with Commerce on the status of their efforts; however, as of January 2020, we had not received an update. We plan to continue to follow up with Commerce to monitor the status of these planned actions.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of Energy partially met the following three software application inventory practices, (1) includes systems from all organizational components, (2) specifies basic application attributes, and (3) is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure reliability. In May 2017, the department reported that it plans to implement automated monitoring and inventory tools by the end of fiscal year 2020, which it expects will address the key practices. In December 2019, the department reported that it anticipates completing a refresh of its application inventory by the end of February 2020. We plan to monitor the department's efforts to implement the tools and to develop a complete application inventory.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) partially met the following three software application inventory practices, (1) includes systems from all organizational components, (2) specifies basic application attributes, and (3) is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure reliability. In June 2017, the department reported that it is working to identify applications in field offices, and planned for this effort to be completed in fiscal year 2018. In addition, the department stated it planned to update the inventory to include business functions for each system by the end of fiscal year 2017. Further, department officials stated that to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the application inventory, the department planned to conduct quarterly portfolio reviews starting in fiscal year 2018. In October 2018, HUD officials reported that CTO performed a technical assessment of HUD's IT assets, which resulted in identifying systems in the inventory that had been decommissioned and will be decommissioned. In addition, the department provided its strategy for performing the assessment. In August 2019, HUD reported that it completed an assessment of its legacy applications and the current inventory system is outdated. However, as of January 2020, HUD had not yet provided an updated inventory. We plan to continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Social Security Administration (SSA) partially met the following two software application inventory practices, (1) includes systems from all organizational components, and (2) regularly updates the inventory with quality controls to ensure reliability. In March 2017, SSA officials reported that the agency's Office of Systems and Office of Operations continue to collaborate on integrating application information into the Enterprise Application Inventory. The officials reported that regionally developed applications that have been granted authority to operate have been imported into the enterprise application inventory. In addition, the officials stated that the Office of Operations was in the process of redesigning their repository to accommodate requirements to support the Enterprise Application Inventory, including the ability to update and maintain application information in the enterprise repository. Lastly, SSA officials reported that its Office of Information Security and Office of Systems were continuing to work to identify additional headquarters applications and develop process and automation to include applications in the inventory. In June 2019, SSA officials reported that they were continuing to make progress to update the inventory to include systems from all organizational components. However, as of January 2020, we had not received an updated inventory. We will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to develop a complete application inventory.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of Labor did not meet one software application inventory practice, and partially met three practices. Specifically, we reported that the department did not meet the practice to ensure that the inventory is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure reliability, and partially met the practices to (1) include business and enterprise IT systems, (2) include systems from all organizational components, and (3) specify basic application attributes. In March 2018, department officials provided an updated inventory, which included business and enterprise IT systems from all organizational components, and specified basic attributes, including the name, owner, and business function. In addition, officials stated that they plan to update the inventory on a periodic basis as necessary, at minimum annually, as part of the department's IT budgeting process. Further, in June 2019, officials reported that the department performs biannual reviews of all IT investments and associated systems and applications to verify reported data. The officials also reported that the department uses quality control processes and procedures to ensure consistent, standard, and complete reporting to align with all investment artifacts. However, the department did not provide evidence of these data quality efforts. In June 2019, officials also reported that the department is implementing a new system in order to maintain an ongoing comprehensive inventory of all IT assets, including applications, which it expects to have fully operational by the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of the Treasury had partially met the following two practices for establishing a complete software application inventory, (1) specifies basic application attributes, and (2) is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure reliability. In September 2017, the department provided evidence showing that it had taken steps to address these practices. Specifically, the department provided an export of its inventory, which showed that most of the systems listed contained a system description. According to department officials, some systems do not have a system description because the department's inventory policy allows bureaus to attach documents to the inventory, which include the system description, instead of populating the system description field. Further, the policy does not require a system description for systems in the disposal state. Moreover, the inventory did not include the business segment or function that the system supports. According to Treasury officials, the Bureau and Functional Unit fields within the inventory allow the department to map the systems to the business segments that they support. We followed up with the department to obtain this mapping. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided it. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to ensure that the inventory is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure its reliability.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Department of State partially met the following software application inventory practices: (1) specifies basic application attributes; and (2) is regularly updated with quality controls to ensure reliability. Specifically, we reported that while the inventory included basic application attributes (e.g. name, description), it did not include the business function for the majority of inventory entries. Further, we reported that the agency did not provide evidence that quality control processes were in place to ensure the reliability of the data in the inventory. In July 2017, department officials stated that the department recently began a department-wide data call to obtain information on all IT assets and applications from each bureau, including aligning the assets and applications to a business function. Further, officials stated that they plan to analyze the results against their current data to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the IT asset inventory. In June 2019, the department provided evidence demonstrating that its inventory includes the business function for IT assets. In addition, State officials stated that the IT asset inventory that is posted internally for review is a high-level summary to facilitate monthly validation. However, as of January 2020, the department has not provided documentation showing that it has implemented the quality control processes to ensure the reliability of the data. We plan to continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Environmental Protection Agency had fully met three of the four practices to establish a complete application inventory, and partially met one. Specifically, the agency partially met the practice for including application attributes in the inventory, as although EPA did not identify the business function for every application. In December 2019, Environmental Protection Agency officials stated that the inventory now requires the business function to be included, and provided inventory update instructions that show the business function is to be included. In addition, agency officials provided instructions for senior information managers to update the inventory in fiscal year 2019. However, as of January 2020, agency officials had not provided an updated inventory, and thus we were not able to verify that the business function was added for all applications. We will follow up with the agency to obtain the updated inventory.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; and heads of the Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Office of Personnel Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and U.S. Agency for International Development should direct their Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and other responsible officials to improve their inventories by taking steps to fully address the practices we identified as being partially met or not met.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: We reported that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) partially met the software application inventory practice to regularly update the inventory with quality controls to ensure reliability. In November 2016, OPM officials stated that they were validating the data in the application inventory. In addition, officials stated that they were making progress in using automated scanning tools to update the inventory, including coordinating with the General Services Administration's Software Management Group which is working to standardize the use of automated inventory tools across the government. In June 2017, November 2018, and November 2019, we followed up with OPM to obtain documentation of these reported actions; however, as of January 2020, the agency had not yet provided supporting documentation. We are continuing to follow up with OPM to obtain documentation of its reported actions.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, the Interior, and Labor; and the Director of the National Science Foundation should direct the CIOs and other responsible officials to modify existing investment management processes to address applications more completely. Specifically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the responsible official to modify the department's existing processes to collect and review cost, technical, and business information for the enterprise and business IT systems within the Enterprise Information Environment Mission Area applications which are currently not reviewed as part of the department's process for business systems.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense did not concur with our recommendation, noting, among other things, in its written response to our draft report, that a majority of the Enterprise Information Environment Mission Area systems are IT infrastructure, and not applications. However, we reported that the mission area nevertheless included a large number of enterprise and business IT applications which could benefit from rationalization, and we therefore believed our recommendation was still warranted. In March 2020, the department stated that it is formalizing a guide to assist components with implementing an application rationalization process, that will be used to rationalize the Enterprise Information Environment Mission Area systems. The department stated that it plans to perform annual reviews, and expects to start by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, the Interior, and Labor; and the Director of the National Science Foundation should direct the CIOs and other responsible officials to modify existing investment management processes to address applications more completely. Specifically, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the department's CIO to identify one high-cost function it could collect detailed cost, technical, and business information for and modify existing processes to collect and review this information.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2018, DHS officials stated that they identified FOIA systems as a high cost function, and will modify existing processes to collect and review the cost, technical, and business information. In November 2019, DHS reported that it is continuing to make progress in acquiring a new enterprise-wide FOIA system by reviewing current capabilities. We plan to continue to monitor the department's efforts.

Recommendation: To improve federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of applications, the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, the Interior, and Labor; and the Director of the National Science Foundation should direct the CIOs and other responsible officials to modify existing investment management processes to address applications more completely. Specifically, the Secretary of Labor should direct the department's CIO to consider a segmented approach to further rationalize and identify a function for which it would modify existing processes to collect and review application-specific cost, technical, and business value information.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2017, department officials stated that the department's portfolio of IT investments, which includes the systems, sub-systems, and applications in the IT asset inventory, are rationalized bi-annually as part of the Office of the Chief Information Officer's IT Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) review processes. Further, officials stated that the systems and applications were also being rationalized as part of the process for updating the IT asset inventory. Officials stated that the department plans to review and update the department's CPIC guide to describe the IT asset inventory management process including the basic quality controls. In July 2019, officials reported that the department plans to have the updated guide completed by the end of fiscal year 2019. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided documentation supporting these efforts. We plan to follow-up with the department to obtain documentation of its efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to more fully implement key practices and meet requirements and to better institutionalize standards and practices, the Secretary of HUD should establish a process and schedule for regularly reviewing, revising, and updating HUD's human capital strategic plan, strategic workforce plan, and succession plan.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating human capital, workforce, and succession plans.

Recommendation: In order to more fully implement key practices and meet requirements and to better institutionalize standards and practices, the Secretary of HUD should establish a process and schedule for reviewing and updating policies and procedures to help ensure that policies and procedures for key management functions remain current and complete.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating policies and procedures for key management functions.

Recommendation: To improve DOE's ability to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of policies that call for all organizations, including contractors, to embrace a strong safety culture and create a work environment that encourages a questioning attitude by all employees, the Secretary of Energy should develop and implement an independent evaluation process for routinely and accurately measuring contractor employees' willingness to raise safety and other concerns without fear of retaliation. This process should ensure that an independent third party develops, conducts, and consistently applies the evaluation methodology--which should include safeguards that protect anonymity. The process should also enable DOE to oversee and ensure that appropriate corrective actions are taken in response to evaluation results.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. DOE has developed a plan to analyze tools utilized by site contractors to determine the viability of using the data to monitor the influence of work environment on employees' willingness to raise safety concerns. As of March 2020, DOE had completed assessments of safety culture sustainment tools and drafted a report. According to officials, the draft report is undergoing final review and officials anticipate issuing the report by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: To help ensure that the organizational placement and practices of DOE- and contractor- provided Employee Concerns Programs (ECP) do not inhibit contractor employees from raising safety and other concerns, the Secretary of Energy should revise DOE's ECP order and guidance to (1) require that the organizational placement and practices of contractor ECP's do not compromise or impair their independence, (2) clarify the circumstances under which DOE's ECP is permitted to transfer and refer concerns to contractors, and notify or require approval of the contractor employee raising the concern, and (3) provide criteria for overseeing and evaluating the effectiveness and independence of contractor-provided ECPs.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. DOE issued its revised order on the employee concerns program (ECP) in January 2019. However, that order did not address all three issues raised in our recommendation. Specifically, the order states that it is a best practice for contractor ECP managers to report to a designated executive in the contractor management chain, but does not include information on concerns of independence. Additionally, there is instruction that ECP managers must assess programs and how often, but there is not specific criteria for overseeing and evaluating effectiveness or independence. As of May 2020, we are continuing to discuss these issues with DOE officials.

Recommendation: To help ensure that Congress has the information it needs as it considers whether or not to make permanent the enhanced whistleblower pilot program and that DOE has assurance that contractor employees have an effective mechanism to seek remedy for unlawful retaliation, the Secretary of Energy should fully evaluate the extent to which the pilot program has been implemented and whether its provisions will mitigate challenges associated with DOE's 708 program. This evaluation should include, at a minimum, an assessment of (1) contractors that have adopted the pilot program and the date they did so; (2) contractors that have not adopted the pilot program and an explanation of why not; (3) cases filed under the pilot program, if any; and (4) the pilot program's potential for mitigating challenges associated with the 708 program.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred in principle with the recommendation. In response, the Office of Hearings and Appeals conducted a review of the Part 708 program that addressed three of the four items identified in the recommendation. As of May 2020, we are continuing to work with DOE on whether or how it plans to assess the contractors that have adopted the pilot program and the date they did so.

Recommendation: To help improve DOE's ability to take enforcement action against unlawful retaliation when appropriate and take action against contractors that create a chilled work environment, the Secretary of Energy should revise DOE's Integrated Safety Management policy and guidance to clarify what constitutes evidence of a chilled work environment and define the appropriate steps DOE should take to hold contractors accountable for creating a chilled work environment.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. In January 2018, DOE issued a revision to DOE Policy 450.4A. The revised policy states that organizations should foster a culture that allows employees to "feel free to raise safety concerns without fear of retaliation...and supporting a questioning attitude concerning safety by all employees." However, the policy does not define the appropriate steps DOE should take to hold contractors accountable for creating a chilled work environment. As of May 2020, we are continuing to work with DOE to determine whether they plan to make additional changes to the policy to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To help improve reporting of emissions data on the OGOR, the Secretary of the Interior should direct BLM to provide additional guidance on how to estimate natural gas emissions from federal oil and gas leases.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2018, BLM's "Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation; Rescission or Revision of Certain Requirements" rule (43 C.F.R. 3179.301) took effect, revising the 2016 rule. According to BLM in July 2020, the revision satisfies the intent of the recommendation because the rule specifies the acceptable means of estimation or measurement of vented or flared gas. The rule says the operator may estimate or measure vented gas in accordance with applicable state or tribal regulatory agency rules or regulations, estimate using the gas to oil ratio (GOR) test (which, during GAO's review, some BLM officials said was not accurate), or to "measure" the volume of the flared gas. We do not believe the revised rule provides sufficient additional specificity on how natural gas emissions should be estimated by operators.

Recommendation: To help improve reporting of emissions data on the OGOR, the Secretary of the Interior should direct ONRR to provide additional guidance on how to differentiate between combusted and noncombusted lease use volumes reported on the OGOR, which could assist Interior in measuring its progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, ONRR reported that it developed and implemented two disposition codes--one for the royalty-bearing flaring of gas and another for the royalty-bearing venting of gas volumes. ONRR did not develop additional disposition codes because, according to BLM, other disposition codes would not be required due to BLM's 2018 revision of the methane rule. However, we do not believe the measurement provisions in the revised methane rule contain any specific provisions requiring reporting for combusted and non-combusted lease use gas. Gas could be used on lease in pneumatic valves, which is released into the atmosphere as methane; or combusted to power up generators, where it's released as carbon dioxide. Knowing whether the emissions are in the form of methane or carbon dioxide is critical to helping Interior accurately estimate greenhouse gas emissions.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should take the steps needed to include category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System and add agreement state category 3 licenses to the Web-based Licensing System as quickly as reasonably possible.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation was expected to consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended not including category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System. They also recommended not adding agreement state category 3 licenses to the Web-based Licensing System. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should at least until such time that category 3 licenses can be verified using the License Verification System, require that transferors of category 3 quantities of radioactive materials confirm the validity of a would-be purchaser's radioactive materials license with the appropriate regulatory authority before transferring any category 3 quantities of licensed materials.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation was expected to consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended not requiring transferors of category 3 quantities of radiological material to confirm the validity of licenses prior to transferring any category 3 quantities of these materials. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should, as part of the ongoing efforts of NRC working groups meeting to develop enhancements to the prelicensing requirements for category 3 licenses, consider requiring that an on-site security review be conducted for all unknown applicants of category 3 licenses to verify that each applicant is prepared to implement the required security measures before taking possession of licensed radioactive materials.

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, NRC issued a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) "Proposed Staff Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Accountability," (SRM-COMJMB-16-0001) and directed NRC staff to take specific actions to evaluate whether it is necessary to revise NRC regulations or processes governing source protection and accountability for category 3 sources. Among other things, this re-evaluation will consider GAO's recommendations. In August 2017, NRC staff completed its analysis and provided recommendations to the NRC Commissioners. (Most of this analysis is available on NRC's website.) In its analysis, the NRC staff recommended requiring all safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license to a previously unknown entity. This requirement would apply to all unknown entities applying for a radioactive material license regardless of the quantity of licensed material requested. If NRC took this action, it would fully address this recommendation. As of January 2020, the NRC Commissioners have yet to take action on the staff analysis.

Recommendation: To ensure efficient use of federal resources, the Administrator of CMS should account for Medicaid payments a hospital has received that offset uncompensated care costs when determining hospital uncompensated care costs for the purposes of making Medicare UC payments to individual hospitals.

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

Comments: No executive action taken as of March 2020. CMS initially agreed with GAO's June 2016 recommendation. However, in October 2018, and again in December 2019 , CMS indicated that it was reconsidering whether to offset Medicare Uncompensated Care (UC) payments by Medicaid's uncompensated care payments. CMS stated that because Medicare UC payments are distributed based on hospitals' relative (not actual) uncompensated care costs, it would not be appropriate to account for Medicaid payments that reduce hospital uncompensated care. However, in some states Medicaid payments reduce or even eliminate hospital uncompensated care costs, which can result in an inequitable distribution of payments. Because the total amount of Medicare UC payments is capped, not accounting for Medicaid payments will result in hospitals that have little or no uncompensated care costs receiving a higher proportion of Medicare UC payments than warranted, resulting in in less funding for hospitals that actually have uncompensated care costs. Implementing GAO's recommendation would ensure that Medicare UC payments are based on accurate levels of uncompensated care costs and result in CMS better targeting billions of dollars in Medicare UC payments to hospitals that do have with the most uncompensated care costs, while avoiding making payments to hospitals with little or no uncompensated care costs.

Recommendation: To help IRS improve its process for determining IT funding priorities and to provide timely information on the progress of its investments, the Commissioner of IRS should direct the Chief Technology Officer to establish, document, and implement policies and procedures for selecting new and reselecting ongoing business systems modernization activities, consistent with IRS's process for prioritizing operations support priorities, which addresses (1) prioritization and comparison of IT assets against each other, (2) criteria for making selection and prioritization decisions, and (3) ensuring IRS executives' final funding decisions on IT proposals are based on IRS's prioritization process.

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

Comments: In September 2018, IRS provided GAO a slide deck titled "Prioritization Process for the Business Systems Modernization (BSM) Program/Projects" which describes a process for prioritizing BSM investments and capabilities within the investments. However, the slides were labeled "pre-decisional." In addition, they did not include specific procedures for prioritizing investments. In April 2020, IRS informed us that it had moved its target for fully implementing the recommendation to November 2020. We will continue to monitor IRS's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help IRS improve its process for determining IT funding priorities and to provide timely information on the progress of its investments, the Commissioner of IRS should direct the Chief Technology Officer to modify existing processes for Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and Return Review Program (RRP) for measuring work performed by IRS staff to incorporate best practices, including accounting for actual work performed and using the level of effort measure sparingly.

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

Comments: In May 2018, IRS told GAO it had implemented the recommendation. As supporting evidence, the agency provided an April 2018 update to its Investment Performance Tool user guide along with briefing slides specifying actions taken to modify its processes to measure work performed by IRS staff. We reviewed the evidence provided and determined that it was not sufficient to close the recommendation as implemented. Specifically, while the Investment Performance Tool user guide included updated procedures for measuring work performed by IRS staff which aligned with best practices, it did not clearly state that earned value (or work performed) during an iteration should always be based on to the percentage of planned features or user stories that were completed for that iteration. In addition, IRS did not provide evidence that it had used its updated procedures for the Return Review Program investment. We followed up with IRS to obtain this documentation. The agency subsequently provided the requested documentation to us and, as of July 2020, we were reviewing it to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure that biosurveillance-related funding is directed to programs that can demonstrate their intended capabilities, and to help ensure sufficient information is known about the current Gen-2 system to make informed cost-benefit decisions about possible upgrades and enhancements to the system, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs and other relevant officials within the Department to not pursue upgrades or enhancements to the current BioWatch system until the Office of Health Affairs (OHA): (1) establishes technical performance requirements, including limits of detection, necessary for a biodetection system to meet a clearly defined operational objective for the BioWatch program by detecting attacks of defined types and sizes with specified probabilities; (2) assesses the Gen-2 system against these performance requirements to reliably establish its capabilities; and (3) produces a full accounting of statistical and other uncertainties and limitations in what is known about the system's capability to meet its operational objectives.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS told us in June, 2019 that it terminated the Biodetection Technology Enhancements program to enhance BioWatch. Additionally, DHS is transitioning to a new acquisition program called BioDetection 21 intended to replace BioWatch. We will update the status of this recommendation as we obtain more information about DHS's BioDetection 21 acquisition efforts and the extent to which these efforts are consistent with our recommendation.

Recommendation: To help reduce the risk of acquiring immature detection technologies, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, to use the best practices outlined in this report to inform test and evaluation actions for any future upgrades or changes to technology for BioWatch.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS told us in June, 2019 that it terminated the Biodetection Technology Enhancements program to enhance BioWatch. Additionally, DHS is transitioning to a new acquisition program called BioDetection 21 intended to replace BioWatch. We will update the status of this recommendation as we obtain more information about DHS's BioDetection 21 acquisition efforts and the extent to which these efforts are consistent with our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the internal control environment for oversight using information from CAS and develop a consistent approach to the use of information from CAS in M&O contractor oversight and performance evaluation across the nuclear security enterprise, the Administrator of NNSA should establish comprehensive NNSA policies and guidance, beyond a general framework as included in NAP-21, for using information from CAS to conduct oversight of M&O contractors, clarifying whether CAS is to cover mission-related activities, and describing how to conduct assessments of risk, CAS maturity, and the level of the contractor's past performance.

Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: We recommended that NNSA establish comprehensive policies and guidance, beyond a general framework, for using information from contractor assurance systems (CAS) to conduct oversight of management and operating (M&O) contractors, clarifying whether CAS is to cover mission-related activities and describing how to conduct assessments of risk, CAS maturity, and the level of the contractor's past performance. NNSA agreed with the recommendation and has taken an important step to revise its policy. However, NNSA needs to take additional action. Specifically, NNSA approved a revised corporate site governance policy in August 2016, and NNSA further revised its policy in October 2019. The revised policy improves on the agency's prior policy by clarifying one element in our recommendation that CAS is to cover mission-related activities. However the policy is still a general framework and NNSA has not established associated implementing guidance. Specifically, NNSA needs to develop guidance for NNSA headquarters' and field offices' procedures to use information from CAS and appropriately balance use of information from CAS with other more direct activities to oversee M&O contractors. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.