Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Management should develop and implement a mechanism to compare component marine operating costs across components and locations, including a cost per vessel underway (float) hour methodology (Recommendation 1).

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 of Commerce, in consultation with the department-level Executive Resources Board and Office of Executive Resources, should fully implement policy and guidance in development that require the bureaus to maintain career SES reassignment-related documentation in the SES member's Official Personnel Folder, and to provide those documents to the Office of Executive Resources for review and approval before making career SES reassignments. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on a draft of this report, Commerce concurred with the recommendation and indicated it will take steps to implement the recommendation. We will continue to monitor Commerce's progress.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should establish a date to finalize its draft standard operating procedures for conducting career SES reassignments, and ensure that the final procedures include (1) obtaining a written moratorium waiver from the career SES member before making the reassignment during the new, noncareer supervisor moratorium, and (2) retaining the waiver in the member's Official Personnel Folder. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on the draft of the report, HUD said it finalized standard operating procedures for making career SES reassignments, and thus believes it has addressed our recommendation. We will follow up with the department to assess whether its actions fully address the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Acting Director of the Office of Personnel Management should use OPM's oversight authority to monitor career SES reassignments to ensure that federal agencies meet requirements contained in statute or regulation, and follow OPM's related guidance. In situations where OPM finds that an agency has taken a career SES reassignment action contrary to these requirements, it should use its authority to require the agency to take corrective action, as appropriate. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM did not concur with our recommendation. In its comment on a draft of the report, OPM said it relies on federal agencies to comply with provisions governing SES reassignments. OPM further stated that it has chosen not to make reassignments a focus of its enforcement efforts, in light of scarce resources and other mandates OPM is required to meet. However, for reasons discussed in the report, we maintain that OPM should use its oversight authority to ensure agencies' reassignments of SES staff are consistent with requirements. We will continue to monitor OPM's progress.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for Mission Support assesses and addresses the causes of data errors and inconsistent entries in MISLE as identified by program offices and MISLE users, including reviewing MISLE training and data validation processes. (Recommendation 1)

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

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

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for Mission Support uses the results of its 2019 Standardization Team assessment of command centers to develop a plan for improving the consistency and accuracy of MISLE data identified in its report. (Recommendation 2)

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

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

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for Mission Support and the Deputy Commandant for Operations use the processes outlined in the SELC to identify needed enhancements across the MISLE system by developing an updated mission needs statement. (Recommendation 3)

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

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

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for Mission Support and the Deputy Commandant for Operations use the processes outlined in the SELC to identify and analyze alternatives, and objectively select the preferred solution for MISLE to meet approved mission needs. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
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 Acquisition and Sustainment implements DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant DOD guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will oversee updates to relevant guidance related to supply processes and that they anticipate the updates to be complete by May 31, 2021. The department further noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will ensure updates are made to the acquisition policies, when and if appropriate. However, the department stated that its Adaptive Acquisition Framework currently provides all of the necessary flexibility required. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Army guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Army should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Army would update, as appropriate, Army guidance related to acquisition and supply upon updates to DOD's climate adaptation directive and other applicable DOD or federal regulations. However, DOD noted that it does not plan to update its acquisition guidance in response to our recommendation that DOD do so. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Navy guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Navy should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Department of the Navy had suggested that the recommendation be restated to recommend that the Department of the Navy ensure that its guidance and procedures are updated to align with DOD's directive on climate adaptation upon issuance of an updated directive. However, DOD has not identified any plans to update its directive on climate change adaptation. Thus, we continue to believe that the Department of the Navy should update its guidance related to acquisition and supply to incorporate the current guidance in DOD's climate adaptation directive, which it has not yet done. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Air Force guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Air Force should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Air Force will work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the other military services to develop specific policies that address climate-related risks to DOD contractors. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretaries of the military departments, and any other governmental and private-sector partners, as appropriate, determine what approaches may be feasible in conducting mission assurance related assessments of commercially owned facilities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that formal mission assurance assessments are limited in scope in order to provide additional rigor to protect DOD's most critical capabilities. However, the department stated that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy would work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment's Defense Contract Management Agency to better understand DOD's commercial dependencies. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretaries of the military departments, and any other governmental and private-sector partners, as appropriate, issue new or update existing guidance, based upon the determination of what approaches may be feasible, to clarify the steps that DOD officials involved in the mission assurance process may take to apply the mission assurance framework to commercially owned facilities, as appropriate, to include consideration of risks related to climate change and extreme weather. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that it concurs with the need to clarify steps that officials may take to apply the mission assurance framework to defense critical infrastructure and critical defense industrial base commercially owned facilities, to include consideration of risks related to climate change and extreme weather. However, the department further noted that it does not concur with doing this for all commercial facilities because conducting such assessments for all commercially owned facilities falls outside the capacity and authority of DOD to conduct mission assurance assessments. However, we had not recommended they conduct such assessments for all commercial facilities. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should establish outcome-oriented performance measures to assess the effectiveness of the reorganization. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should develop an implementation plan for the reorganization that includes milestones and deliverables to track and communicate implementation progress. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should complete a strategic workforce plan that addresses how it will recruit for and fill vacant positions resulting from the relocations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should ensure its bureau leadership incorporates key practices for effective agency reforms prior to implementing reorganization activities at other Interior bureaus. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner, in conjunction with the DHS Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer, should develop and implement a plan to ensure that CBP executes its Facility Condition Assessments (FCA) program by conducting FCAs at each CBP-owned land border crossing consistent with DHS Directive 119-02-004. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in March 2020, provided a plan for conducting FCAs at some, but not all, CBP-owned land border crossings. According to officials, CBP will update this plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings and may coordinate with the DHS Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer to ensure the plan is consistent with DHS Directive 119-02-004. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should complete the FCA plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should share FCA reports with GSA and use facility condition information in GSA's Building Assessment Tool to inform FCAs. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in February 2020, GSA confirmed that it received FCA reports from CBP for GSA-owned land border crossings. GSA also confirmed that it provided CBP with a spreadsheet containing data from GSA Building Assessment Tools. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is using GSA Building Assessment Tool information to inform its FCAs at GSA-owned land border crossings.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator should share Building Assessment Tool reports with CBP and use facility condition information in CBP's FCAs to inform its assessments through the Building Assessment Tool. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided documentation that it received CBP FCAs and provided Building Assessment Tool information to CBP. GSA further provided updated guidance describing how it will share this information with CBP going forward. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should demonstrate that it using CBP FCA reports to inform its Building Assessment Tool assessments.

Recommendation: The GSA Administrator, in conjunction with CBP, should share with CBP information on GSA maintenance and repair work at GSA-owned land border crossings at the level of detail necessary to inform CBP's data in TRIRIGA. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, stated that it would share this information with CBP on a monthly basis until it is available to CBP for self-service on a shared data system. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should provide documentation that CBP has access to the shared data system.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should use information on maintenance and repair work conducted by GSA at GSA-owned land border crossings to update facility condition information in TRIRIGA on an ongoing basis. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, reported that it began documenting processes for validating and correcting existing records in TRIRIGA using information on maintenance and repair work conducted by GSA. In addition, CBP reported that it is developing a standard operating procedure for TRIRIGA data entry. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is regularly receiving information on maintenance and repair work performed by GSA and that it is using this information to update data in TRIRIGA.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should establish review time frames for stakeholders involved in its Five-year Capital Investment Plan review and approval process. (Recommendation 6)

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

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document establishing time frames for stakeholders involved in the five-year plan review and approval process. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it has communicated these time frame expectations to stakeholders.

Recommendation: The CBP Commissioner should establish and document a methodology for its annual land border crossing capital prioritization process that includes procedures and time frames for each step. (Recommendation 7)

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

Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document that formally establishes and documents a methodology for its land border crossing prioritization process, including procedures and time frames for each step. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is implementing this methodology during its annual five-year capital investment planning process.

Recommendation: The Director of JIATF-West should establish a vital few performance measures that are consistently measured over time. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Joint Interagency Task Force West
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, DOD officials reported that JIATF-W identified measures of performance in critical mission areas that have not previously been captured, including the Counter Narcotics Operations Center, Operational Intelligence, and Mission Support units. However, it is unclear whether the measures JIATF-W identified are higher-level and part of a "vital few" rather than just additional output-based performance measures. GAO will need to review the new measures to understand whether DOD/JIATF-W's actions are aligned with the intent of the recommendation. GAO will continue to follow-up with DOD/JIATF-W on the their progress toward implementing the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of JIATF-West should establish specific targets that set a minimal level of performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Joint Interagency Task Force West
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, DOD stated JIATF-W updated its Assessment Instruction to codify baseline standards and processes for collecting metrics in its directorates and would send personnel to train to improve their ability to measure performance against DOD minimal standards. However, it is unclear whether JIATF-W has set targets. We will continue to follow up with DOD/JIATF-W on their progress toward implementing the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should develop outcome-based performance measures for the DHS JTFs that are consistent. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS stated it concurred with the GAO recommendation. In December 2019, DHS officials stated it is overseeing the implementation of measures that contain outcome-based direction for assessing counter drug operations effects, which requires a phased approach, and added that DHS hopes to achieve two consecutive years of consistent reporting of performance measures. The estimated completion date for addressing this recommendation is June 2020. GAO will continue to follow-up with DHS on its progress towards implementing the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the IRS should fully implement the workforce planning initiative, including taking the following actions: (1) conducting enterprise strategy and planning, (2) conducting workforce analysis, (3) creating a workforce plan, (4) implementing the workforce plan, and (5) monitoring and evaluating the results. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reported it has hired or made final offers to new members of its Workforce Planning branch that will help implement the Workforce Planning initiative. According to IRS, the agency is updating its workforce planning policy, and will establish a workforce plan including an enterprise strategy and initiate related workforce analysis by December 2020. By December 2021, IRS expects to implement the workforce plan and a process to monitor and evaluate the results of the workforce plan. Full implementation of a workforce plan that provides a comprehensive inventory of its current workforce will allow IRS to develop competency and staffing requirements to conduct agency-wide activities associated with identifying and addressing skills gaps.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should issue clarifying guidance to IRS about the Integrated Talent Management system, including when the workforce planning and talent management modules will be deployed and available for IRS's use, the functions it will include, and how IRS's existing systems and processes within business divisions and program offices will be affected. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury agreed with the recommendation. Treasury stated that it has taken actions to ensure that IRS and all Treasury bureaus have a clear understanding of when the ITM workforce planning module will be available and how it will be used. Treasury stated that they conducted a Workforce Planning offsite in May 2019 to (1) ensure a common understanding of the workforce planning process as it relates to ITM; 2) document the process in preparation of utilizing ITM; and 3) agree on how the agency will accomplish workforce planning in ITM. According to Treasury, goals 1 and 2 were achieved during the offsite and the workforce planning community continues to work on the third goal. Treasury expects to complete the discussion on how to accomplish workforce planning in ITM by the end of calendar year 2019. Treasury's Offices of the Chief Human Capital Officer and the Chief Information Officer are responsible for ensuring effective communication and training are completed as each ITM module is implemented. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of IRS should ensure the Human Capital Officer improves reporting for its workforce planning initiative in its bi-monthly HRstat information submissions to Treasury. The submissions should include the original implementation schedule, changes to the original schedule, delays in implementation and each of their causes, and IRS's strategy to address the causes of those delays. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: IRS agrees with this recommendation. In its recommendation status letter to us, IRS wrote that they will include workforce planning in their bi-monthly HRstat information submissions to Treasury, and will have an approved implementation schedule for the workforce planning initiative by December 2019. IRS identified the Human Capital Officer as the responsible official for addressing this recommendation. We will continue to monitor IRS's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of IRS should ensure the Human Capital Officer and Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement report the results of efforts to close skills gaps among revenue agents, including lessons learned, that may help inform strategies for conducting skills gap assessment efforts for other mission critical occupations. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: IRS agrees with this recommendation. In its recommendation status letter to us, IRS provided a timetable for implementation. By January 2021, IRS will initiate use of Integrated Talent Management's (ITM) capability to enable workforce planning and analytics. They are still working through requirements and the implementation plan for using this system. By December 2021, IRS will report the results of efforts to close skills gaps among revenue agents, including lessons learned on an annual basis over the next three fiscal years. IRS identified the Human Capital Officer and Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement as the officials responsible for addressing this recommendation. In our 2019 Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation report, we determined implementing this recommendation is needed to address IRS's fragmented human capital activities to improve its strategic workforce planning so it can better meet challenges to achieving its mission. We will continue to monitor IRS's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of IRS should ensure the Human Capital Officer and Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement collaborate to develop a work plan or other mechanism that prioritizes and schedules skills assessments for mission critical occupations at highest risk of skills gaps, such as those identified by Treasury or where key activities have been scaled back, for the purposes of developing a strategy to close the gaps. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. As of February 2020, IRS reported that it expects to fully implement this action by June 15, 2020. IRS reported that full implementation of related actions has been delayed due to limited resources. To date, the IRS Human Capital Officer has (1) identified mission critical occupations (MCOs), (2) collaborated with the Employment, Talent and Security (ETS) Division to develop an implementation schedule for the assessments, (3) obtained the Worklife Benefits and Performance Division and ETS Division Directors' approval of the implementation schedule, and (4) published and distributed the schedule. Going forward, the IRS Human Capital Office will coordinate with the Chief Financial Office and the Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement in developing a work plan or other mechanism that prioritizes and schedules skills assessments for mission critical occupations. IRS will also validate its list of 22 positions established in coordination with Treasury. A work plan for addressing MCOs and skills gaps could help IRS identify and close skills gaps on a timely basis. Without such a plan, IRS risks continuing to scale back on mission-critical activities, adding to the existing fragmentation of its human capital planning efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director, CAPE, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, establish joint planning assumptions for developing operational medical and dental personnel requirements, including a definition of what forces should and should not be identified as "operational." (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to department officials, as of November 2019, they are drafting a report that will address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, establish a method to assess options for achieving joint efficiencies in medical and dental personnel requirements and any associated risks. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to department officials, as of November 2019, they are drafting a report that will address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts. .

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the secretaries of the military departments, apply joint planning assumptions and a method for assessing efficiencies and risk, use these to determine operational medical and dental requirements, and report to Congress. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to department officials, as of November 2019, they are drafting a report that will address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts..

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Surgeons General of the military departments, identify and mitigate limitations in the clinical readiness metric, such as data reliability, a lack of complete information on reserve component providers and patient care workload performed outside of medical treatment facilities (MTFs), and the lack of linkage between the metric and patient care and retention outcomes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of November 2019, DOD has not taken any actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with the Surgeons General of the military departments and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, determines which critical wartime specialties perform high-risk, high-acuity procedures and rely upon perishable skill sets and use this information to prioritize specialties to which the clinical readiness metric could be expanded (Recommendation 5).

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of November 2019, DOD has not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in coordination with each of the Surgeons General of the military departments and the Director of the Defense Health Agency, estimates the cost and benefits, by specialty, of implementing a clinical readiness metric and use that information to determine whether DODs approach should be revised. Costs to be considered should include those needed to provide additional training for medical personnel to achieve clinical readiness thresholds and to hire additional civilian personnel in MTFs to backfill military providers who leave to attend training. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of November 2019, DOD has not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issue a more detailed implementation plan or include implementation plan details in identified formal department-wide guidance to include a description of the resources (i.e., relevant operational and financial information) required to implement the plan including dollar and personnel amounts. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. On February 25, 2020, DOD issued its revised Pre-Positioned War Reserve Materiel Strategic Implementation Plan. However, the updated plan did not include a description of the resources-- including dollar and personnel amounts--required to implement the plan. Instead, the updated plan states that no additional personnel or resources will be required to execute and manage the plan, and that those personnel executing and managing the plan are expected to do so in addition to their normal duties. In May 2020, DOD stated it intends to include additional information about the required resources in the plan's next revision. We will keep this recommendation open pending our review of the next iteration of the plan.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, take steps to fully implement joint oversight of DODs prepositioned stock programs, including providing detailed information on how to implement such an oversight approach in department guidance and reviewing other joint oversight efforts, in order to synchronize the military services' preposition stock strategies to avoid fragmentation. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. On February 25, 2020, DOD issued its revised Pre-Positioned War Reserve Materiel Strategic Implementation Plan which lays out a method for joint oversight. While GAO is encouraged and will monitor DOD's implementation efforts, it is too soon to determine the extent to which these efforts-when completed-will address DOD's fragmented management of its prepositioned stock programs. To fully address this recommendation, DOD needs to fully implement the joint oversight method outlined in the plan.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should (a) establish and implement a formal process to collect and monitor information on the extent to which all implemented IGSAs have resulted in financial and nonfinancial benefits and (b) document that process in Air Force IGSA policy or procedures. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Air Force has taken in response to it, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should (a) establish and implement a process to monitor whether Navy installations are evaluating opportunities for using IGSAs and to obtain explanations from installations on the outcome of their evaluations and (b) document that process in Navy IGSA policy or procedures. (Recommendation 6)

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation, and in March 2019 the Department of the Navy directed Commander, Navy Installations Command to implement the recommendation. When we confirm any further actions the Navy has taken in response to it, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Marine Corps should (a) establish and implement a process to monitor whether Marine Corps installations are evaluating opportunities for using IGSAs and to obtain explanations from installations on the outcome of their evaluations and (b) document that process in Marine Corps IGSA policy or procedures. (Recommendation 7)

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

Comments: The Marine Corps did not concur with this recommendation. However, in written comments, DOD stated that the Department of the Navy would implement this recommendation and that it would be applicable to both the Navy and Marine Corps. In March 2019, the Department of the Navy directed Marine Corps Installation Command to implement the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Marine Corps has taken in response to this direction, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should document in Air Force IGSA policy or procedures its process for monitoring whether Air Force installations are evaluating opportunities for using IGSAs. (Recommendation 8)

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

Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the Air Force has taken in response to it, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should determine the estimated effects of cost inflation on planned CSCP embassy construction capacity and time frames and update this information for stakeholders on a regular basis, such as through the annual budgeting process. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. As of March 2020, State/OBO had developed a worldwide construction inflation rate and had integrated this rate into its bureau budget request for fiscal year 2021. According to OBO officials, OBO is working to update its budget guidance to ensure the inflation rate is updated and integrated into future bureau budget requests on a regular basis. We will continue to monitor State's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that the Director of OBO conducts an OBO-wide workforce analysis to assess staffing levels and workload capacity needed to carry out the full range of OBO's mission goals, to include the CSCP. Such an assessment could provide a basis for broader stakeholder discussion of OBO's human capital needs and potential prioritization of activities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. As of March 2020, State/OBO was working with the Institute for Defense Analysis to conduct an OBO-wide workforce analysis, with initial findings and recommendations planned for early 2020. We will continue to monitor State's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should direct the leaders of the Leveraging Data as a Strategic Asset CAP Goal to ensure future updates to the action plan, and the resulting federal data strategy, provide additional details on improving the use of data, including performance information, more extensively within federal agencies. The action plan should identify performance goals; contributing agencies, organizations, programs, and other activities; those responsible for leading implementation within these contributors; planned actions; time frames; and means to assess progress. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and contributors to the Leveraging Data as a Strategic Asset cross-agency priority (CAP) goal, have taken some actions to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2019 they released a set of recommended practices designed to support agency implementation of the federal data strategy. In particular, several of these practices relate to data-driven decision making, encouraging agencies to "champion data use," "use data to guide decision making," and "use data to increase accountability." However, as of September 2020, the action plans for the implementation of the federal data strategy, and the overall CAP goal, did not include all of the required information. For example, they did not include a means to assess progress related to efforts to improve data-driven decision making in the federal government. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions related to implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB, in coordination with the PIC, should prioritize efforts to identify and share among agencies proven practices for increasing, and challenges that hamper, the use of performance information in decision making more extensively within agencies. At a minimum, this effort should involve the agencies that our survey suggests may offer such insights. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) have taken some actions towards addressing this recommendation. For example, in 2018 and 2019, the PIC hosted a series of workshops focused on relevant topics, such as how agency staff can develop performance measures and analyze data, and how data-driven reviews are used across the federal government. However, as of October 2020, they had not yet undertaken efforts to directly address the recommendation. They have not engaged the agencies highlighted by our survey results to identify proven practices that would increase, or challenges that are hampering, data-driven decision making within agencies. We will continue to monitor actions related to implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to fully report the range of challenges in federal patent licensing, such as those outlined in this report, by, for example, leveraging its survey of practices at federal technology transfer offices, past Federal Laboratory Consortium studies, and agency reports and including that information in its summary reports to Congress. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. In August 2020, Commerce officials stated that the next annual report to the President and Congress was in the review process and is expected to be published this fall.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to clarify the link between establishing patent license financial terms and the goal of promoting commercial use, through appropriate means, such as the upcoming rule-making process and updating relevant guidance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process and the purpose of licensing royalties will be addressed through a related initiative. The expected completion date for this action has been revised to November 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to facilitate formal information sharing among the agencies to provide federal labs with information on financial terms in comparable patent licenses, as appropriate. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. The actions to address it have been discussed by the Interagency Workgroup for Technology Transfer and the FLC, including adding a licensing guide and community of practice for licensing terms to the FLC website. In August 2020, Commerce stated that the expected completion date for this action has been revised to September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the agency or its labs document processes for establishing license financial terms, while maintaining flexibility to tailor the specific financial terms of each license. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD officials stated that DoDI 5538.08, which would require military departments and defense agencies to instruct their laboratories to document their licensing processes as appropriate, is in the review process as of August 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to address, in conjunction with the Chief Human Capital Officer, gaps in IT workforce planning by fully implementing the eight key IT workforce planning activities noted in this report. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA did not concur with this recommendation. As of October 2019, the agency reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer was beginning its involvement with the agency's Mission Support Architecture Program which aims at re-aligning mission support functions from a decentralized model to an enterprise model. The office's participation in the re-alignment effort has an estimated completion date in fiscal year 2023.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to address weaknesses in oversight practices and ensure routine oversight of all investments by taking action to document criteria for escalating investments among governance boards and establish procedures for tracking corrective actions for underperforming investments. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that the agency intended to address this recommendation by documenting its approach for governing IT investments. In February 2020, NASA reported that the agency remained committed to taking action to address this recommendation and reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer had established a process to govern IT investment funds and had planned additional modifications for that framework. The agency now expects to complete actions to address this recommendation by November 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator should ensure that the Chief Information Officer fully defines policies and procedures for developing the portfolio criteria, creating the portfolio, and evaluating the portfolio. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had begun updating policies and procedures for developing the portfolio criteria. In April 2019, NASA provided copies of its updated guidance. Among other things, the guidance described criteria for the portfolio and defined policies and procedures for creating the portfolio. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided evidence that it had developed policies and procedures for evaluating the portfolio. We plan to continue following up on the status of efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to establish an agency-wide approach to managing cybersecurity risk that includes a cybersecurity strategy that, among other things, makes explicit the agency's risk tolerance, accepted risk assessment methodologies, a process for consistently evaluating risk across the organization, response strategies and approaches for monitoring risk over time, and priorities for risk management investments. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had hired a Chief Cybersecurity Risk Officer in April 2018 and that it had also approved a charter for an agency-wide Cybersecurity Integration Team. As of September 2020, NASA reported that it intends to deliver a cybersecurity risk management strategy that addresses the elements outlined in this recommendation by 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to establish an agency-wide approach to managing cybersecurity risk that includes policies and procedures with well-defined roles and responsibilities that are integrated and reflect NASA's current security practices and operating environment. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of September 2020, NASA reported that the Chief Information Officer had initiated a review of the agency's cyber policy management framework and that any related updates were expected to be completed by 2021.

Recommendation: The NNSA Administrator should revise the scope of the mission need statement to clarify which mission need it seeks to achieve and, as appropriate, adjust the range of options considered in the analysis of alternatives process. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: NNSA disagreed with our recommendation and has not taken steps to implement it. In August 2019, GAO requested an update on the status of the small centrifuge project at Oak Ridge since NNSA officials indicated in May 2019 that the status of the small centrifuge project will impact NNSA's ability to complete the analysis of alternatives (AOA) process by December 2019, as originally planned. Early in calendar year 2020, NNSA announced that completion of the AOA would be delayed to the end of fiscal year 2020. In September 2020, NNSA stated that the COVID-19 pandemic had further delayed the AOA and that the agency had not determined a revised target date for completion. We will continue monitoring the AOA process and will review the AOA once it is completed to determine whether we can close this recommendation at that time.

Recommendation: The NNSA Administrator should--following clarification of the scope of the mission need statement--ensure that the agency's cost estimates for whichever options it considers going forward are aligned with the scope of the mission need that the enrichment capability is intended to fulfill and that they are developed consistent with best practices. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: NNSA disagreed with our recommendation and has not taken steps to implement it. In August 2019, GAO requested an update on the status of the small centrifuge project at Oak Ridge since NNSA officials indicated in May 2019 that the status of the small centrifuge project will impact NNSA's ability to complete the analysis of alternatives (AOA) process by December 2019, as originally planned. Early in calendar year 2020, NNSA announced that completion of the AOA would be delayed to the end of fiscal year 2020. In September 2020, NNSA stated that the COVID-19 pandemic had further delayed the AOA and that the agency had not determined a revised target date for completion. We will continue monitoring the AOA process and will review the AOA once it is completed to determine whether we can close this recommendation at that time.

Recommendation: To improve internal controls over the Forest Service's budget execution processes, the Chief of the Forest Service should (1) design, document, and implement a comprehensive system for administrative control of funds and (2) submit it for review and approval by USDA before issuance, as required by the USDA Budget Manual. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: The Forest Service generally agreed with this recommendation and stated that its financial policies concerning budget execution have been revised to address our concerns with allotments, unliquidated obligations, commitments, and administrative control of funds as prescribed by OMB Circular A-11. Further, the Forest Service stated that it has undertaken an in-depth review of its unliquidated obligations and modified the certification process to comply with the USDA requirement. However, the Forest Service has not yet provided support for the review and approval of the administrative control of funds by USDA and OMB. GAO will continue to follow up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve internal controls over the Forest Service's budget execution processes, the Chief of the Forest Service should develop, document, and implement a process and related control activities to reasonably assure that standard operating procedures and desk guides (1) clearly refer to guidance in the Directive System for allotments, reimbursable agreements, and review of unliquidated obligations and (2) are reviewed and approved by responsible officials prior to use. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: The Forest Service generally agreed with this recommendation and stated that it has made significant progress to address this recommendation. Specifically, the Forest Service stated that its financial policies concerning budget execution have been revised to address allotments, unliquidated obligations, commitments, and administrative control of funds as prescribed by OMB Circular A-11. Further, the Forest Service stated that it has undertaken an in-depth review of its unliquidated obligations and modified the certification process to comply with the USDA requirement. However, as of August 2020, the Forest Service has not provided support for the training provided to implement the revised procedures. GAO will continue to follow up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should either develop new performance goals to address mission activity gaps, or explain in the Coast Guard's Annual Performance Report (APR) why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In October 2017, the Coast Guard concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would add new measures in future Annual Performance Reports (APRs) and explain what is measured and what is not, as appropriate. In May 2020, the Coast Guard provided GAO with its updated fiscal year 2019 APR. After reviewing the fiscal year 2019 APR, we found that the Coast Guard made revisions to the goals for the Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security (PWCS) and Marine Environmental Protection-prevention activities (MEP) missions and added a goal for the Search and Rescue mission. However, the APR did not include additional goals or an explanation why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not for the other performance goals we previously identified as not fully addressing all related mission activities. In its July 2020 update to this recommendation, the Coast Guard reported that the metrics published in the APR are measures of Coast Guard performance and not performance goals. The Coast Guard also noted that it continually evaluates the utility of its performance measures, and makes changes to individual measures, as well as its suite of measures, when doing so provides meaningful improvement. In its July 2020 update, the Coast Guard added that targets established for performance measures are intended to be realistic expectations of future performance and targets are continually evaluated and changed when current performance modify expectations. However, we continue to believe that in the absence of documentation explaining how existing performance goals address each mission, the extent to which the Coast Guard's performance goals encompass all of its mission activities is unclear. Either developing new goals to address mission activity gaps, or describing in the APR how existing goals sufficiently assess the performance of each mission could provide more meaningful information on progress in achieving Coast Guard's missions to executive branch decision makers, Congress, and the public. In order to fully implement the recommendation as intended, in instances in which performance goals do not fully address all of the respective mission activities, the Coast Guard's APR should include an explanation of the Coast Guard's rationale for why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not. We will continue to follow-up on the Coast Guard's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should revise and publicly issue OMB guidance--through an update to its Circular No. A-11, a memorandum, or other means--to provide time frames and associated milestones for implementing the federal program inventory. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for implementing some of the federal program inventory requirements. In that guidance, OMB states that beginning with the 2021 budget cycle, agencies' program activities will be used for the inventory's program-level reporting requirements. This will allow OMB and agencies to leverage federal spending data reported on USASpending.gov as required by the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. Those data can be presented at the program activity level, and therefore could meet the inventory requirements to present program-level spending data. However, OMB's guidance does not yet present any time frames or milestones for meeting other inventory requirements, such as describing the purpose of each program or how it contributes to the agency's mission and goals. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should consider--as OMB determines its strategy for resumed implementation of the federal program inventory--using a systematic approach, such as the information architecture framework, to help ensure that GPRAMA requirements and our past recommendations for the inventory are addressed. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB states that it and agencies will meet some of the federal inventory requirements by leveraging the spending data reported on USASpending.gov. The guidance notes that this information is provided in a structured information architecture format on USASpending.gov. In July 2019, OMB staff told us that they considered an information architecture approach in response to our past reports on the topic. However, OMB has not yet clarified in guidance or elsewhere how the information architecture format of USASpending.gov-which is currently focused on spending data-could be used to meet additional information reporting requirements and our past recommendations related to the inventory. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should work with the Performance Improvement Council to identify and share among agencies practices for expanding the use of data-driven performance reviews beyond agency priority goals, such as for other performance goals and at lower levels within agencies, that have led to performance improvements. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. OMB and the PIC, in guidance provided through Circular No. A-11 and the Goal Playbook respectively, have encouraged agencies to expand their use of data-driven reviews beyond agency priority goals. In March 2019, OMB staff told us that they would work with the PIC to provide agencies with case studies and other resources that could help expand their use of data-driven reviews, should agencies choose to do so. However, as of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have not yet identified and shared practices related to expanding the use of those reviews as we recommended. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to ensure that the department-level investment review structure is implemented as planned and that guidance on the IT governance process is documented and identifies criteria for selecting new investments, and reselecting investments currently operational at VHA.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation and provided meeting minutes for its Portfolio Investment Management Board and documentation describing the proposed alignment and interdependencies between information technology (IT) governance boards. According to VA officials, as of September 2019, the department had continued to further evolve its IT governance framework, reworked the committee structure and related working groups that oversee IT investments, and refined the process for prioritizing investments. A draft IT Governance Policy that describes an updated governance structure intended to implement IT solutions and an agile workforce was to be implemented by March 2020. The department has yet to report on the status and results of this implementation. We will continue to monitor VA's actions to ensure that the implementation is consistent with planned actions.

Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to identify additional performance metrics to align with VHA's core business functions, and then use these metrics to determine the extent to which the department's IT systems support performance of VHA's mission.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. In addition, the department outlined steps it intends to take to address our recommendation, including developing a set of metrics to provide continuous input into investment portfolio decisions and establishing a methodology for ensuring that IT investments are aligned to business needs and that expected outcomes are defined prior to making the investments. According to department officials, VA issues a Joint Business Plan that identifies annual milestones associated with initiatives agreed upon by both VHA and OIT. As of September 2020, we are reviewing additional documentation related to the underlying processes that support the compilation of the plan and any related metrics for the associated investments that are to support VHA's mission. We will continue to monitor progress in this area.

Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to ensure that unmet IT needs identified by key program areas--pharmacy benefits management, scheduling, and community care--are addressed appropriately and that related business functions are supported by IT systems to the extent required.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. The department described its intention to ensure that unmet IT needs for the pharmacy benefits management, scheduling, and community care program areas were addressed appropriately during fiscal year 2018 budget formulation. In March 2020, we met with officials from the Pharmacy Benefits Management program office, the Office of Veterans Access to Care, and the Community Care program to discuss the status of new service requests and the extent to which IT needs have been met since our report. While there was a slight decrease in the total number of new service requests that remained open for 5 years or more, officials from each office did not consistently report improvements in how IT needs were being addressed. For example, Pharmacy Benefits Management officials still waited for improvements that may come with the deployment of the new electronic health record system, but they continued to report that updates to industry standards should be addressed sooner and often IT needs did not make it through the prioritization process at the Veterans Health Administration to be considered by the Office of Information and Technology. Community Care officials reported a general improvement in the IT governance process and a more engaged relationship with the Office of Information Technology; however, the list of open new service requests still included long-term VistA-related enhancements, some of which had not yet been prioritized by the department. The Office of Veterans Care has not yet provided an updated list of open new service requests, but officials were satisfied with a new maintenance contract that allowed them to address a number of IT issues. We will continue to monitor the number of new service requests in each program area and the extent to which the IT needs are being met by the IT governance process.

Recommendation: To increase the likelihood that its IT investments develop reliable cost estimates, the Secretary of HUD should finalize, and ensure the implementation of, guidance that incorporates the best practices called for in the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2017, HUD reported that the department concurred with the recommendation and noted that the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) intended to establish cost estimation guidance for IT projects within its IT Management Framework Guide, incorporating appropriate best practices from the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide. In March 2019, HUD reported that, with contractor assistance, the department had begun to develop a standard methodology for investment lifecycle cost estimation; however, the methodology had not been fully institutionalized across all investments, and a policy for cost estimation had not been developed. Lacking an updated IT Management Framework and cost estimation policy, OCIO took additional interim action in the most recent budget cycle to reduce cost estimation risk by having the Chief Technology Officer standardize the cost estimates for IT investments. HUD continues to take action intended to address this recommendation; however, OCIO has not yet finalized a cost estimation methodology or the associated policy for IT investments or established a timeframe for implementing cost estimation practices departmentwide.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help ensure that the Air Force strategies to address UAS pilot shortages are tailored to address remaining issues, such as the significant amount of pilots who are temporarily assigned to the UAS pilot career, the limited amount of cadet interest in the UAS pilot career, and the workload of UAS pilots, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to revise the Get Well Plan to address these issues.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: Although the Air Force has taken some steps to address issues such as the use of pilots temporarily assigned to the UAS pilot career and has accelerated its efforts to increase recruit interest in this particular field, high operational tempo, manning shortages and increased workload among UAS pilots still exist. As noted earlier, in July 2018, the Air Force established a new office within its headquarters a focal point for overseeing RPA personnel matters throughout the Air Force and it established a career field manager (CFM) specifically for RPA personnel, placing the career field on par with manned aircraft pilot career fields. These latest efforts show that the Air Force is taking actions to address challenges to the RPA community beyond the stated goals of the Get Well Plan that we identified and on an enterprise-wide level. Because the Air Force efforts are newly instituted and it remains to be seen how UAS aircrew workloads will be affected, we believe that as of November 2019 this recommendation should remain open until more progress is made.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help the Air Force ensure that its strategies are having the intended effects, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to monitor the extent to which that achieving the human capital goals in its strategy helps the Air Force achieve its programmatic goals.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to headquarters Air Force officials, the Air Force has three program goals that are related to addressing UAS pilot shortfalls: to (1) meet combat demand, (2) staff enough personnel to UAS units to allow UAS pilots time to train and take part in development activities, and (3) provide surge UAS combat capabilities when needed. As of September 2019, the Air Force does not have enough personnel in UAS units to allow UAS pilots time to train and take part in developmental activities-known as being in "dwell." As of November 2019, Air Force officials state that they are able to "meet combat demand" but are not able to provide enough manpower to "surge UAS combat capabilities when needed." Therefore, we believe this recommendation should remain open.

Recommendation: To help the Air Force in its effort to address UAS pilot shortfalls, and to help the Air Force ensure that it is poised to meet future needs for UAS pilots, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to explore the potential use of additional flexibilities that would enable it to increase the number of UAS pilots in its workforce.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In a March 2018 report to Congress, the Air Force stated it had developed a deliberate plan to integrate enlisted pilots in the RQ-4 Global Hawk UAS as it provided the ideal environment to expand mission flexibility. Further, as another way to build capability in support of human capital strategies by using flexibilities, an Air Force selection board met in July 2017 to consider total force officer as well as civilian candidates for various test pilot positions to include test UAS pilots. Finally, the Air Force is seeking legislative changes to allow the Air Reserve Component to perform full time, 24/7, 365 operational missions such as the UAS mission, in Active Guard Reserve status. Additionally, in July 2018, Air Force is in the process of establishing a new division to be the Headquarters focal point for overseeing RPA personnel matters throughout the Air Force and they also stated the Air Force established a career field manager (CFM) specifically for RPA personnel, placing the career field on par with manned aircraft pilot career fields. Further, the Air Force is working on an initiative that would enable it to provide UAS pilots with "dwell time"-a time during which servicemembers are at their home station during which they are able to take leave, attend training, and recuperate. As of November 2019, the Air Force had not implemented this initiative. Additionally, the Air Force has increased the maximum annual retention pay for UAS pilots (and all other pilots) to $35,000. While the Air Force has taken some steps, it is too early to tell whether these steps will result in effective workforce planning outcomes that reduce Air Force UAS pilot shortages. Therefore, we believe that this recommendation should remain open until more progress is made.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to collect feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units, such as by surveying, or conducting focus groups with them.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its initial comments, DOD stated that incorporating feedback from the field is already an element of the Army's strategy for improving the sustainability, maturity, and health of its UAS workforce. DOD stated that our findings will reinforce the importance of using feedback to improve and refine the Army's overall strategy. In September 2019, Army Headquarters officials reiterated previous statements that they made that the Army has multiple agencies and systems that gather feedback to refine and improve UAS programs. However, the Army has not collected feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units via surveys, focus groups, to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army identify challenges that UAS pilots face in completing their training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to incorporate such feedback into the Army's strategy to address UAS training shortfalls.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, and in its initial comments, DOD stated that incorporating feedback from the field is already an element of the Army's strategy for improving the sustainability, maturity, and health of its UAS workforce. DOD stated that our findings will reinforce the importance of using feedback to improve and refine the Army's overall strategy. In July 2018, Army Headquarters officials stated that the Army has multiple agencies and systems that gather feedback to incorporate and improve UAS programs. The officials listed a number of the systems in place to gather feedback on UAS units. However, the Army did not describe any efforts to collect feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units such as by surveying them or conducting focus groups with them. In September 2019, Army officials reiterated their 2018 comments and stated that Army has a number of the systems in place to gather feedback on UAS units. However, the Army has not collected feedback from UAS pilots in UAS units such as by surveying them or conducting focus groups with them and incorporated such feedback into an Army strategy to address UAS training shortfalls.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help ensure that Army Shadow units meet minimum training requirements, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to revise its strategy to address UAS training shortfalls to ensure that it is fully tailored to address training issues and address factors such as lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Army revise its strategy to address UAS training shortfalls to ensure that it is fully tailored to address training issues and address factors such as lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time. DOD stated that the Army has already taken steps to continuously improve its training strategy and that our findings will underline the importance of those initiatives, but that additional direction related to our recommendation is not necessary. In their July 2018 written update, Army officials responded to this recommendation by discussing a regulation regarding readiness reporting; however, the response did not clarify how the regulation might address our recommendation. As of November 2019, the Army has not issued an updated UAS strategy that addresses UAS training shortfalls including a lack of adequate facilities, lack of access to airspace, and the inability to fly more than one UAS at a time.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to validate that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of UAS pilot candidate performance in UAS pilot training and job performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation that the Army validate that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of UAS pilot candidate performance in UAS pilot training and job performance. DOD stated that it believes that the current graduation rate of soldiers from its UAS pilot school of 98 percent is an indication that the existing personnel resource predictors and practices are sufficient. It also stated that periodic re-validation is prudent, but specific direction to do so is not necessary. In its July 2018 written update about this recommendation, Army officials stated that the successful graduation rate from UAS Advanced Individual Training and suggested that this graduation rate may indicate that the existing Army approach is adequate. As we stated in our report, Army officials told us that senior Army leaders pressure officials at the Army UAS pilot schoolhouse to ensure that UAS pilot candidates make it through training. As a result, graduation rates may not provide the Army with reliable evidence that its approach to selecting personnel to serve as UAS pilots is providing the Army with personnel who have the aptitude for this career. Validating that the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is an effective predictor of training and job performance of UAS pilot is an important step that would help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for the UAS pilot career field on sound evidence. As of November 2019, the Army continued to maintain that the successful graduation rate from UAS Advanced Individual Training and suggests that the existing Army approach is adequate.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to assess existing research that has been performed that identifies UAS pilot competencies.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendations that the Army assess existing research that has been performed that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In its comments, DOD stated that incorporating findings regarding UAS pilot competencies is already an integral part of both workforce and community management and that effective and efficient resource management, as well as force shaping and management processes, will help ensure that the Army's selection of candidates is consistent with the findings of existing research in this area. DOD stated that it does not believe it is necessary to provide additional direction or guidance to the Army to leverage existing research that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In it's July 2018 written update about this recommendation, Army officials indicated that the Army will assess existing research on UAS operator competencies to improve UAS operator selection. As of November 2019, the Army continued to express interest in assessing existing research on UAS operator competencies to improve UAS operator candidate selection.

Recommendation: To help the Army in its effort to address UAS unit training shortfalls, and to help the Army ensure that it is basing its decisions to select individuals for UAS pilot training on sound evidence and to help it take advantage of the key benefits associated with effective personnel selection that could include reducing training costs, improving job performance, improving retention of qualified personnel, enabling leadership development, and enhancing organizational effectiveness, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to incorporate relevant findings from such research into the Army's approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendations that the Army incorporate relevant findings from such research into the Army's approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates, as appropriate. DOD stated that incorporating findings regarding UAS pilot competencies is already an integral part of both workforce and community management and that effective and efficient resource management, as well as force shaping and management processes, will help ensure that the Army's selection of candidates is consistent with the findings of existing research in this area. DOD stated that it does not believe it is necessary to provide additional direction or guidance to the Army to leverage existing research that identifies UAS pilot competencies. In its July 2018 written update on this recommendation, Army officials indicated that the Army will consider a cost benefit analysis on techniques that would potentially improve a process, product, or result related to selecting UAS pilot candidates. Officials went on to state that once the assessment is complete, the Army will incorporate relevant findings into the approach for selecting UAS pilot candidates. As of November 2019, the Army expressed interest in incorporating findings from relevant research into processes for selecting UAS pilot candidates.

Recommendation: To ensure that Field Collection program case selection processes support IRS's and the Collection program's mission, including applying tax laws with integrity and fairness to all, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop, document, and communicate Field Collection program and case selection objectives, including the role of fairness, in clear and measurable terms sufficient for use in internal control.

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions being taken to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was chosen as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure that Field Collection program case selection processes support IRS's and the Collection program's mission, including applying tax laws with integrity and fairness to all, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop, document, and implement performance measures clearly linked to the Field Collection program and case selection objectives.

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure that Field Collection program case selection processes support IRS's and the Collection program's mission, including applying tax laws with integrity and fairness to all, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should incorporate program and case selection objectives into existing risk management systems or use other approaches to identify and analyze potential risks to achieving those objectives so that Field Collection can establish risk tolerances and appropriate control procedures to address risks.

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. Since program and case selection objectives are necessary before appropriate risk management systems can be established, in September 2020, IRS officials said they expected to complete actions to implement program and case selection objectives in Fall 2020 but provided no anticipated completion date for actions to identify and analyze potential risks to those objectives and related risk management actions.

Recommendation: To ensure that Field Collection program case selection processes support IRS's and the Collection program's mission, including applying tax laws with integrity and fairness to all, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop, document, and communicate control procedures guidance for group managers to exercise professional judgment in the Field Collection program case selection process to achieve fairness and other program and collection case selection objectives.

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions it will take to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative which would include actions to address this recommendation. In September 2020, IRS officials said they had revised the Internal Revenue Manual to guide group managers on elements to consider in selecting cases. We will update the status of IRS's actions to implement the recommendation after review of any documentation IRS provides.

Recommendation: To ensure that Field Collection program case selection processes support IRS's and the Collection program's mission, including applying tax laws with integrity and fairness to all, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop, document, and implement procedures to periodically monitor and assess the design and operational effectiveness of both automated and manual control procedures for collection case selection to assure their continued effectiveness in achieving program objectives.

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

Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. According to IRS officials, this pilot effort is ongoing and includes consideration of how the agency will address this recommendation. In September 2020, we met with IRS officials to discuss the status of actions to implement this recommendation but no anticipated completion date was provided.

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

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, the Army had taken some steps to improve its guidance, as GAO recommended in August 2016, but did not plan to fully address the recommendation until 2021. Officials stated that the Army established target usage rates for existing virtual training devices and issued guidance and tracking tools for recording device usage. However, the Army had not modified the guidance, cited in GAO's August 2016 report, to require that training developers consider the amount of time available to train with or expected usage rates of new virtual training devices. According to Army officials, they will implement GAO's recommendation in a planned update to guidance on the justification and validation of new virtual training devices scheduled for 2021. By updating this guidance, the Army will have the information it requires to evaluate the amount of virtual training capabilities needed to achieve training tasks and proficiency goals during operational training.

Recommendation: To help ensure that the contributions of tax expenditures toward the achievement of agency goals are identified and measured, the Director of OMB, in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, should work with agencies to identify which tax expenditures contribute to their agency goals, as appropriate--that is, they should identify which specific tax expenditures contribute to specific strategic objectives and agency priority goals.

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

Comments: As of December 2019, OMB had not begun to work with agencies to identify which tax expenditures contribute to the agencies' specific strategic objectives and agency priority goals, as GAO recommended in 2016. OMB staff told GAO that, although they agreed with the recommendation, it was not an effort they were pursuing due to competing priorities, as well as capacity and resource constraints. Without additional OMB assistance, agencies may continue to have difficulty identifying whether or which of the dozens of tax expenditures-representing an estimated $1.32 trillion in forgone revenues in fiscal year 2019-contribute to their goals.

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

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

Comments: In February 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that Coast Guard management made a decision to not to address this recommendation within the annual Strategic Planning Direction (SPD) or Operational Planning Direction (OPD) products as previously planned, but rather within the Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Process Guide. The liaison further stated that both of these documents are currently under revision and expected to be completed by March 31, 2018. On October 11, 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that The Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Instruction is in routing for edits, comment, and final approval. The new estimated completion date is the 2nd quarter of FY 2019. GAO sent an inquiry to the Coast Guard on April 24, 2019 and is awaiting a reply. On March 30, 2020, the Coast Guard liaison informed GAO that the update to the Standard Operational Planning Process (SOPP)/Global Force Management (GFM) Instruction, which includes the addition and test of Strategic Priorities Planning Guidance and the new Coast Guard Force Allocation Matrix, was further delayed due to recent discussions of changing to a 2-year SOPP planning cycle to align with the Department of Defense Global Force Management process. This change would further require an update of the SOPP/GFM Instruction. The COVID-19 crisis as well as the need to finalize the Strategic Planning Direction by June 2020 are also factors in this delay. New Estimated Completion Date (ECD): June 30, 2021.

Recommendation: To ensure that high priority mission activities are fully supported with the appropriate number of staff possessing the requisite mix of skills and abilities, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a systematic process that prioritizes manpower requirements analyses for units that are the most critical for achieving mission needs.

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

Comments: On December 14, 2016, the Coast Guard noted that it submitted two FY 2019 Resource Proposals to staff and equip the Manpower Requirements Determination Division to conduct the analysis as described in the recommendation. In April, 2016, the Coast Guard liaison stated that, resources permitting, the Coast Guard is to address the following steps: (1) Validate the "unit-type" list so that it encompasses the vast majority of active duty and civilian billets in a logical framework that can be readily analyzed, review/update the list as changes (e.g., asset mix, organizations) occur. (2) Develop the requirements for the envisioned Manpower Analysis & Simulation Tool (MAST). (3) Prioritize unit list according to strategic alignment and risk assessment (4) Conduct the manpower requirements analyses (MRA) in accordance with established priorities. As of August 2020, the Coast Guard reported it had not implemented the actions. Specifically, the Coast Guard reported that in response to GAO's February 2020 modernization report (GAO-20-223, rec#2), it was developing new guidance for executing the manpower requirement determination process. Officials told us that the new guidance would include a systematic process for prioritizing manpower analysis. In this way, the actions for implementing the GAO-20-223 recommendation may also serve to meet the intent of the recommendation for GAO-16-379. Officials told us the Coast Guard estimated implementing the actions by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the strategic allocation of assets, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should incorporate field unit input, such as information on assets' actual performance from Operational Performance Assessment Reports and Planning Assessments, to inform more realistic asset allocation decisions--in addition to asset performance capacities currently used--in the annual Strategic Planning Directions to more effectively communicate strategic intent to field units.

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

Comments: In February 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that Coast Guard management made a decision to not to address this recommendation within the annual Strategic Planning Direction (SPD) or Operational Planning Direction (OPD) products as previously planned, but rather within the Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Process Guide. The liaison further stated these documents are under revision and expected to be completed by March 31, 2018. On October 11, 2018, the Coast Guard liaison stated that The Standard Operational Planning Process/Global Force Management Instruction is in routing for edits, comment, and final approval. The new estimated completion date is the 2nd quarter of FY 2019. GAO sent an inquiry to the Coast Guard on April 24, 2019 asking for an update. On March 30, 2020, the Coast Guard liaison informed GAO that the update to the SOPP/GFM Instruction, which includes the addition and test of Strategic Priorities Planning Guidance and the new Coast Guard Force Allocation Matrix, was further delayed due to recent discussions of changing to a 2-year SOPP planning cycle to align with the Department of Defense Global Force Management process. The liaison stated that the COVID-19 crisis as well as the need to finalize the Strategic Planning Direction by June 2020 are also factors in this delay. The new estimated completion date for this recommendation is June 30, 2021.

Recommendation: In order to improve FDA's strategic planning for regulatory science efforts, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to develop and document measurable goals, such as targets and time frames, for its regulatory science efforts so it can consistently assess and report on the agency's progress in regulatory science efforts.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2018, the agency described the actions of committees developed by each of the centers to oversee their regulatory science activities. In July 2019, the agency indicated that it was revisiting its strategic regulatory science priorities as part of its cyclical strategic planning process, and the centers and various offices have taken steps to address the recommendation. In an August 2020 written response, the agency reported that a committee had undertaken a review its 2011 regulatory science strategic plan that will result in the issuance of an accountability framework--an internal document outlining the type of information that FDA centers and offices will provide to the agency's Chief Scientist to demonstrate progress made in addressing relevant focus areas of regulatory science. FDA reported that its goal was to complete this work by the end of December 2020. However, FDA still needs to document steps taken by these centers to develop measurable goals, and the agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open. GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to improve FDA's strategic planning for regulatory science efforts, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to systematically track funding of regulatory science projects across each of its priority areas.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2018 and July 2019, the agency described actions taken by each center to better track its regulatory science funding. However, FDA still needed to complete these activities and document that funds are systematically tracked across each of the priority areas. In an August 2020 written response, the agency reported that there continue to be efforts to improve tracking of funds for regulatory science projects in priority areas. Specifically, it described the development of an accountability framework-an internal document outlining the type of information that FDA centers and offices will provide to the agency's Chief Scientist to demonstrate progress made in addressing relevant focus areas of regulatory science. According to FDA, as part of the internal accountability framework, it will track regulatory science projects. FDA reported that its goal was to complete this work by the end of December 2020. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, conduct uncertainty and sensitivity analyses consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, this recommendation conflicts with established Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation guidance for cost estimation and uncertainty analysis. Absent a change in policy at that level, the Joint Program Office will continue to follow Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation policy on this issue. We continue to believe that in order for any risks associated with ALIS to be addressed expediently and holistically, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis must be used on the F-35s cost estimates to improve its overall reliability. Thus, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, ensure that future estimates of ALIS costs use historical data as available and reflect significant program changes consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, since April 2016, the F-35 program has continued to update the ALIS estimate with the latest available cost data, based on recent contracts. Until more reliable actual costs become available, the program utilizes negotiated contract costs, incorporates program initiatives, and ensures the estimate reflects the latest technical baseline and requirements. Until actual costs associated with ALIS historical data are incorporated in the F-35 cost estimate, we believe that the estimate will not be as reliable as it could be. For this reason, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FDA's IT strategic planning activities are successful in supporting the agency's mission, goals, and objectives, the Commissioner of FDA should require the CIO to implement the plan to ensure that expected outcomes of the agency's key IT initiatives are achieved.

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

Comments: According to agency officials, FDA's CIO met with the FDA Commissioner in 2016 where the updated IT strategic plan was reviewed and approved. The Commissioner identified key IT initiatives to be implemented within FY2017 and incorporated them into the CIO's performance management appraisal program. According to officials, the Commissioner requires the CIO to implement a plan to ensure that expected outcomes of the agency's key IT initiatives are achieved. Although FDA provided us with an excel spreadsheet that identifies IT initiatives at the agency's weekly FDA project meeting, we requested additional documentation regarding the plan the CIO is required to implement to ensure that expected outcomes of the agency's key IT initiatives are fulfilled. We contacted FDA in September and December 2019 and January 2020 to obtain additional information on the actions taken to implement the recommendation, but have not received a response. We will update the recommendation when additional information is obtained.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should develop a risk-based, cost-effective strategy to verify that states are implementing a process for assessing whether any teacher preparation programs are low-performing.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: In 2016, Education published an issue brief about identifying low-performing schools, which referenced GAO's report and the potential risks of limited state action to identify and address low performance. In December 2019, Education provided GAO with a revised data collection instrument for collecting information about states' criteria for identifying low-performing teacher preparation programs. Officials stated that the instrument has been approved by OMB and Education plans to start using it in October 2020. Officials said that the instrument is designed to provide more structured information about state criteria and allow Education to better monitor states' responses from year to year. We are encouraged by these efforts and will revisit the status of this recommendation when the new template is implemented in 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure that OPM builds the predictive capacity to identify emerging skills gaps across the government--including the ability to collect and use reliable information on the competencies of the federal workforce for government-wide workforce analysis--the Director of OPM should (1) establish a schedule specifying when OPM will modify its Enterprise Human Resources Integration database to capture staffing data that it currently collects from agencies through its annual workforce data reporting process; and (2) work with agency CHCOs to bolster the ability of agencies to assess workforce competencies by sharing competency surveys, lessons learned, and other tools and resources.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Although OPM did not initially concur with this recommendation, OPM has taken actions towards addressing it by using the EHRI database, in combination with other sources, to generate workforce data to assist agencies in their efforts to identify skills gaps. In March 2019, OPM reported that it believed that collecting staffing gap targets through an alternative system, MAX Collect, would provide a more efficient and accurate means to collect workforce data than EHRI. In February 2020, OPM officials reported that it has used MAX Collect to address a portion of the recommendation by sharing lessons learned to close skills gaps. MAX Collect also stores and makes relevant tools and training available to users. However, OPM still needs to collect and store a consistent set of staffing and competency data. Without the collection and sharing of this data, OPM cannot perform valuable government-wide analysis to predict and address skills gaps in occupations affecting multiple agencies.

Recommendation: To help ensure that it receives accurate information on the full effect of funding decisions on acquisition programs, Congress should consider amending the law that governs the 5-year Capital Investment Plan to require the Coast Guard to submit cost and schedule information that reflects the impact of the annual President's budget request on each acquisition across the portfolio--in addition to the current practice of reporting the cost and schedule estimates in current program baselines.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congressional action has not been taken. GAO will continue to follow up with relevant congressional committees.

Recommendation: To help the Coast Guard improve the long-term outlook of its portfolio, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a 20-year fleet modernization plan that identifies all acquisitions needed to maintain the current level of service and the fiscal resources necessary to build the identified assets. The plan should also consider trade-offs if the fiscal resources needed to execute the plan are not consistent with annual budgets.

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

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation. Since the issuance of GAO's report, in February 2016, Congress directed the Coast Guard to develop a long-term plan to cover fiscal year 2017 and 20 years thereafter and that it should be updated every two years. In November 2017, officials told GAO that the Coast Guard was developing a 20-year long-term plan that specifically focused on the highest priority recapitalization and sustainment efforts for its assets and will focus on meeting the intent of the 2016 congressional mandate. However, as of July 2020, the Coast Guard has not completed this plan. At that time, officials said that the Coast Guard continues to refine the process to define the long term acquisition and capital sustainment needs of the Service and align them with published and anticipated fiscal top line budgets. The Coast Guard is working with internal and external stakeholders to define useful parameters in order to complete work to close this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor the Coast Guard's actions in completing its long-term plan given that GAO's recent work has found that the Coast Guard continues to pursue an unaffordable acquisition portfolio that is not likely to fully address all known and anticipated capability gaps.

Recommendation: To provide the Congress with the necessary insight into program affordability, ensure its ability to effectively monitor total program costs and execution, and to facilitate investment decisions, the NASA's Administrator should direct the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate to establish a separate cost and schedule baseline for work required to support the SLS Block I Exploration Mission-2 (EM-2) and report this information to the Congress through NASA's annual budget submission. If NASA decides to fly the SLS Block I beyond EM-2, establish separate life cycle cost and schedule baseline estimates for those efforts, to include funding for operations and sustainment, and report this information annually to Congress via the agency's budget submission.

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

Comments: NASA partially agreed with this recommendation, stating that it defined and documented life-cycle costs for SLS to a first demonstrated capability, consistent with cost estimating best practices and NASA project and program management policy and that it would report costs associated with the second exploration mission via its annual budget submission. In January 2020, NASA stated that it is evaluating changes to NASA Procedural Requirements 7120.5E, "NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements," to better enable the necessary insight into program affordability and efficient monitoring of total program costs and execution for multi-year, multi-cadence type programs. Further, NASA stated that it is investigating plans to redefine performance expectations for multi-decade programs' formal commitments while maintaining visibility to the entire plan. To address this recommendation, NASA needs to establish separate cost and schedule baselines for work required to support SLS for EM-2, which is now known as Artemis II.

Recommendation: To provide the Congress with the necessary insight into program affordability, ensure its ability to effectively monitor total program costs and execution, and to facilitate investment decisions, because NASA intends to use the increased capabilities of the SLS, Orion, and Ground Systems Development and Operations efforts well into the future and has chosen to estimate costs associated with achieving the capabilities, the NASA's Administrator should direct the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate to establish separate cost and schedule baselines for each additional capability that encompass all life cycle costs, to include operations and sustainment. When NASA cannot fully specify costs due to lack of well-defined missions or flight manifests, forecast a cost estimate range -- including life cycle costs -- having minimum and maximum boundaries. These baselines or ranges should be reported to Congress annually via the agency's budget submission.

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

Comments: NASA partially agreed with this recommendation, stating that it had established separate programs for SLS, Orion, and the ground systems and adopted a block upgrade approach for SLS. In January 2020, NASA stated that it plans to establish an agency baseline commitment for capability upgrades (e.g., Block 1B upgrades, such as Mobile Launcher-2 and Exploration Upper Stage) above the $250 million threshold. A joint confidence level analysis will be performed at key decision points and will include the cost and schedule range estimates for each of these upgrades. To address this recommendation, NASA needs to provide evidence that it established separate cost and schedule baselines for each additional SLS, Orion, and Ground Systems Development and Operations capability blocks that encompass all life-cycle costs, including operations and sustainment.

Recommendation: To ensure appropriate levels of employees' supervision and guidance for the workforces of USDA's service center agencies, consistent with OPM guidance, the Secretary of Agriculture, through the Chief Human Capital Officer, should revise departmental policy targeting a uniform supervisory ratio so that the service center agencies can identify appropriate supervisory ratios based on a documented analysis of their specific customer needs and workload distribution.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the Department of Agriculture has not taken action to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help address the uncertainty NIH faces, related to the potential impact of increasing indirect costs on its funding of future research, the Director of NIH should assess the impact of growth in indirect costs on its research mission, including, as necessary, planning for how to deal with potential future increases in indirect costs that could limit the amount of funding available for total research, including the direct costs of research projects.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 7, 2015, NIH provided some information indicating that it had taken action to address our recommendation by tracking the size of indirect costs as a proportion of NIH's overall budget as part of the agency's annual budget planning process and risk assessment program. However, we determined that the actions did not fully address the recommendation because they focus on the agency's overall budget and do not assess the potential ongoing impact of indirect costs for universities on its mission. As of September 2018, NIH officials have not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that the geographic combatant commands are properly sized to meet their assigned missions and to improve the transparency of the commands' authorized manpower, assigned personnel, and mission and headquarters-support costs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to revise Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 1001.01A to require a comprehensive, periodic evaluation of whether the size and structure of the combatant commands meet assigned missions.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) did not concur with our recommendation, stating that the combatant commands had already been reduced during previous budget and efficiency reviews. The department also noted that any periodic review of the combatant commands' size and structure must include a review of assigned missions, and that a requirement for a mission review was not appropriate for inclusion in the commands' guiding instruction on personnel requirements. However, DOD has taken some actions to better manage the combatant command headquarters activities and personnel as GAO recommended in May 2013. First, DOD has taken actions to control management headquarters authorized positions and funding levels across the department, including those at the combatant commands, through the budget process. For example, in a May 2017 memorandum entitled: Lifting the Hiring Freeze for Civilian Employees, the Deputy Secretary of Defense stated that components must operate within the full-time equivalent authorization and funding limits established in the fiscal year 2017 President's budget, including the Future Years Defense Program. Notably, current baselines, divestiture requirements, and hiring limitations applicable to major headquarters activities remain in effect. Major headquarters activities billet adjustments or growth was not authorized unless approved through the program review and budget process. Additionally, in the conference report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the defense committees by January 1, 2020 that provides a description of the headquarters staff of each geographic combatant command, as well as each sub-unified command and service component command under the geographic combatant command. According to DOD officials, as of March 2020, the Department has not completed the report and they could not provide an estimated timeframe for its completion. As part of this effort, the Secretary of Defense was also directed to submit a report by January 1, 2021 recommending the number of military and civilian personnel required in the headquarters element to execute the missions and functions of each geographic combatant command. Further, in a January 6, 2020 memorandum entitled: Department of Defense Reform Focus in 2020, the Secretary of Defense announced plans to lead a series of reviews with the combatant commands in 2020, to focus on strategic priorities, harvest opportunities to reduce costs, and realign forces and manpower in order to support National Defense Strategy priorities and rebuild readiness. This effort includes establishing a common baseline understanding of all tasks, missions, and overall resources and costs within the commands. According to the memorandum, the goal is to review all the commands in time to inform the fiscal year 2022-2026 program budget review. GAO will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to better manage the combatant command headquarters activities and personnel. Although the department has taken some positive steps, GAO continues to believe that institutionalizing a comprehensive, periodic evaluation of the combatant commands would help to ensure efficient use of resources.

Recommendation: To better leverage agency quarterly performance reviews as a mechanism to manage performance toward agency priority and other agency-level performance goals, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should work with the Performance Improvement Council and other relevant groups to identify and share promising practices to help agencies extend their quarterly performance reviews to include, as relevant, representatives from outside organizations that contribute to achieving their agency performance goals.

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

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) have taken little action to address this recommendation. In August 2017, PIC staff told us that they were working to identify examples where agencies had included representatives from outside organizations in their performance reviews, and would then disseminate promising practices based on those experiences. However, according to information shared by OMB and PIC staff in March 2019, they had not taken any additional action, nor had they identified or shared any such practices. OMB staff emphasized that while some agencies found it is useful to engage external stakeholders in their reviews, agencies generally view them as internal management meetings. OMB's July 2020 guidance continues to direct agencies to include, as appropriate, relevant personnel from outside the agency that contribute to the accomplishment of Agency Priority Goals or other priorities. However, supplementing this guidance with insights into how to do this well could help ensure that agencies can effectively bring together key players to achieve common goals. We will continue to monitor the status of actions taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure the department maintains its critical skills and competencies, when planning for and implementing future civilian workforce actions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to involve functional community managers and to the extent possible, use information from gap assessments of its critical skills and competencies as they are completed to make informed decisions for possible future reductions or justify the size of the force that it has.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2017, the Associate Director, Total Force Requirements & Sourcing Policies; OUSD(P&R), stated that the Department has taken some actions and that there are ongoing efforts in this area. As of November 2019, DOD has taken no further action. We will continue to monitor DOD's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: FSOC and OFR should clarify responsibility for implementing requirements to monitor threats to financial stability across FSOC and OFR, including FSOC members and member agencies, to better ensure that the monitoring and analysis of the financial system are comprehensive and not unnecessarily duplicative.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, Treasury staff said that steps continue to be taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. In June 2019, the Senate confirmed a new OFR Director. Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We will continue to monitor progress in implementing these steps.

Recommendation: FSOC and OFR should clarify responsibility for implementing requirements to monitor threats to financial stability across FSOC and OFR, including FSOC members and member agencies, to better ensure that the monitoring and analysis of the financial system are comprehensive and not unnecessarily duplicative.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council: Office of Financial Research
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019 Treasury staff said that steps are being taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway as staff from both entities meet on a weekly basis and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. The Senate confirmed a new OFR director in June 2019. In June 2017, Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We continue to monitor FSOC and OFR actions that would be responsive to clarifying responsibilities for monitoring threats to financial stability.

Recommendation: To better ensure the credibility of IRIS assessments by enhancing their timeliness and certainty, the EPA Administrator should require the Office of Research and Development, should different time frames be necessary, to establish a written policy that clearly describes the applicability of the time frames for each type of IRIS assessment and ensures that the time frames are realistic and provide greater predictability to stakeholders.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of March 2020, we have not seen a formal written memo from the IRIS program laying out this information - in detail - publicly, or how timelines for assessments are influenced by various criteria. While IRIS program staff have discussed this issue, no written guidance has been created. Such communication from the IRIS Program, as well as more frequent updates of the timelines for chemicals currently in assessment and projected starting dates for every chemical listed as "under assessment" is needed.

Recommendation: To ensure that current and accurate information on chemicals that EPA plans to assess through IRIS is available to IRIS users--including stakeholders such as EPA program and regional offices, other federal agencies, and the public--the EPA Administrator should direct the Office of Research and Development to annually publish the IRIS agenda in the Federal Register each fiscal year.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program has established the priority chemicals it is working on, and has published some timelines via the IRIS Program Outlook document. However, this information has not been published as an agenda in the Federal Register.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in DCOE's strategic plan, the Secretary of Defense, through the Director of TMA, should direct the DCOE director to revisit and revise as necessary the organization's goals for completing statutorily required responsibilities.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in DCOE's strategic plan, the Secretary of Defense, through the Director of TMA, should direct the DCOE director to require the directorates to align their day-to-day activities to support DCOE's mission and goals.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in DCOE's strategic plan, the Secretary of Defense, through the Director of TMA, should direct the DCOE director to improve the performance measures in the plan to enable DCOE to determine if achievement of each measure fully supports attainment of its associated goal.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that DCOE obligations are properly classified and recorded in accordance with OMB guidance, the Secretary of Defense, through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) (ASD(HA)), should direct TMA to develop written procedures with detailed steps to be performed for ensuring proper classification and recording of obligations in TMA's financial management systems.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that DCOE obligations are properly classified and recorded in accordance with OMB guidance, the Secretary of Defense, through the ASD(HA), should direct TMA to assign responsibility for updating and maintaining procedural guidance and systems codes to assure consistency with annual OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To address USPS's financial viability in the short term, Congress may wish to consider providing financial relief to USPS, including modifying its retiree health benefit cost structure in a fiscally responsible manner. Congress may also wish to consider any and all options available to reduce USPS costs, including revising the statutory framework for collective bargaining to ensure that binding arbitration takes its financial condition into account. At the same time, to facilitate making progress in difficult areas, Congress may wish to consider establishing (1) a panel of independent experts, similar to a BRAC-like commission, to coordinate with USPS and stakeholders to develop a package of proposed legislative and operational changes needed to reduce costs and address challenges to USPS's business model and (2) procedures for the review and approval of these proposals by the President and Congress. These proposals could focus on adapting delivery and retail services to declining mail volumes; making postal operations, networks, and workforce more cost-efficient; and generating new revenue.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action on this matter.

Recommendation: Congress may wish to consider requiring the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Treasury to collaborate on the development and implementation of a joint radio communications solution. Specifically, Congress may wish to consider requiring the departments to (1) establish an effective governance structure that includes a formal process for making decisions and resolving disputes, (2) define and articulate a common outcome for this joint effort, and (3) develop a joint strategy for improving radio communications.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Legislation has been enacted to provide funding for, among other things, the development of a nationwide, interoperable broadband network that is aimed at improving interoperable radio communications among public safety officials. However, the use of the broadband network by public safety users will be voluntary. In addition, officials from the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and the Treasury stated that, once mission-critical voice capabilities have been developed for the broadband network, their respective departments will determine whether they will use the network to support their mission-critical operations. Therefore, until the three departments have the information they need to make a decision to use the nationwide public safety broadband network to support mission critical voice capabilities, it is uncertain if the legislation will remedy these agencies' fragmented approaches to improving interoperable radio communications. As of March 2020, there has been no legislative action taken in the current Congress.