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:
Topic: "Budget and Spending"
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-512, Jul 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-385, May 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-336, Apr 1, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2623
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, USDA stated that the Food and Nutrition Service should formalize its existing processes into a standard operating procedure to analyze the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP) state-level root causes to identify potential similarities among states, in order to improve development and implementation of SNAP agency-level corrective actions, if appropriate.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, USDA stated that a proposed action plan will be developed to revise USDA's procedures for monitoring the progress and measuring the effectiveness of improper payment corrective actions. Processes will focus on the impact corrective actions have on the root causes of improper payments.
Agency: Department of Education: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Education stated that Federal Student Aid (FSA) will continue to evaluate and refine its processes to measure corrective actions and the effectiveness of these actions. Further, Education stated that FSA's measurement of corrective action effectiveness and root cause identification will gain additional precision as FSA collects annual improper payment data and builds upon the new baseline of statistically valid improper payment estimates. Education stated that FSA annually measures the overall effectiveness of its corrective action plans collectively against the improper payment reduction targets, rather than measuring the effectiveness of each individual corrective action. However, OMB guidance directs agencies to measure the effectiveness of each individual corrective action annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, HHS elaborated on the improper payment corrective action plan process that is called for in OMB guidance. HHS stated that OMB guidance provides agencies the flexibility to measure the effectiveness of corrective actions and believes that this flexibility is vital to its oversight processes to reduce improper payments.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that each year it indicates in its corrective action plan that IRS will continue to work with Treasury to develop legislative proposals that will improve refundable credit compliance and reduce erroneous payments.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that each year it indicates in its corrective action plan that IRS will continue to work with Treasury to develop legislative proposals that will improve refundable credit compliance and reduce erroneous payments. Although Treasury has made certain legislative proposals, it has not made proposals to specifically help address EITC eligibility criteria issues. Additionally, Treasury's strategy does not include identifying and proposing additional legislative changes needed to help reduce EITC improper payments.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, SSA stated that it will determine the most cost-effective strategies to remediate the underlying causes of payment errors and monitor, measure, and revise the strategies as needed.
GAO-20-263, Mar 17, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will more specifically define who is responsible for identifying and implementing opportunities for achieving efficiencies with service usage, including roles for the business process analyses the Working Capital Fund division conducts from time to time. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will add the results of the Working Capital Fund division's business process analyses as a performance metric to its Working Capital Fund performance scorecard. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and is in the process of implementing this recommendation. According to the letter, reviews of Working Capital Fund business lines are conducted as a part of regular Working Capital Fund Committee meeting discussions. However, the Committee plans to hold formal review sessions dedicated to reviewing the business lines. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-362, Feb 28, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Directorate for Operations
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, in its written response to our report, NRC neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation but did describe actions that it intends to take in response to our recommendation. NRC stated that it will review its current practice of providing information on work progress to licensees and develop or revise any policy and guidance where necessary. We believe our review sufficiently demonstrated that by implementing our recommendation NRC could further enhance transparency and facilitate planning and budgeting for licensees. We will continue to monitor NRC's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, in its written response to our report, NRC neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation but did describe actions that it intends to take in response to our recommendation. NRC stated that it will review its current web-based cost estimates to determine if changes are necessary and implement those changes as appropriate. We believe our review sufficiently demonstrated that by implementing our recommendation NRC could further enhance transparency and facilitate planning and budgeting for licensees. We will continue to monitor NRC's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-20-68, Dec 19, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that the Advanced Exploration Systems division will review program life-cycle review plans to ensure enterprise and program requirements are reconciled across the mission. NASA is in the process of determining the organizational structure of the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. Following this completion, NASA officials stated that the appropriate control board and division structures for review and program direction will become active.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated it would conduct a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent. The Gateway program is planning to conduct a series of project- and program-level reviews and assessments aligned with key decision point reviews. This includes conducting a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent of the Gateway initial configuration to support a program key decision point planned for fall 2021. NASA has not yet taken action on this recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken action on it. NASA stated that it would provide a schedule for future reviews, including whether there will be a Key Decision Point (KDP) II, at the KDP-I review currently scheduled for fall 2021.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: NASA agreed with the recommendation and stated that the agency will provide a preliminary cost estimate for the Artemis III mission by the end of 2020. Further, NASA stated that it will provide an updated cost estimate for the Artemis III mission after it establishes cost and schedule commitments for some of the projects that compose the lunar mission, currently planned for the Spring of 2021. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to provide a cost estimate.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that it is developing a document that will summarize the trades and architectural studies, but the document is not yet complete.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken any action on it. NASA stated that it will provide additional clarifying guidance for conducting analyses of alternatives for new programs in the next update to NASA Procedural Requirements 7120.5E, "NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements." NASA plans to complete the update of the procedural requirement in September 2021.
GAO-20-126, Dec 12, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the office has not provided information on its actions to implement our recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, OMB needs to collect data on the extent to which federal agencies are using cloud services authorized outside of FedRAMP and oversee agencies' compliance with using the program. According to an OMB Associate General Counsel, the agency does not have a mechanism for enforcing agencies' compliance with its guidance on FedRAMP. However, we believe that OMB can and should hold agencies accountable for complying with its policies. By implementing this recommendation, OMB could substantially improve participation in the FedRAMP program, which is intended to standardize security requirements for federal agencies' authorizations of cloud services. We will update the status of this recommendation when OMB provides information on its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status once CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, EPA stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, EPA stated it is taking action to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any additional evidence. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
GAO-20-130, Dec 10, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation and has developed an action plan to implement it. In January 2020, GSA officials told us that GSA will change the method for calculating the average cost per square foot performance measure by now using the actual rent agencies paid to GSA in the calculation. GSA officials also stated that GSA will post this information annually to performance.gov. We will continue to monitor GSA's implementation of these efforts.
GAO-20-148, Oct 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-600, Sep 9, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6881
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they would determine a reasonable time frame for completing the report and will coordinate with appropriate officials regarding a potential legislative proposal to Congress.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they are taking steps to modify their Foreign Assistance Coordination and Tracking System database to improve the collection of relevant data.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they are developing a plan in coordination with USAID to fill existing vacancies, and are recruiting State and USAID employees to serve on details to fill existing staffing gaps.
GAO-19-624, Sep 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remains open. Treasury enhanced its procedures to include additional management reviews, particularly the Financial Reports and Advisory Division Director, for restatements, reclassifications, and adjustments to beginning net position. Although FRAD took steps to enhance its review procedures, the additional review did not prevent FRAD from including descriptions in the draft CFS that were not supported by entity financial statements or from excluding some information from the CFS notes. Further steps are needed to define procedures to ensure consistent and accurate treatment of restatements, reclassifications, and adjustments to beginning net position in the CFS. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remains open. Treasury and OMB (1) increased guidance to federal entities in the Treasury Financial Manual section 2-4700; (2) included an illustrative Contingent Loss Table in OMB Circular No. A-136 for agencies to use as guidance when reporting probable and reasonably possible losses; (3) provided guidance to agencies through monthly Central Reporting Team (CRT) meetings with the agencies' financial reporting staff and at the Government Financial Management Conference; (4) communicated regularly with Department of Justice officials regarding the preparation of the government-wide legal representation letter; and (5) increased the number of Treasury staff performing the legal letter analysis. However, we noted inconsistencies among the significant component entities' financial statement note disclosures, management schedules, and legal representation letters, and the legal contingency loss information reported in the CFS, as well as inconsistencies between entities' year-end management schedules/legal representation letters and the final government-wide legal representation letter. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-19-562, Jul 22, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, FTA had posted GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide to its website. However, FTA has yet to update its cost estimating information, which does not align with GAO's best practices in five areas: (1) risk and uncertainty analysis; (2) sensitivity analysis; (3) identifying ground rules and assumptions; (4) obtaining the data; and (5) presenting cost estimates to management. GAO continues to believe that because FTA's cost estimating information does not align with all 12 steps found in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, FTA lacks reasonable assurance that sponsors have developed and communicated high-quality cost estimates. We will continue to monitor FTA's actions.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, FTA had developed a webpage with some cost estimating information for project sponsors. However, the website did not include key information for project sponsors which FTA had previously provided to GAO for its analysis of cost estimating information. We continue to believe that providing a centralized location to share existing FTA documentation with sponsors, and ensuring that the documentation incorporates best practices from GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, such as sensitivity analyses, could improve the reliability of sponsors' cost estimates and could reduce the risk of cost overruns for Capital Investment Grant (CIG) New Starts applicants and grantees. We will continue to monitor FTA's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-19-497, Apr 8, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, stating that the Columbia Class Program cost estimate will be updated in 2019 to support the lead ship authorization Decision Acquisition Board in 2020. As of September 2020, we have yet to receive an update on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation, stating that the updated Columbia Class Program cost estimate would incorporate estimated savings from use of the authorities associated with the fund and savings associated with the Columbia lead submarine cost estimate. In August 2020, Navy officials indicated that NAVSEA updated the Columbia lead submarine cost estimate to include updates to the estimate of savings from the use of the authorities associated with the Fund.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, stating that the lead submarine cost estimate and cost risk analysis will be updated to support the lead ship authorization Decision Acquisition Board in 2020. In August 2020, Navy officials indicated that NAVSEA updated the Columbia lead submarine cost estimate. However, this estimate was completed after funding was requested for lead submarine construction. While the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation plans to conduct an assessment of this estimate in the summer of 2020, the assessment will also be too late to inform the Navy's funding request.
GAO-19-284, Mar 22, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB has taken steps to restructure the federal data ecosystem, including issuing government-wide guidance covering all federal data and creating a Business Standards Council. However, given the complexity of recent changes, OMB needs to explicitly and publicly describe how those changes-developed in the context of other government-wide initiatives-apply to DATA Act data element definitions.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OMB staff cited its Federal Spending Transparency Data Standards website and specifically notations on that site regarding the dates of revisions made to those standards as being responsive to this recommendation. However, the specific notations cited by OMB only show changes made back in 2015 and do not reflect nor explain some of the more recent revisions that led to GAO making this recommendation.
GAO-19-178, Jan 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 31, 2019, DOD has not updated its policy or instruction.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 31, 2019, DOD has not updated its policy.
GAO-19-72, Dec 13, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury agreed with the recommendation. As of September 2020, metadata are not available on USAspending.gov.
GAO-19-20, Nov 7, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Corps has developed a definition for "deferred maintenance" for civil works and plans to request funding to establish a team to review maintenance data. The Corps anticipates implementing this recommendation by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Corps is working to review existing authorities, funding, and contracting mechanisms to identify potential courses of action to address GAO's recommendation. The Corps anticipates implementing this recommendation in 2021.
GAO-18-557, Sep 4, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to take specific actions in response. As of July 31, 2020. DOD had not demonstrated that the commendation has been implemented. we will provide updated information when it becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to take specific actions in response. As of July 31, 2020. DOD had not demonstrated that the commendation has been implemented. we will provide updated information when it becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to take specific actions in response. As of July 31, 2020. DOD had not demonstrated that the commendation has been implemented. we will provide updated information when it becomes available.
GAO-18-221, Apr 3, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, DOD had planned actions to update Volume 6A, Chapter 7 of the Financial Management Regulation (FMR) with guidance on rates for disbursement to ensure all components are utilizing the most cost-effective rates while balancing mission requirements and time required to process transactions. DOD estimates that the FMR revision will be completed by October 31, 2020. Until the revision to the FMR is completed, DOD risks paying more to disburse funds for overseas expenditures than would otherwise be required.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. However, as of August 2019, DOD had not planned any actions intended to implement this recommendation. According to DOD, projecting foreign currency gains or losses to determine the necessary size of the Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense (FCFD) account balance would only be possible if foreign currency rates do not fluctuate. DOD states that if projected gains or losses are used to determine the necessary size of the FCFD account when foreign currency rates are volatile, it would expose the department to additional risk. In our report, we acknowledged the inherent challenge in projecting foreign currency gains or losses. However, we also noted that DOD already projects foreign currency gains or losses as the basis for transfers out of the FCFD account but does not use the same analysis to inform its transfers into the account. Further, DOD has the flexibility to make multiple transfers of funds to the FCFD account in a fiscal year in response to any unforeseen foreign currency fluctuations. Without an analysis of projected losses to determine the necessary size of the account balance, DOD may be maintaining the account at a higher balance than is necessary and losing opportunities to more efficiently use funds.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, DOD had planned actions to revise Volume 6A, Chapter 7 of the Financial Management Regulation (FMR) to ensure reporting is complete and accurate and assign responsibilities to DOD components for data correction. DOD estimates that the revision to the FMR will be completed by October 31, 2020. Without updated guidance to ensure that the data that tracks foreign currency gains and losses are complete, DOD and Congress will continue to lack quality information with which to make decisions and exercise stewardship over resources for managing foreign currency fluctuations.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, DOD had planned actions intended to address the recommendation. Specifically, the Secretary of the Army intended to develop a Systems Change Request for how disbursements are recorded in the General Fund Enterprise Business System to be consistent with DOD's Financial Management Regulation. DOD estimates that the system changes will be complete by the second quarter of FY 2020. Until DOD completes its planned actions to address this recommendation, the Army and DOD will continue to lack accurate information for tracking and helping to manage foreign currency gains and losses.
GAO-18-56, Jan 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9869
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.
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.
GAO-17-557, Jul 20, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9971
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Chief Information Officer
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of the issuance of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Joint Report, DOD has taken some steps to address this recommendation. For example, DOD provided more information on the methodologies used to develop NC3 budget estimates. However, the methodology reported for NC3 estimates is still not transparent and DOD must still provide additional information beyond what the methodology in the joint report to clarify differences with the FYDP. However, according to DOD officials, actions will be taken to incorporate a more robust methodology that takes into account these issues in the FY2020 Joint Report. We will re-evaluate DOD's implementation of this recommendation as we review future joint reports.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In the Fiscal Year 2019 Joint Report issued in November 2018, the Air Force identified some instances of programmatic changes in its estimates. However, not all programmatic changes were identified in the report. We will continue to monitor DOD's response to this recommendation as we review future annual joint budget estimate reports.
GAO-17-68, Jan 18, 2017
Phone: (404) 679-1816
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In DOD's response to a draft of our report, DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated it planned to propose updated criteria to OMB to reflect current and evolving threats and reflect any changes in OCO policy under the new Administration. In October 2017, a DOD official stated that the department has discussed possible modifications to the criteria with the military departments and combatant commands, but had not made any formal recommendations to the OMB to revise the criteria. In May 2020, DOD officials stated they had re-evaluated the criteria, and were considering modifications that would take into account mission, instead of location, but OMB did not accept the modifications. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 included a provision requiring DOD and OMB to update their OCO criteria by September 2018. As of May 2020, neither DOD nor OMB has issued updated criteria, and DOD had not made any updates to Volume 12, Chapter 23 of its Financial Management Regulation that governs contingency operations to reflect updated criteria.
GAO-16-695, Jul 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In its fiscal year 2017 congressional justification, IRS modified how its budget data were organized, including linking requested increases to future state themes, but did not clarify how current spending by themes relates to appropriation accounts. Information on current spending by theme and account is important to ensure transparency on the current funding levels to assist Congress in making informed budget decisions. As reported in October 2018 in GAO-19-108R, the themes under the Future State vision are now being pursued as part of IRS's strategic plan for fiscal years 2018 to 2022-issued in May 2018. IRS has been phasing out the use of the term Future State and did not include it in its fiscal year 2020 congressional justification. Including data on the themes in the strategic plan would provide additional transparency and improve the quality of the information available to Congress for budget deliberations.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2017, Treasury Department officials took steps to address the need to manually correct budget data for the fiscal year 2017 budget request. However, as of October 2019, we have not received documentation that they have done so for future budget years. Improved information would help Treasury and IRS better account for information technology resources. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress.
GAO-16-622, Jul 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 1 priority recommendation
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.
GAO-16-439, Apr 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-5431
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.
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.
GAO-16-263, Apr 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, OMB staff maintained their position of disagreement with this recommendation as summarized in our April 2016 report. As of January 2020, OMB has not provided any plans to implement this recommendation.
GAO-16-151, Dec 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2017, Treasury officials told us that they planned to include correspondence data as part of Treasury's fiscal year 2018 annual performance plan and fiscal year 2016 annual performance report. While the fiscal year 2016 performance report included data on correspondence overage rates, as of August 2019, Treasury has not included correspondence overage as part of its performance goals. We continue to believe this recommendation is valid.
GAO-15-476, Jul 9, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 temporarily suspended the debt limit through July 31, 2021. This will allow the Treasury to continue to borrow to meet the funding needs of the federal government. However, the Act did not explicitly link decisions about the debt limit to legislation that is expected to increase borrowing needs or debate over specific tax or spending proposals and their effect on debt. As of June 2020, we confirmed that no further legislative action has been taken since our last update. We will continue to monitor legislation enacting future debt limit increases to see if it addresses our matter for congressional consideration.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 temporarily suspended the debt limit through July 31, 2021, but did not provide Treasury with more flexibility in the level of Treasury's operating cash at the end of the suspension period. As result, absent future action, Treasury is expected to reduce its cash balance to approximately the level it was at on the date the suspension was enacted as it has following previous debt limit suspensions, regardless of cyclical or other cash management needs. We will continue to monitor legislation enacting future debt limit increases to see if it addresses our matter for congressional consideration. As of June 2020, no relevant legislation has been enacted.
GAO-14-476, Jun 30, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4456
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB has taken several steps related to this recommendation as of December 2019, but have not fully addressed it. Specifically, working with the Department of the Treasury to implement the DATA Act, OMB took partial action on two aspects of the recommendation and are still considering actions on two others. 1) OMB staff said they continue to deliberate on agency responsibilities for reporting awards funded by non-annual appropriations. 2) OMB staff provided a Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) addressing the applicability of USASpending.gov reporting requirements for recipient information related to classified or sensitive information. GAO reviewed the FAQ and determined that additional guidance is still needed to ensure complete reporting of unclassified awards as required by FFATA. 3) OMB staff have agreed that it will be important to clarify guidance on how agencies can report on award titles that appropriately describes the awards' purposes and noted that they are working on providing additional guidance to agencies as part of their larger DATA Act implementation efforts. 4) OMB released policy guidance in May 2016 (MPM 2016-03) that identifies the authoritative sources for reporting procurement and award data. However, GAO's review of this policy guidance determined that it does not address the underlying source that can be used to verify the accuracy of non-financial procurement data or any source for data on assistance awards.
GAO-14-529, Jun 17, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, but did not elaborate as to why. As of November 2019, DOD has not implemented an administrative furlough since our 2014 report nor has it produced any guidance regarding the recommendation. We will continue to monitor for the development of guidance or a potential DOD administrative furlough.
GAO-14-605, Jun 12, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: No executive action taken as of December 2019. While IRS agreed that having actual ROI data for implemented initiatives would be useful, it did not believe it was feasible to produce such estimates, as GAO recommended in June 2014. GAO maintains that IRS should be able to provide some information on past initiatives, such as whether funds requested were used in the manner originally proposed. As of December 2016, IRS officials reported there is no timeline for full implementation. Comparing projected ROI to actual ROI can help hold managers and IRS accountable for the funding received.
GAO-14-450, Jun 5, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4841
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.
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.
GAO-13-525, Jul 19, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2013, to increase beneficiaries' awareness of providers' financial interest in a particular treatment, we suggested that Congress should consider directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require providers who self-refer IMRT services to disclose to their patients that they have a financial interest in the service. As of June 2020, Congress has not implemented this suggestion.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2013, we recommended that the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) insert a self-referral flag on its Medicare Part B claims form, require providers to indicate whether the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) service for which a provider bills Medicare is self-referred, and monitor the effects that self-referral has on costs and beneficiary treatment selection. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) did not concur with this recommendation, noting that CMS does not believe that this recommendation will address overutilization that occurs as a result of self-referral, would be complex to administer, and may have unintended consequences. We continue to believe that such a flag on Part B claims would likely be the easiest and most cost-effective way for CMS to identify self-referred IMRT services and monitor the effects of self-referral. As of June 2020, CMS has not provided any additional information about actions it has taken to address this recommendation.
GAO-13-227, May 12, 2013
Phone: (202)512-9869
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD), in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD will work with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to implement key quality assurance procedures, such as reconciliations, to ensure the completeness and accuracy of sampled populations. In August 2017, DOD officials stated that its Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will continue its work with DFAS to annually reconcile gross outlays (as stated on its Statement of Budgetary Resources) with outlays as reported in its Agency Financial Report. These reconciliations are currently done only on a summary level. In the future, DOD's validation of its universe of transactions combined with planned reconciliations with the Defense Departmental Reporting System trial balance and transaction data from DOD's entitlement systems will provide more complete reconciliations. As of December 2019, DOD officials stated that DOD needs to resolve its material weakness relating to the universe of transactions. This material weakness is preventing the department from performing the reconciliations necessary to ensure that the populations, from which the samples are drawn to estimate improper payments, are complete and accurate. As of May 2020, DOD had developed a spreadsheet including over 80 financial management and disbursing systems. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, OUSD(C), is planning to review and analyze these systems to (1) determine the types of payments and lists of systems used to process the types of payments; (2) confirm if reconciliations are done to verify the total outlays; and (3) determine the testing status of the universe of payments. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would work with the applicable components to monitor the implementation of the revised Financial Management Regulation (FMR) chapter on recovery audits (subsequently renamed as payment recapture audits). According to DOD officials, this action would help to ensure that recovery audits are developed, or will demonstrate that it is not cost-effective to do these audits. In July 2015, DOD was working to update the FMR chapter on recovery audits to reflect revised Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance issued in October 2014. DOD issued its revised FMR chapter in November 2015. This chapter requires components to develop cost-effective payment recapture audits or to submit a quantitative justification to the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) for approval. However, we consider this recommendation to be open because DOD did not provide documentation demonstrating that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is monitoring component implementation of recovery auditing. Further, as of April 2017, DOD's efforts to develop cost-estimates for recovery audits were still under way. As of October 2018, this recommendation remains open. As of December 2019, DOD stated that in FY 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) will coordinate with the DOD improper payment reporting components to analyze whether it would be cost effective to implement payment recapture audit programs for their payments. In a March 20, 2020 memorandum, the Deputy CFO asked DOD components, programs, or activities with annual payments exceeding $1 million to submit a payment recapture plan by June 30, 2020. If a component determines that payment recapture audits are not cost-effective, then the plan must provide the specific analysis and documentation used to reach that conclusion. When completed, the results of the evaluation will serve the Department's final position on payment recapture audit programs. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open as this evaluation was not yet complete.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would develop and submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a payment recapture plan that fully complies with OMB guidance and is informed by a cost-effectiveness analysis. In July 2015, DOD's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) efforts to develop a payment recapture audit plan to ensure cost-effectiveness were ongoing and these efforts must be completed before a plan can be submitted to the OMB. In June 2016, DOD officials stated that the Comptroller's efforts to develop a payment recapture audit plan to ensure cost-effectiveness were ongoing. As of August 28, 2017, DOD officials stated that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will determine if a payment recapture audit plan was developed and submitted to OMB for approval in the previous fiscal years. If so, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will determine its relevance and significance (i.e. cost effectiveness)to the improper payments program. If the payment recapture audit plan is considered to be applicable, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will update the previous plan to comply with current OMB guidance. As of October 2018, this recommendation remains open. As of December 2019, DOD stated that in FY 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) will coordinate with the DOD improper payment reporting components to analyze whether it would be cost effective to implement payment recapture audit programs for their payments. In a March 20, 2020 memorandum, the Deputy CFO asked DOD components, programs, or activities with annual payments exceeding $1 million to submit a payment recapture plan by June 30, 2020. If a component determines that payment recapture audits are not cost-effective, then the plan must provide the specific analysis and documentation used to reach that conclusion. When completed, the results of the evaluation will serve the Department's final position on payment recapture audit programs. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open as this evaluation was not yet complete..
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would design and implement procedures to further ensure that its annual improper payment and recovery audit reporting is complete, accurate, and in compliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERA) requirements and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance. In June 2015, DOD revised its FMR chapter on improper payments to require components to provide information needed to report on improper payment and recovery audit activities in its annual financial report (AFR) in accordance with IPERA requirements and OMB guidance. DOD's fiscal year 2015 AFR reflected its implementation of the revised FMR. We found that DOD's improper payment reporting in its fiscal year 2015 AFR had improved. However, we were not provided with evidence that Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is performing oversight and monitoring activities to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the improper payment and recovery audit data submitted by DOD components for inclusion in the AFR. DOD is continuing to work on procedures for ensuring that its reporting on improper payment and recovery audits is accurate, complete, and in compliance with IPERA and OMB guidance. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) has developed and implemented a Payment Integrity Checklist to ensure that the department's annual improper payment and recovery audit reporting was complete, accurate, and in compliance with IPERA and OMB guidance. However, the DOD Inspector General in its May 2020 report, stated that while DOD published improper payment estimates for all eight programs for fiscal year 2019, it did not publish reliable estimates for five of the eight programs: Military Health Benefits, Civilian Pay, Military Retirement, DOD Travel Pay, and Commercial Pay. Moreover, DOD did not use accurate populations in calculating the improper payment estimates for the Military Retirement, Commercial Pay, and DOD Travel Pay programs. Based on these issues affecting improper payment reporting, we consider this recommendation to be open as of September 30, 2020.
GAO-13-228, Feb 26, 2013
Phone: (202)512-3236
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.
GAO-13-188, Jan 17, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-3604
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.
GAO-13-130, Dec 20, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. VA has taken actions intended to address the reliability of appointment wait times through improvements in appointment scheduling, including issuing a revised scheduling policy, providing and documenting scheduler training and improving oversight through scheduler audits. While the revised scheduling policy and subsequent guidance changed the terminology of wait time measures, it did not substantively clarify or define the desired date, one of the dates used for measuring appointment wait times. Therefore, we continue to believe that the desired date is still subject to interpretation and prone to scheduler error, which poses concerns for the reliability of wait times measured using the patient's desired date. Furthermore, in its internal audit report dated February 2019, VA reported it was unable to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of its wait-time data due to the lack of business rules for calculating them, indicating that additional efforts are needed to address this issue. In January 2020, VA reported to us that the internal audit did not test whether schedulers entered the patient's desired date into the scheduling system in compliance with VHA policy because of the lack of verifiable source documentation. Given our continued concerns about VA's ability to ensure the reliability of the wait-time data, we have requested additional information from VA about its wait time methodology and assessment of evidence underlying the audit findings.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation and stated that VISN and VA Medical Center leadership would use best practices to develop and implement improved telephone service plans. As of March 2015, VA had developed a standardized telephone assessment tool and requested that facilities that care for 5,000 or more veterans complete the assessment and select actions for improvement based on its existing telephone systems improvement guide. Based on this request, VA received telephone assessment and improvement plans from 286 facilities that care for 5,000 or more veterans. VA is monitoring the facilities' telephone performance and is re-baselining call center infrastructure at each facility with a survey and new performance goals. In September 2015, VA issued an updated Telephone Access and Contact Management Improvement Guide. VA has also drafted an update to its directive on telephone access to outpatient care. As of July 2019, VA decided not to advance the draft policy for review and approval at this time, because of the significant uncertainty due to ongoing development of VA clinical contact centers and telehealth services. VA stated that it remains committed to developing sound policy related to virtual (telephone, video, and web-chat) access to clinical care.
GAO-13-21, Dec 20, 2012
Phone: (617)788-0534
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In a status update from OMB received on March 6, 2020, OMB stated that it agrees that agencies should respond to comments on final major rules, for which the agency has discretion, that are issued without a prior notice of proposed rulemaking. OMB says it will continue to prioritize this issue during review of regulations under EO 12866, and that it is currently considering whether additional guidance is appropriate and will consult with the staff of the Administrative Conference of the United States on this issue.
GAO-13-156, Dec 18, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-9110
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: IRS neither agreed nor disagreed with GAO's recommendation from December 2012, but has made progress in developing a customer service strategy that defines appropriate levels of telephone service; however, as of February 2020, IRS had not finalized its strategy nor determined the appropriate levels of service for correspondence and wait time. In January 2017, IRS shared results of a benchmarking study that compared its telephone service, measures, and goals to comparable agencies and companies. The team that conducted the study recommended options for additional measures to indicate the level of access taxpayers have to service across service channels. In September 2019, IRS provided GAO its revised customer service strategy; however, it did not include correspondence service. In July 2019, the Taxpayer First Act (Public Law 116-25) was enacted which requires IRS to develop a comprehensive customer service strategy. As of February 2020, IRS had established an internal office to implement this requirement. Completion of a comprehensive customer service strategy that defines appropriate levels of service and wait time as well as specific steps to manage services based on an assessment of time frames, demand, capabilities, and resource requirements would enable IRS to make a more informed request to Congress about resources needed to deliver specific levels of service. Further, finalizing a long-term comprehensive strategy will help ensure IRS is maximizing the benefit to taxpayers and possibly reduce costs in other areas.
GAO-13-77, Dec 13, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, FHWA stated it does not plan to revise and publish the agency's Highway Cost Allocation Study because of the cost of doing so and the uncertainty about whether and how it would be used. GAO continues to believe that up to date information on the cost of road damage imposed by all vehicle types compared with the revenues contributed by those vehicles to the Highway Trust Fund is needed to help determine whether user fees are sufficient to cover damage costs. Moreover, Congress and the administration need to agree on a long-term sustainable plan for balancing spending from and revenues to the Highway Trust Fund and, for this reason, funding surface transportation is on GAO's High Risk List. GAO will continue to monitor any efforts by DOT and FHWA to respond to our recommendation.
GAO-13-99, Nov 19, 2012
Phone: (202)512-6304
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: Congress had taken a number of actions that affect the NTIS fee-based model for disseminating technical information. Specifically, for the past 5 fiscal years and in the current Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, NTIS is prohibited from charging customers for reports generated by legislative branch offices unless the agency tells the customer how an electronic copy of the report can be accessed or downloaded for free online. The act further states that, if a customer still requires such a report from NTIS, the agency should not charge more than what is needed to recover the cost of processing, reproducing, and delivering the document requested. It remains to be seen whether these requirements will be continued under the yet to be introduced House and Senate bills making appropriations for the Department of Commerce (Commerce) for fiscal year 2021. Congress again has the opportunity to consider legislation that would ensure the assessment of the appropriateness or viability of NTIS functions.
GAO-13-42, Nov 14, 2012
Phone: (202)512-4431
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, Congress has taken no action to implement this matter. GAO will continue to monitor Congressional action related to this matter to determine if either an extension or reauthorization of the current surface transportation program includes changes that would allow states to use the Motorcyclist Safety Grants for purposed beyond motorcyclist training and raising motorist awareness of motorcycles.
GAO-12-966, Sep 27, 2012
Phone: (202)512-7029
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation. CMS believes that a new checkbox on the claim form identifying self-referral would be complex to administer and providers may not characterize referrals accurately. We continue to believe that such a flag on Part B claims would likely be the easiest and most cost-effective way for CMS to identify self-referred advanced imaging services and monitor the behavior of those providers who self-refer these services, even though the agency has no plans to take further action. As of January 2020, CMS continues to indicate it will not take additional actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation, noting that CMS did not believe that a payment reduction would address overutilization that occurs as a result of self-referral and that the agency's multiple procedure payment reduction policy for advanced imaging already captures efficiencies inherent in providing multiple advanced imaging services by the same physician. Further, CMS does not think a payment reduction for self-referred services would be effective. For example, the agency believes that providers in self-referring arrangements could avoid this reduction by having one provider refer an advanced imaging service while having another perform the service. Finally, CMS questioned whether implementing our recommendation would violate the Medicare statute prohibiting paying a differential by physician specialty for the same service. Our recommendation, however, refers to specific self-referral arrangements in which the same provider refers and performs an imaging service, and therefore would not be addressed by CMS's multiple procedure payment reduction policy. As noted in our report, this payment reduction would affect about 10 percent of advanced imaging services referred by self-referring providers. In addition, while CMS raised questions about whether implementing our recommendation would violate Medicare's prohibition on paying a differential by physician specialty for the same service, our report shows that self-referring providers generally referred more MRI and CT services, regardless of differences in specialties, and CMS did not indicate how this recommendation would implicate the prohibition on paying a differential by specialty. We continue to believe that CMS should determine and implement a payment reduction to recognize efficiencies for advanced imaging services referred and performed by the same provider. As of January 2020, the agency has no plans to take further action regarding this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation, according to its fiscal year 2021 budget justification. To fully implement this recommendation, CMS should determine and implement an approach to ensure the appropriateness of advanced imaging services referred by self-referring providers.
GAO-12-806, Jul 31, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: According to DOE's audit tracking system report, for the period ending 1/28/16, DOE Office of Budget was evaluating and revising DOE Order 130.1 as necessary to include planning, programming, budgeting, and evaluation (PPBE). The report states that the Office of Budget will communicate revisions to NNSA as appropriate with an estimated completion date of 9/30/16. According to a previous tracking system report, Order 130.1 was updated and placed in the management review process some time between 6/30/13, and 9/30/13. According to DOE, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer implemented a new funding execution system on 10/1/16. The development and implementation of the new system has delayed revision of DOE Order 130.1. The new system will impact the budget practices, planning, policies and processes content that will be outlined in the revised DOE 130.1. As of 6/30/20, DOE's Directives Review Board established an Integrated Project Team to revise the Department's Budget Formulation and Budget Execution Directives. Final approval of the revised guidance is anticipated by 9/30/20.
GAO-12-446, Jun 15, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, Congress has not acted on this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation if Congress takes action.
GAO-12-623, Jun 7, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and said that it would establish a process to review the mission and requirements for the Selective Service System. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 established the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service (i.e., the Commission) to, among other things, review the military selective service process. The Commission is to submit a report to the President and Congress no later than March 2020 with recommendations concerning the need for a military draft and means by which to foster a greater ethos of public service among American youth. Further, the Commission was directed to conduct hearings and meetings open to the public in various locations throughout the country to provide maximum opportunity for public comment and participation in order to help develop its recommendations. In January 2019, the Commission released an Interim Report. The Interim Report shared what the Commission learned throughout its first year, explored options the Commission is considering to increase service participation among all Americans, and outlined issues involved in the Commission's review of the military selective service process. In March 2020, the Commission issued its final report, and it recommended that (1) the Congress require the Secretary of Defense to update the personnel requirements and timeline for obtaining draft inductees in the event of an emergency requiring mass mobilization and (2) the President direct the Secretary of Defense to include in future Quadrennial Defense Reviews and National Defense Strategies a section on the state of the Selective Service System and the ability of the United States to rapidly mobilize personnel in the event of an emergency. The Commission's report reinforced our recommendation; however, until DOD takes action to respond to our recommendation to take actions to establish a process to periodically review the mission and requirements of the Selective Service System, this recommendation should be left open.
GAO-12-482, May 3, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In January 2019, according to DOD officials, the Navy was still revising its policies and guidance documents to include information on sharing UII data enterprise wide. They expected a revised Secretary of the Navy instruction to undergo review in Fiscal Year 2019 and an OPNAV supporting instruction to follow, once the Secretary of the Navy instruction is released. However, as of September 2019, the relevant Secretary of the Navy instruction had not been updated.
GAO-12-333, Mar 9, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2019, CMS officials reported that the agency was still in the process of implementing this recommendation about developing guidance regarding liability and no-fault set-aside arrangements. Since April 2012, the month the recommendation was made, CMS officials have reported at various times that the agency was planning to issue either regulatory or sub-regulatory guidance on this topic. In March 2019, officials said that the agency now planned to issue regulatory guidance, and that a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was expected to be posted in October 2019. We will continue to update the status of this recommendation as new information is available.
GAO-12-33, Oct 5, 2011
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill was introduced on June 28, 2011, which would have amended electronic filing requirements for paid preparers. This included language amending section 6695 of the Internal Revenue Code to include a penalty of $50 for failure to electronically file returns under section 6011 (e)(3). However, this bill was never enacted. As of January 2020, there are no bills pending that would provide IRS with authority to penalize paid preparers for failure to electronically file returns as GAO recommended
GAO-11-587, Jul 20, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9286
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In March, 2017, IRS issued its Portfolio Investment Plan Process Description Manual for selecting and prioritizing new and ongoing operations support activities. The manual includes criteria for prioritizing selections; and provides for comparing assets against one another to create a prioritized portfolio; and ensuring executives' funding decisions are based upon the process for selecting and prioritizing activities. In March 2018, IRS updated the manual and also issued related detailed procedures. In May 2019, IRS stated that its Information Technology/Strategy and Planning group had developed a prioritization process and associated scoring criteria to help facilitate decision making for business systems modernization programs, projects, and capabilities. The agency noted that improvements were being made to the process and full implementation was anticipated for June 2019.In April 2020, IRS informed us that it had moved its target for fully implementing the recommendation to November 2020. We will continue to monitor IRS's efforts to implement the recommendation.
GAO-11-481, Mar 29, 2011
Phone: (202)512-5594
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has expanded IRS's math error authority in certain circumstances, but not as broadly as GAO suggested in February 2010. Section 208 of division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 114-113 enacted in December 2015) gave IRS the authority to use math error authority if (1) a taxpayer claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, or the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) during the period in which a taxpayer is not permitted to claim such credit as a consequence of either having made a prior fraudulent or reckless claim; or (2) a taxpayer omitted information required to be reported because the taxpayer made prior improper claims of the Child Tax Credit or the AOTC. While expanding math error authority is consistent with what GAO suggested in February 2010, GAO maintains that a broader authorization of math error authority with appropriate controls would enable IRS to correct obvious noncompliance, would be less intrusive and burdensome to taxpayers than audits, and would potentially help taxpayers who underclaim tax benefits to which they are entitled. If Congress decides to extend broader math error authority to IRS, controls may be needed to ensure that this authority is used properly such as requiring IRS to report on its use of math error authority. The Administration also requested that Congress expand IRS's math error authority as part of the Service's Congressional Budget Justification and Annual Performance Report and Plan for fiscal year 2021. Specifically, the Administration requested authority to correct a taxpayer's return in the following circumstances: 1) the information provided by the taxpayer does not match the information contained in government databases or Form W-2, or from other third party databases as the Secretary determines by regulation; 2) the taxpayer has exceeded the lifetime limit for claiming a deduction or credit; or 3) the taxpayer failed to include with his or her return certain documentation that is required to be included on or attached to the return. As of March 2020, the Congress had not provided IRS with such authority.
GAO-11-171R, Dec 16, 2010
Phone: (202)512-8246
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2015, DOD had not documented program-specific recommendations from the corrosion study for the other weapon systems identified in its report. However, DOD updated its Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook in 2014 and, according to officials, is working to update DOD Instruction 5000.67, Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure. These actions may improve the corrosion prevention and control planning for the weapon systems identified in DOD's study. DOD partially concurred with this recommendation at the time of our report but as of March 2019, has since decided to take action to implement it. According to Corrosion Office officials, they interacted with two of five weapon-systems programs on corrosion-related matters. One of these weapon-system programs, per Corrosion Office officials, was eventually canceled. In addition to updating the Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook for Military Systems and Equipment in 2014, officials stated that they are planning to further update DOD Instruction 5000.67 (Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure). Also, according to Corrosion Office officials, procedures for evaluating acquisition programs will be included in the new DOD manual on corrosion. The Corrosion Office's goal of completing this instruction update and creating the new manual is by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2015, DOD had not documented Air Force- and Navy-specific recommendations flowing from the corrosion study. However, DOD updated its Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook in 2014 and, according to officials, is working to update DOD Instruction 5000.67, Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure. Further, the Air Force and the Navy have both taken actions to address the DOD-wide recommendations from the corrosion study. These actions may improve corrosion prevention and control planning for Air Force and Navy programs. As of March 2019, Corrosion Office officials stated that they are planning to further update DOD Instruction 5000.67 (Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure) or other appropriate guidance related to the process or procedures for monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of Corrosion Prevention Control planning for weapon systems, particularly related to how the military services will accomplish this within their increased weapon system oversight role. In addition, per Corrosion Office officials, this information will be addressed in the new DOD manual on corrosion. The Corrosion Office's goal to complete this instruction update and create the new manual by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.
GAO-11-45, Dec 14, 2010
Phone: (202)512-2757
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department generally agreed with this recommendation. In 2011, the Bureau reported on the agency's assessment of the partnership program. In September 2014, the Bureau's Path to the 2020 Census, identified the Partnership Program as one of the best methods for communicating the importance of response and states its intent to map out details about the Partnership Program in early 2016. As of March 2018, Bureau officials said they were developing coordination mechanisms between partnership and Area Census Office staff for the 2020 Census. For example, the Bureau updated a form it had used during the 2010 Census to track partnership outreach activities to help facilitate information sharing within the Bureau and said it plans to make additional updates. In March 2019, the Bureau informed us that it is assigning at least one partnership specialist to each census office manager to help address this recommendation. As we reported in May 2020, the Bureau had not put in place expectations for how Partnership staff should support area census office staff. We also reported that pluralities of area census office managers we surveyed in March 2020 were dissatsified with the level of clarity of roles and responsibilities of Partnership staff, as well as the level of communication and coordination between Partnership and office staff. To fully implement this recommendation, the Bureau will need to take such steps as documenting for partnership specialists and their area census office manager how they are expected to work together and other significant mechanisms that would increase effectiveness of coordination and communication between partnership and local field office staff.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department generally agreed with this recommendation. In September 2012, the Bureau issued its assessment of the Service Based Enumeration Program. The assessment reported on the number of individuals counted and the complexities of this special enumeration activity. The assessment did not address the Bureau's approach to staffing this special enumeration activity. In its 2020 Census Operational Plan, issued in October 2017, the Bureau provided a high level overview of reengineered field operations plans but did not provide details on special enumeration efforts. In April 2018, the Bureau provided us with its planned staffing ratios for its Service-Based Enumeration activity for the 2020 Census in comparison to those used in the 2010 Census, as well as results of its 2016 Census Test of SBE activity. As of August 2020 we have ongoing work that will be examining implementation of peak field operations and providing updates to this recommendation. In order to fully implement this recommendation, the Bureau needs to demonstrate that its planning for how it will determine staffing levels for SBE takes into account the factors that led to inefficient staffing allocation previously.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department generally agreed with this recommendation. In 2012, the Bureau reported on assessments of many 2010 special enumeration activities such as the Service-Based Enumeration and the Be Counted/Questionnaire Assistance Center Programs. These assessments revealed the number of persons counted and spending for the special enumeration activities. Separately, the Bureau issued results of the 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Program that described the level of coverage of various hard-to-enumerate populations generally without attributing coverage to specific enumeration activities. Since 2015, the Bureau has issued annual updates of its 2020 Census Operational Plans, which have not provided details of plans for various special enumeration activities. In April 2017 Bureau officials provided us with evaluation results of its 2010 communication efforts and other documents related to ongoing efforts to reduce errors in the census. As of August 2020, we are in communication with Bureau officials about steps they are taking to implement this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, the Bureau needs to demonstrate how it is relying on data about how various special enumeration activities of historically hard-to-enumerate groups contributed to census coverage in 2010 to inform its design for the 2020 Census.
GAO-11-84, Dec 8, 2010
Phone: (202)512-8246
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD has not updated DOD Instruction 5000.67 - Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure, the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan, or other applicable guidance since the publication of our report. DOD did not concur with this recommendation at the time of our report but as of March 2019, has since decided to take action to implement it. Corrosion Office officials agree that Corrosion Executives' responsibilities in the Corrosion Prevention Project selection process have to be further defined. They plan to clearly document the selection procedures and participation of the Corrosion Executive in an update to DOD Instruction 5000.67 (Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure) and in the new DOD manual on corrosion. The Corrosion Office's goal is to complete this instruction update and create the new manual by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.
GAO-10-455, Apr 12, 2010
Phone: (202)512-8509
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action on this matter.
GAO-10-59, Nov 13, 2009
Phone: (202)512-2757
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Commerce neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Regarding GAO's 2013 assessment of the Bureau's schedule (GAO-14-59), Bureau officials stated that they hoped to begin identifying the resources needed for each activity in their schedules by early 2014. Bureau officials announced they had completed the 2020 Census schedule in July 2016, and have since periodically described their intent to link resources to activities within their schedules. However, as of May 2018, when the Bureau had not taken these steps. Senior Bureau officials stated that it would require additional staffing in order to plan for and implement this recommendation. In July 2018 (GAO-18-589) we reported again on the status of the Bureau's scheduling, stating that when the Bureau has resource loaded its schedule, it will be able to use the schedule more effectively as a management tool. The Bureau took steps toward assigning resources to its master activity schedule for the 2020 Census, but effectively ran out of time to do so. Assigning resources to large complex schedules is easier to do early in schedule development process, as we recommended the Bureau do in 2009 for its 2020 Census schedule. This recommendation will remain open pending the Bureau taking steps in developing its 2030 schedule with appropriate resources linked to it.
GAO-10-136, Nov 6, 2009
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury issued proposed regulations clarifying the definition of gross receipts on December 13, 2013 and solicited public comments. During the course of 2014, tax practitioners and business executives submitted comments criticizing the regulations and asking for them to be withdrawn. As of March 2020, Treasury has yet to issue final regulations that would include responses to these criticisms. The regulations would not become effective until the tax year beginning after the date on which the regulations are published in final form.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to clarify what types of activities are considered to be qualified support activities.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to more clearly identify when commercial production of a qualified product is deemed to begin.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit. Adding a minimum base for the ASC would reduce the revenue cost of the credit without affecting the average incentive it provides for research.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to update the historical base period that regular credit claimants use to compute their fixed base percentages.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken to eliminate base period recordkeeping requirements for taxpayers that elect to use a fixed base percentage of 16 percent in their computation of the credit.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to clarify for Treasury its intent regarding the definition of gross receipts for purposes of computing the research credit for controlled groups of corporations. In particular, it may want to consider clarifying that the regulations generally excluding transfers between members of controlled groups apply to both gross receipts and QREs and specifically clarifying how it intended sales by domestic members to foreign members to be treated. Such clarification would help to resolve open controversies relating to past claims, even if the regular credit were discontinued for future years.
GAO-09-976, Sep 30, 2009
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically share with appropriate staff business rules information, along with related results of periodic evaluations of the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of time frames for regularly sharing business rules information. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically evaluate the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices and share evaluation results with appropriate staff. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of any evaluation results or a date when IRS expects to complete the first such evaluation. Nor had IRS provided time frames for regularly conducting and sharing business rules evaluation results. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
GAO-09-647, Jul 31, 2009
Phone: (202)512-7029
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: Congress has exempted savings from the implementation of multiple procedure payment reductions (MPPR) for certain diagnostic imaging and therapy services from the budget neutrality requirement, as GAO suggested in July 2009. However, as of January 2020, other policies that may result in a reduction in payments for the professional component for imaging services remained subject to budget neutrality; "savings" from these services are redistributed to other services and do not accrue to the Medicare program. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 revised the payment reduction for the professional component of multiple diagnostic imaging services from 25 percent to 5 percent beginning on January 1, 2017, and exempted the reduced expenditures attributable to this MPPR from the budget neutrality provision. MPPRs or other policies that may result in a reduction to payments for the technical component for diagnostic cardiovascular and ophthalmology services continue to be subject to budget neutrality for 2020. Unless Congress exempts from the budget neutrality requirement savings realized from the implementation of all MPPRs or other policies that reflect efficiencies occurring when services are furnished together, these savings will not accrue to the Medicare program.
GAO-09-521, May 13, 2009
Phone: (202)512-5594
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: No executive action taken. IRS had not addressed this action and had no plans to do so as of January 2020. IRS did not agree with GAO's May 2009 recommendation and the agency maintains that existing examination guidance provides examiners with sufficient information to properly examine this deduction. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2016, section 11042 of Public Law 115-97 caps the deduction for state and local taxes, including real estate taxes, at $10,000. In its 2009 review, GAO found that some examiners were not confirming that taxpayers were entitled to deduct real estate charges claimed, even in situations where their deductibility may have been in question. As a result, GAO maintains that examiners are continuing to rely on guidance that is inadequate to properly examine this deduction and that action should be taken to clarify the guidance.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: No executive action taken. IRS had not addressed this action and had no plans to do so as of January 2020. IRS did not agree with GAO's May 2009 recommendation and the agency maintains that existing examination guidance provides examiners with sufficient information to properly examine this deduction. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2016, section 11042 of Public Law 115-97 caps the deduction for state and local taxes, including real estate taxes, at $10,000. In its 2009 review, GAO found that some examiners were not confirming that taxpayers were entitled to deduct real estate charges claimed, even in situations where their deductibility may have been in question. As a result, GAO maintains that examiners are continuing to rely on guidance that is inadequate to properly examine this deduction and that action should be taken to clarify the guidance.
GAO-09-238, Jan 28, 2009
Phone: (202)512-5594
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislative action has been taken, as of March 2020, to require payers engaged in a trade or business to report on payments to corporations for services, thereby reducing these payers' burden to determine which payments require reporting, as GAO recommended in January 2009. Reporting of third-party information is a powerful compliance tool, and eliminating the reporting exemption for payments to corporations would be a cost-effective way to improve voluntary compliance.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: According to IRS, developing such an estimate requires a multi-pronged approach and a large amount of coordinated effort. One prong is to determine the extent of filing compliance among employers. A second prong would determine the extent to which 1099-MISC payers properly report their payments. Starting with the Tax Year 2001 individual income tax reporting compliance study, the National Research Program (NRP) office has been collecting some data related to Form 1099-MISC compliance, from both the payer and payee perspectives. Additional data were generated by the NRP reporting compliance study for employment tax. As part of the NRP employment tax research, IRS examiners were to review taxpayers' Form 1099 filing compliance. Data collected from these studies should shed some light on whether employers are appropriately reporting required payments on Form 1099-MISC. As of March 2020, IRS had completed its preliminary analysis and expected to complete more comprehensive analysis of the NRP employment tax data by May 2020. GAO will continue to monitor IRS's progress.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS researchers collected data on 1099-MISC reporting as part of its National Research Program (NRP) study on employment taxes, a program that involved examinations of a sample of tax returns for tax years 2008 through 2010. As part of the NRP employment tax research, IRS examiners were to review taxpayers' Form 1099 filing compliance. Collecting data on this issue will enable IRS to study the nature and characteristics of payers that do not comply with 1099-MISC reporting requirements. As of March 2020, IRS had completed its preliminary analysis and expected to complete more comprehensive analysis of the NRP employment tax data by May 2020. GAO will continue to monitor IRS's progress.
GAO-08-956, Aug 28, 2008
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislative action had been taken, as of January 2020, to make owners of rental real estate subject to the same payment reporting requirements regardless of whether they engaged in a trade or business under current law, as GAO recommended in August 2008. Changing reporting requirements and holding taxpayers with rental real estate to the same filing requirements as taxpayers whose activities are considered a trade or business would provide clarity about who is required to file, which would improve tax compliance.
GAO-08-364, Feb 15, 2008
Phone: (202) 512-9039
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislative action as of March 2020. GAO suggested in February 2008 that as Congress considers whether tax-exempt governmental bonds should be used for professional sports stadiums that are generally privately used, it also should consider whether other privately used facilities, including hotels and golf courses, should continue to be financed with such bonds. Reconsidering the tax-exempt status of certain bonds could generate hundreds of millions of dollars in additional federal revenue.
GAO-08-87, Jan 31, 2008
Phone: (212) 512-3000
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, there had been no legislation introduced to require HHS to improve the Medicaid demonstration review process. However, HHS has taken some action to address some aspects of GAO's recommendation. CMS established new policies that addressed certain problems GAO had identified and issued written guidance on the process and criteria used to approved states' proposed spending limits. Not all problems identified by GAO were addressed by the new CMS policy, thus legislation to require HHS to improve the Medicaid demonstration review process, as GAO recommended in January 2008, continues to be a viable matter for consideration.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, Congress had not passed legislation in response to our matter for congressional consideration.
GAO-08-287, Jan 7, 2008
Phone: 2025128984
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: To fully implement this recommendation, DOT should complete and issue a National Freight Strategic Plan. As part of the development of the National Freight Strategic Plan, DOT should include defining the federal role in freight transportation, including economically-based and objective criteria to identify areas of national significance for freight transportation and to determine whether federal funds are required in those areas. As of February 2020, DOT had not issued the National Freight Strategic Plan and DOT officials said they were planning to issue the strategy by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: To fully implement this recommendation, DOT should complete and issue a National Freight Strategic Plan. As part of the development of the National Freight Strategic Plan, DOT should include establishing the roles of regional, state, and local governments, as well as the private sector. As of February 2020, DOT had not issued the National Freight Strategic Plan and DOT officials said they were planning to issue the strategy by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: To fully implement this recommendation, DOT should complete and issue a National Freight Strategic Plan. As part of the development of the National Freight Strategic Plan, DOT should include using new or existing federal funding sources and mechanisms to support a targeted, cost-effective, and sustainable federal role in freight transportation. As of February 2020, DOT had not issued the National Freight Strategic Plan and DOT officials said they were planning to issue the strategy by the end of 2020.
GAO-04-45, Oct 30, 2003
Phone: (202)512-8815
including 5 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-03-753, Jul 7, 2003
Phone: (202)512-8365
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with all recommendations for Executive Action in the report. DOD stated it "is committed to meeting the requirements of Congress and, to the extent compatible with its core mission, the positive recommendations of the GAO report." In DOD's Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan dated November 2004, DOD stated that the working integrated product team for Metrics, Impact and Sustainment established as one of its objectives initiating studies and surveys to determine the impact of corrosion, pinpoint critical areas for concentration of prevention and mitigation efforts and to develop metrics to measure the effect of corrosion and results of prevention and mitigation efforts. In its 2005 update to the DOD corrosion strategic plan, DOD included a revised list of metrics for cost, readiness and safety and the associated outcomes that would result from the implementation of these metrics. In addition, the strategic plan included details of corrosion projects funded in 2005 and 2006 and the expected results of completing the projects in terms of achieving cost savings, increasing readiness, and enhancing safety. As of March 2019, Corrosion Office officials stated that they plan to include goals, objectives, and performance measures in the update to the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan. The Corrosion Office's goal is to complete this plan update by the end of calendar year 2020 . We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.