Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should take steps to provide information to Congress and sponsors to better clarify how FTA applies the methods and factors it considers when performing its review of sponsors' projects. Clarification could include how FTA uses documents, such as project roadmaps, to help sponsors advance through the development process; estimated time frames for reviewing submissions and responding to sponsors' requests; and how FTA considers geographic diversity of projects in its decision-making. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should take steps to review all agency guidance pertaining to the Capital Investment Grants program's development process and identify aspects that may be outdated or confusing for sponsors, and communicate to Congress and sponsors the steps needed to update FTA's guidance or otherwise provide sponsors with more current information on the Capital Investment Grants program. As part of FTA's efforts, FTA could obtain feedback from sponsors and the industry on these issues as appropriate. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should take steps to ensure its staff communicates information, such as the reason why a project is not advancing, to sponsors in a timely manner and in writing upon the sponsor's request. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The FTA administrator should ensure that FTA's cost estimating information for project sponsors is consistent with all 12 steps found in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide and needed for developing reliable cost estimates. [Recommendation 1]

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.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should provide a central, easily accessible source with all of FTA's cost estimating information to help project sponsors improve the reliability of their cost estimates. [Recommendation 2]

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.

Recommendation: The General Manager of WMATA should establish documented policies and procedures for the new capital planning process. These policies and procedures should include methodologies for ranking and selecting capital projects for funding in WMATA's fiscal year 2020 capital budget and fiscal years 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program and for future planning cycles. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA prepared guidance and briefings for project managers to describe the new capital planning process for WMATA's fiscal year 2021 Capital Improvement Program, as well as for the FY 2021-2030 Capital Plan. WMATA's guidance states that WMATA will prioritize projects based on their alignment with WMATA's strategic and supplemental goals and project readiness. WMATA is currently developing the guidance for the FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program planning cycle, which was delayed by COVID-19. WMATA officials stated that they are also finalizing a Capital Program Planning Policy/Instruction document, and they will provide these guidance documents to GAO once completed. GAO will continue to assess whether these policies and procedures include a methodology for ranking and selecting capital projects for funding in future Capital Improvement Program cycles, as we recommended.

Recommendation: The General Manager of WMATA should develop performance measures to be used for assessing capital investments and the capital planning process to determine if the investments and planning process have achieved their planned goals and objectives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA is in the process of finalizing the strategic criteria that will be used for the FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program Development process. Once the guidance is approved and issued, copies will be provided to GAO. During the FY 2022 Capital Planning process WMATA is working to define expected outcomes, or key performance indicators describing the success of a capital investment when completed. GAO will continue to assess whether these efforts will develop a means to sufficiently assess WMATA's capital investments and its capital planning process

Recommendation: The General Manager of WMATA should develop a plan for obtaining complete information regarding WMATA's asset inventory and physical condition assessments, including assets related to track and structures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA is managing three efforts focused on improving WMATA's asset inventory and condition assessment processes. Specifically, WMATA reported that it is developing Data Governance and Standards rules and working with contractors to improve WMATA's asset inventory and condition assessment processes. According to WMATA officials, these efforts should all be complete by the end of 2020. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The General Manager of WMATA should conduct a comprehensive risk assessment of the track preventive maintenance program that includes both a quantitative and qualitative assessment of relevant program risks. In addition to considering technical program risks, WMATA should also consider broader program risks, such as the availability of funding for the program and stakeholders' support. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA reiterated information provided to GAO in October 2019 that it was developing and implementing a new Reliability Centered Maintenance process that will largely replace the previously established preventive maintenance program. According to WMATA, the Reliability Centered Maintenance process will enable WMATA to assess risks to its assets and implement strategies to mitigate those risks. However, WMATA reported that implementation of Reliability Centered Maintenance across the entire enterprise will take considerable time. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's efforts to implement its Reliability Centered Maintenance process, including the degree to which it includes both a quantitative and qualitative assessment of relevant program risks, as we recommended for the previously existing preventive maintenance program.

Recommendation: The General Manager of WMATA should prepare a formal program management plan for the track preventive maintenance program that aligns with WMATA's strategic plan, addresses how the program is linked to overall strategic goals and objectives, and includes program milestones and decision points. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020 WMATA reported that it was developing and implementing a new Reliability Centered Maintenance process that will largely replace the previously established preventive maintenance program. According to WMATA officials, Reliability Centered Maintenance is not a preventive maintenance program itself, but that some of the programs have evolved from preventive maintenance to planned corrective maintenance, based on evaluation of effectiveness of the programs and recommendations from the engineering and maintenance teams. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's efforts to implement its Reliability Centered Maintenance process, including: whether WMATA has made sufficient efforts to compile their various asset management strategies into a formal program management plan; whether this process is clearly linked to WMATA's overall strategic goals and objectives; and whether it includes milestones and decision points for its implementation, as we recommended for the previously existing preventive maintenance program.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should work with Congress to include in the Coast Guard's annual 5-year CIP a discussion of the acquisition programs it prioritized that describes how trade-off decisions made could affect other acquisition programs, such as by delaying recapitalization efforts or needing to conduct Service Life Extension Projects for legacy assets. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Coast Guard agreed with this recommendation and in August 2019 officials reported that the Coast Guard is working with DHS to include additional information that addresses how trade-off decisions made could affect other major acquisition programs in future CIP reports. It anticipates including this information in the FY 2021-2025 CIP, which it expects to release in late summer 2020.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should require the Executive Oversight Council, in its role to facilitate a balanced and affordable acquisition portfolio, to annually review the acquisition portfolio collectively, specifically for long-term affordability. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: The Coast Guard disagreed with this recommendation stating that other bodies within the Coast Guard--such as the Investment Board, Deputies Council, and Investment Review Board--are responsible for making decisions regarding out-year funding, while the Executive Oversight Council works outside of the annual budget process. DHS also stated that, to meet the spirit of our recommendation, the Coast Guard will update the Executive Oversight Council's charter to require a review of the collective acquisition portfolio, specifically evaluating long-term planning. We believe that updating the Executive Oversight Council's charter to include long-term-planning is a positive step. However, we continue to believe that in addition to long-term planning, the Executive Oversight Council should include the major acquisition portfolio's budget realities faced by the Coast Guard in its reviews, or long-term affordability. If the planning accounts for long-term funding considerations to achieve the Coast Guard's acquisition goals and objectives, we believe the intent of our recommendation would be met. The Coast Guard expects to complete the update of the EOC charter by by late summer 2020.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should initiate a rulemaking regarding the evaluation and rating process for Core Capacity Improvement projects, consistent with statutory provisions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, DOT indicated that the Department was working to determine what actions it will take regarding initiating a rulemaking. When we confirm what actions DOT has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To enhance the budget process and to improve transparency, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, to the extent feasible, should ensure that the CJ includes data by appropriation account on the amount of funding requested to maintain current services for each future state theme.

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.

Recommendation: As Treasury works with IRS to improve the quality and accuracy of budget data, the Secretary of the Treasury should ensure sufficient controls are in place to make certain that the information technology investment reports generated from the SharePoint Investment Knowledge Exchange are accurate. This includes, for example, taking steps to reduce the need for manual corrections to the data.

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.