Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: "Border security"
GAO-19-538R, Jul 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS agreed with our recommendation and in August 2020, DHS issued the Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Border Security Improvement Plan. The plan includes a description and the status for satisfying of each of the 11 statutorily required elements. GAO has on-going work to review the plan.
GAO-19-470, Jun 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Office of the Commissioner: U.S. Border Patrol
Status: Open
Comments: Border Patrol concurred with this recommendation and in an April 2020 update and stated that it is developing new northern border security metrics. Border Patrol is in the process of evaluating them and coordinating with subject matter experts to ensure they are valid. We will continue to monitor Border Patrol's ongoing efforts.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Air and Marine Operations
Status: Open
Comments: AMO concurred with this recommendation and in a July 2020 update, stated that it has developed preliminary performance measures and established a working group to assess their effectiveness. According to AMO, they remain on track to implement the performance measures and report on them beginning in fiscal year 2022. We will continue to monitor AMO's efforts.
GAO-19-305, Mar 21, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with the recommendation and in a May 2020 update stated that it plans to address this recommendation in its FY2019 Border Security Metrics Report scheduled to be issued in the summer of 2020. We will continue to monitor DHS's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In its comment letter, DHS concurred with the recommendation and requested that we consider it closed as implemented because the department already detailed some of the limitations in its fiscal year 2017 report, and plans to continue to identify known limitations and the progress made to mitigate previously identified limitations in future reports. As discussed in the report, we agree that DHS identified and disclosed limitations for some metrics in its fiscal year 2017 Border Security Metrics Report; however, we identified at least one additional limitation for 21 of the 35 metrics on which DHS reported that DHS did not disclose or about which it could have been more transparent. To address the intent of this recommendation, once DHS has implemented a process to systematically review the reliability of the data used in its report and comprehensively identified related limitations, it should disclose those limitations in its annual Border Security Metrics Report. In a May 2020 update, DHS stated that it plans to address this recommendation in its FY2019 Border Security Metrics Report scheduled to be issued in the summer of 2020. We will continue to monitor DHS's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with the recommendation and in a May 2020 update stated that it plans to address this recommendation in its FY2019 Border Security Metrics Report scheduled to be issued in the summer of 2020. We will continue to monitor DHS's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with the recommendation and in a May 2020 update stated that it plans to address this recommendation in its FY2019 Border Security Metrics Report scheduled to be issued in the summer of 2020. We will continue to monitor DHS's ongoing efforts to do so.
GAO-18-11, Oct 4, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2017, CBP concurred with our recommendation and stated that it will use the Capability Gap Analysis Process to validate its access and mobility requirements on a national level. The national priorities will be determined through requirements planning at Border Patrol stations. CBP noted that it will outline the process and criteria for making decisions on funding for non-owned operational requirements and communicate this process to Border Patrol sectors. In November 2018, CBP reported that Border Patrol developed a prioritization process related to the order of wall deployments, which will be tailored to use in determining the priority order for road investments. According to CBP, priority order is to be determined based on the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data and the operational expertise of Border Patrol station, sector and national level leadership. The process was developed by USBP's Operational Requirements Management Division, communicated to southern border sectors, and executed to establish the priority deployment order of fiscal year 2018 new road requirements. Once the prioritization process has been refined, it will be expanded to also include the maintenance and repair on existing roads. In October 2019, CBP reported that it continues to work on enhancing the existing prioritization strategy, which includes exploring implementation of a new prioritization modeling tool and methodology. Discussions on how and if the model will be effective as a prioritization tool have been delayed due to several other internal priorities and external disruptions. Therefore, and based on leadership guidance, the prioritization strategy and methodology will be delayed. CBP officials reported in June 2020 that Border Patrol's Strategic Planning and Analysis Directorate Operational Requirements Management Division personnel will conduct data calls over the upcoming weeks with Tactical Infrastructure subject matter experts from the sectors and stations to validate existing road requirements and initiate the data collection for the prioritization process. Once the process is formalized, we will determine whether CBP's efforts fully address the intent of this recommendation.
GAO-17-618, Jun 12, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8612
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, the seven FY 2019 Priority Trade Issue (PTI) annual plans prepared by CBP's Office of Trade all included performance measures with performance targets, but some plans did not include baselines to measure it's trade enforcement efforts against. The Office of Trade reported that it was in the process of finalizing its FY2020 annual plans, which should be available in December 2019. In addition, the Office of Trade reported that it no longer develops a single strategic plan covering all of its PTIs and only prepares the PTI annual plans.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2019, CBP stated that both the Office of Trade (OT) and Office of Field Operations (OFO) continue to take steps to address hiring gaps which include evaluating approaches to hiring and evaluating and selecting candidates for its various trade positions. For example, OT had developed a recruitment strategy for hiring regulatory auditors. OT reported that it has brought regulatory auditors onboard as a result of its strategy but experienced attrition and challenges in attaining its staffing target for this position. OT and OFO did not provide recruitment strategies for the other trade positions. OFO's Human Capital Division, along with assistance from OT and other CBP components, reported finalizing a long-term hiring plan to meet and maintain the congressional floor for certain trade and revenue positions, including those for import specialists, by the end of fiscal year 2020.
GAO-17-474, May 1, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that it plans to assess and document requirements related to ultralight aircraft threats and how technological solutions will address these requirements as part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Air and Marine Operations (AMO) air domain awareness efforts. In March 2018, CBP completed an Air Domain Awareness Capability Analysis Report that identifies current capability gaps, including those related to ultralight aircraft. CBP stated that it plans to build upon the Capability Analysis Report to identify mission needs, a concept of operations, and operational requirements to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. In February 2020, AMO reported that, in 2019, it conducted a technical assessment of one technology and plans to assess other systems in 2020 and 2021 to help determine if they fit into AMO's larger strategic vision for persistent wide area surveillance to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should assess and document how alternative solutions will meet operational requirements related to ultralight aircraft.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will review available information and develop performance measures and targets as deemed appropriate. As of March 2020, CBP and ICE have not reported taking any actions to develop performance measures and targets. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish and monitor performance measures and targets related to cross-border tunnels.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred and stated that within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Air and Marine Operations and the U.S. Border Patrol are developing a joint performance measure and targets for interdicting ultralight aircraft. However, in December 2019, CBP reported that it will no longer pursue establishing a performance measure because it found that the ultralight aircraft interdiction rate fluctuated year to year, and that the number of ultralight aircraft incidents had been trending downward. Subsequently, in September 2020, CBP officials stated that they had reinitiated efforts to develop a performance measure and target in response to our continued belief that they can be set and would help CBP monitor performance to ensure that technology investments and operational responses to address ultralight aircraft are effective. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should establish a measure and monitor performance related to ultralight aircraft.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. However, CBP and ICE agreed that strengthening operational procedures may be beneficial and stated that they will jointly review procedures and discuss revising and/or consolidating the procedures. In May 2018, CBP stated that it is looking for opportunities to standardize procedures for the detection, interdiction, mapping, and remediation of cross-border tunnels. To this end, CBP has plans to develop a standardized training on tunnel identification and tactics, techniques, and procedures for different types of tunnels. In addition, CBP is working to develop a consistent process that will facilitate coordination and collaboration with ICE. In March 2019, CBP reported that CBP and ICE have begun to routinely meet to collectively develop processes for using tunnel robotics, including processes to enhance communication between CBP and ICE. In September 2020, CBP and ICE reported that they do not plan to take any additional steps to address this recommendation. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish standardized procedures for addressing tunnels, including procedures for sharing information with one another.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. DHS stated that that it believes that by establishing common terminology to address our first recommendation, the RECOMs will have more reliable, usable analyses to inform their maritime interdiction efforts. However, DHS did not believe that performance measures and targets related to smuggling by panga boats would provide the most useful strategic assessment of operations to prevent all illicit trafficking, regardless of area of operations or mode of transportation. DHS also cited the recent creation of the DHS Office of Policy, Strategy, and Plans that is to work with U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and other components and offices to better evaluate the effectiveness of all operations that work to prevent the illegal entry of goods and people into the country, as appropriate. In February 2020, DHS reported that the department had not taken any further actions to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid and will monitor any actions DHS takes that are responsive to it. For example, in response to a requirement in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, DHS issued reports in May 2018, February 2019, and August 2020 that contain metrics and planned metrics to measure the effectiveness of border security in the maritime environment and other domains. Planned metrics that DHS does not yet have a methodology to measure across all components include situational awareness in the maritime environment, illicit drugs removal rate, and DHS maritime threat response rate. To fully address our recommendation, DHS should measure its performance related to smuggling across U.S. maritime borders.
GAO-17-331, Feb 16, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Office of the Commissioner: U.S. Border Patrol
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DHS agreed with the recommendation and stated that it planned to develop metrics for southwest border security operations. To fully implement it, the Border Patrol should complete its efforts to develop metrics for assessing the contributions of pedestrian and vehicle fencing to border security operations and apply these metrics when making resource allocation decisions. As of October 2019, DHS stated that they have developed and are testing the initial metrics. DHS stated that they will continue to gather data over the next two fiscal years (FY20-FY21) which will help to identify if these metrics are accurately representing realities in the field. The estimated completion date is September 2021.
GAO-17-66, Jan 12, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Office of the Commissioner: U.S. Border Patrol
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. DHS noted that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Consequence Delivery System Program Management Office (CDS PMO) uses annual recidivism rate calculations to measure annual change, which is not intended to be, or used, as a performance measure for CDS. We continue to believe that DHS should strengthen its methodology for calculating recidivism. DHS noted in its comments on our report that the recidivism rate is used as a performance measure by U.S. Border Patrol and DHS. Additionally, strengthening the recidivism rate methodology would not preclude its use for CDS as a measure of annual change, and would provide Border Patrol a more complete assessment of the rate of change in recidivism. In January 2018, CDS-PMO officials stated that the office started reporting nationwide the recidivism rates for multiple years to U.S. Border Patrol sectors for situational awareness. However, the methodology for this reported recidivism rate does not exclude aliens for who there is no record of removal. In May 2020, CDS-PMO reported that it has not taken any further steps to implement this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, DHS needs to further strengthen its recidivism rate methodology by excluding aliens for whom there is no record of removal. Further, DHS needs to demonstrate that it is using this updated methodology on a recurring basis and for CDS performance measurement purposes.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with the recommendation. In May 2017, U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations directorate provided immigration enforcement and removal data on a one-time basis to U.S. Customs and Border Protection's U.S. Border Patrol. In March 2018, U.S. Border Patrol officials requested that ICE provide these data on a quarterly basis. As of July 2020, ICE stated that it had shared the data with U.S. Border Patrol on multiple occasions. To fully implement this recommendation, ICE and U.S. Border Patrol need to document and implement their plans to share the data on a recurring basis.
GAO-15-521, Jul 14, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Since our 2015 report, DHS and HHS developed two documents to guide interagency procedures related to the processing of UAC. Specifically, in April 2018, HHS and DHS established a memorandum of agreement regarding information sharing for UAC. Subsequently, on July 31, 2018, DHS and HHS issued a Joint Concept of Operations to memorialize interagency policies, procedures, and guidelines related to the processing of UAC. However, in February 2020, we reported that DHS and HHS officials' indicated that, in practice, the agencies have not resolved long-standing differences in opinion about whether and how agencies are to share information, and what type of information is needed to inform decisions about the care and placement of UAC. In commenting on our draft report, DHS stated that its components are working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, to validate remaining information sharing gaps, and to draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS to ensure that HHS receives information needed to make decisions for UAC. In their comments, HHS officials stated that they intend to reach out to counterparts at DHS in June 2020 to discuss potential periodic updates to the Joint Concept of Operations. In August 2020, DHS informed us that the department is working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, validate gaps, and draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS, among other actions. DHS estimates that it will complete these actions by March 31, 2021. To fully address the recommendation, DHS and HHS should ensure that they have implemented procedures aimed at improving the efficiency and accuracy of the interagency UAC referral and placement process.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Since our 2015 report, DHS and HHS developed two documents to guide interagency procedures related to the processing of UAC. Specifically, in April 2018, HHS and DHS established a memorandum of agreement regarding information sharing for UAC. Subsequently, on July 31, 2018, DHS and HHS issued a Joint Concept of Operations to memorialize interagency policies, procedures, and guidelines related to the processing of UAC. However, in February 2020, we reported that DHS and HHS officials' indicated that, in practice, the agencies have not resolved long-standing differences in opinion about whether and how agencies are to share information, and what type of information is needed to inform decisions about the care and placement of UAC. In commenting on our draft report, DHS stated that its components are working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, to validate remaining information sharing gaps, and to draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS to ensure that HHS receives information needed to make decisions for UAC. In their comments, HHS officials stated that they intend to reach out to counterparts at DHS in June 2020 to discuss potential periodic updates to the Joint Concept of Operations. In August 2020, DHS informed us that the department is working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, validate gaps, and draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS, among other actions. DHS estimates that it will complete these actions by March 31, 2021. To fully address the recommendation, DHS and HHS should ensure that they have implemented procedures aimed at improving the efficiency and accuracy of the interagency UAC referral and placement process.
GAO-14-368, Mar 3, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In 2014, CBP expanded its Arizona Border Surveillance Technology Plan to the Southwest Border Technology Plan. In February 2015, the Border Patrol took steps to address this recommendation by developing the Capability Gap Analysis Process (CGAP) with the support of Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Lab to examine the effects of technology and other assets. In May 2017, Border Patrol officials demonstrated a new system, intended to allow for more comprehensive analysis of the contributions of surveillance technologies to Border Patrol's mission during the CGAP process. As of March 2019, Border Patrol is now able to generate a performance report, using data collected from multiple systems, on how surveillance technologies have assisted agents during operations, including Border Patrol apprehensions. In February 2020 Border Patrol officials stated the data gathered in the report were reliable. They also provided examples of how they use available performance data to help identify gaps in capabilities and inform future investments in surveillance technologies. Border Patrol officials are also developing a surveillance capability score intended to represent the combined contributions of individual technology assets and agents on patrol to conduct surveillance in a given area. Border Patrol plans to report this score in fiscal year 2021, according to documentation provided by Border Patrol. We view these efforts, as described, as important progress toward fulfilling our recommendation, and will review the planned surveillance capability score once it is implemented to determine whether Border Patrol has fully implemented our recommendation.
GAO-13-603, Jul 24, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2017, CBP's Office of Field Operations began working with a contractor to develop a comprehensive CBP position allocation methodology and tool. According to CBP officials, the purpose of this tool was to ensure a data driven, transparent process for allocating CBP resources--including staff--to land ports of entry on the southwest border. CBP officials stated that the contractor completed the tool in January 2018, CBP tested the tool in fiscal year 2018, and CBP planned to implement the tool in fiscal year 2019. However, CBP officials told us in September 2020 that a subsequent reorganization of the Office of Field Operations rendered the tool unusable without further modification. As a result, they used a manual method to allocate staff in fiscal year 2020 and plan to do the same in fiscal year 2021. As of September 2020, CBP officials planned to document the methodology and process they are now using to allocate staff to land ports of entry, including rationales and factors considered, by November 2020. This recommendation remains open.
GAO-13-268, Mar 1, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, Congress had not passed legislation to give the Secretary of Agriculture authority to set fee rates to fully recover the aggregate costs of agricultural quarantine inspection (AQI) services, as GAO suggested in March 2013. The current AQI fee authority does not permit the U.S. Department of Agriculture to set AQI fees to recover the aggregate estimated costs of AQI services. Authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to set fee rates to recover the full costs of the AQI program would save the federal government money by reducing the program's reliance on U.S. Customs and Border Protection's annual Salaries and Expenses appropriation.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, Congress had not passed legislation to give the Secretary of Agriculture authority to assess agricultural quarantine inspection (AQI) fees on private vessels, private aircraft, and commercial buses and include in those fees the costs of AQI services for the passengers on those vehicles. The current AQI fee authority does not permit the U.S. Department of Agriculture to assess AQI fees on private vessels, private aircraft and commercial buses and to recover, through those fees, the costs of AQI services for the passengers on those vehicles.