Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency fully implements the category management activity to reduce unaligned IT spending, by performing an analysis of alternatives to justify the agency's unaligned IT contracts. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency fully implements the category management activity to develop and implement vendor management strategies, by implementing the strategies it had developed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency fully implements the category management activity to share prices paid, terms, and conditions for purchased IT goods and services. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency finishes implementing its process to analyze IT contract data. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency develops and implements strategies to address duplication identified through the use of spend analyses. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture should direct the Agricultural Marketing Service to conduct an evaluation of the Farmers to Families Food Box Program after the third round of the program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture, in coordination with the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, should more fully incorporate the seven leading practices for effective collaboration in the agencies' interagency agreement for the joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: FDA and USDA partially concurred with this recommendation. FDA stated that it concurred with the intent of incorporating the seven leading practices into the interagency agreement, and both agencies said that they are open to incorporating the practices into their development of the structure for joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. However, the agencies stated that they did not agree to revise the agreement at this time. FDA and USDA stated that the agreement is a general framework and that incorporating the leading practices would constitute an inappropriate level of detail. Instead, the agencies stated that they believe it would be most valuable to incorporate the leading practices into a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure they plan to issue. We appreciate the agencies' willingness to incorporate the leading practices for effective collaboration into their efforts. The March 2019 interagency agreement states that the agencies have the ability to modify it as needed and will review the agreement every 3 years to determine whether they should modify or terminate it. Therefore, the agencies are due to revisit the agreement in March 2022, if not sooner. Regarding the agencies' concern that incorporating the leading practices in the interagency agreement would add an inappropriate level of detail, we note that, as we state in our report, the existing agreement already partially incorporates each of the seven leading practices. We continue to believe that FDA and USDA should more fully incorporate the seven leading practices for effective collaboration into their interagency agreement for the joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. Developing a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure in accordance with the existing interagency agreement that incorporates those leading practices would meet the intent of our recommendation to improve the effectiveness of the agencies' collaboration.

Recommendation: As the three cell-cultured meat working groups move forward, the Secretary of Agriculture, in coordination with the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, should more fully incorporate the seven leading practices for effective collaboration, such as identifying specific outcomes and a way to monitor and evaluate progress toward outcomes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, USDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture, in coordination with the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, should clearly document in their interagency agreement, or other publicly available document, which agency will oversee cell-cultured seafood other than catfish. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, USDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should develop and implement a process, documented in policies and procedures, to analyze SNAP state-level root causes to identify potential similarities among the states and develop and implement SNAP agency-level corrective actions, if appropriate, to help address them. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should revise USDA's procedures to include processes for monitoring the progress and measuring the effectiveness of improper payment corrective actions. The process for measuring the effectiveness of corrective actions should clearly demonstrate the effect USDA's corrective actions have on reducing improper payments. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to publicize promising practices for Title IX compliance on its websites for their university grantees. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with the recommendation. In its March 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that it will ensure promising practices information is posted to websites for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Additionally, a notice will be sent to universities to ensure they are aware the information is available, along with specifics regarding access to the same.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to finalize and publish revised Title IX complaint procedures. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with the recommendation to finalize and publish Title IX complaint procedures. According to the department's March 2020 formal comment letter, USDA's Departmental Regulation (DR) 4330-002, Nondiscrimination in Program and Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance from USDA, addresses processing Title IX administrative complaints filed with the Department in any program or activity receiving financial assistance from USDA. The Departmental Regulation (DR) 4330-002 was revised in 2019 and is currently in the clearance process for publication.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to clarify on its website that individuals on USDA-funded grants can file Title IX complaints through the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights—including clarifying who is considered "customers." (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. According to the department's March 2020 formal comment letter, USDA's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) will add language on its website to make clear recipients of USDA-funded grants are included in the definition of a customer and, as such, may file Title IX complaints through OASCR. Additionally, the requested information will be added to the Frequently Asked Questions section on OASCR' s website.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to assess the feasibility of receiving and reviewing concerns of sex discrimination—including sexual harassment—and communicating to individuals on agency-funded grants the option to notify the agency of these concerns, outside of the Title IX complaint process. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. According to the department's March 2020 formal comment letter, USDA is to direct the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) to assess the feasibility of receiving and reviewing concerns of sex discrimination (including sexual harassment) and including language in agency-funded grants on the option to notify the agency of harassment issues outside of the Title IX complaint process. The Office of the Mission Area Liaison within OASCR will assess the feasibility of creating a tracking system to capture inquiries and concerns outside of the Title IX complaint process. If feasible, the system will serve as a risk assessment tool to identify issues, potential violations, trends, risks, and areas prime for focused compliance review, according to USDA's formal comment letter.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should establish goals and an overall plan to assess all of the agency's sexual harassment prevention efforts for their university grantees, including methods to regularly monitor and evaluate its sexual harassment prevention policies and communication mechanisms (e.g. Title IX or sex discrimination websites). (Recommendation 16)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. According to the department's March 2020 formal comment letter, USDA will consider developing language to include in university grantees' terms and conditions regarding allegations of sexual harassment. Additionally, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) will reach out to other agencies within the Title IX Quarterly Working Group to assess best practices for monitoring and evaluating sexual harassment prevention policies and communication mechanisms. Finally, USDA will increase its communication with university grantees and increase oversight through compliance reviews.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should take action to achieve its data center-related cost savings target established under DCOI by OMB. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) agreed with our recommendation and stated that it planned to meet the cost savings target in 2020. We will continue to monitor Agriculture's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, should take steps to consult with respective sector partner(s), such as the SCC, DHS, and NIST, as appropriate, to collect and report sector-wide improvements from use of the framework across its critical infrastructure sector using existing initiatives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In written comments provided in April 2020, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) stated that it concurred with our recommendation. The department stated that it routinely shared framework guidance provided by the Department of Homeland Security and discussed the framework as part of its monthly Sector conference calls and biannual Sector Meetings. It also added that the department will continue to strengthen its coordination efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct Departmental Administration to work with the mission areas to develop department-level outcome-oriented performance goals and related measures for the business centers, and use them to assess the effectiveness and impact of the business center reforms. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2020, USDA officials agreed with our recommendation and stated that the department is evaluating options for the development of performance metrics and inclusion of these metrics and related information as part of the regular and recurring reviews by the department's Deputy Secretary who is identified as the Chief Operating Officer.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Office of Property and Fleet Management to consistently monitor property provided to non-federal recipients within 1 year of receipt, and to ensure property is being used for its intended purpose 1 year after initial monitoring. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, USDA's 180-day letter has not been received.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Office of Property and Fleet Management to establish clear processes to oversee property programs, including excess property provided to non-federal recipients across the agency. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, USDA's 180-day letter has not been received.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should complete development of guidance and provide training to agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with the findings of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 21)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with the findings of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should take steps to improve its oversight of CACFP meals provided in adult day care centers. For example, FNS could amend its approach for determining federal onsite reviews of CACFP meal providers to more consistently include adult day care centers. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service told us that, in an effort to improve oversight of the CACFP meals provided in adult day care centers, it will place a special interest on lessons learned from onsite local reviews that are conducted by states where the adult portion of the CACFP is administered separately by the state department of aging and thus, adult day care institutions are always selected for local onsite reviews as part of their management evaluation. Further, Food and Nutrition Service told us it will commit to sharing this information with other state agencies that administer the CACFP. Food and Nutrition Service estimates completing this action by the end of calendar year 2020. We will review the status of this recommendation upon receipt of Food and Nutrition Service updates at the end of 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should take steps to better disseminate existing information that could help state and local entities involved in providing CACFP meals meet the varying nutritional needs of older adult participants, as well as continue to identify additional promising practices or other information on meal accommodations to share with CACFP entities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service told us that it will take several actions over the next 12 months to address our recommendation. Food and Nutrition Service actions will include holding listening sessions specifically focused on the adult day care side of the program at two national CACFP conferences this year to understand the specific information providers are looking for the address the needs of older adults and identify promising strategies for accommodating those needs; review existing guidance for training opportunities and areas that could benefit from further clarifications; and updating the Adult Day Care Handbook to include promising practice examples to address specific information and concerns gathered from the listening sessions, GAO's report findings, and further clarifications from existing guidance. Food and Nutrition Service also told us it will use multiple channels to ensure the handbook is widely disseminated to state agencies and adult day care program operators. We will review the status of this recommendation upon receipt of additional updates from Food and Nutrition Service regarding the aforementioned actions to be taken over the next 12 months.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the agency fully implements each of the eight key IT workforce planning activities it did not fully implement. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Forest Service to develop a centralized mechanism to record the current estimated cost of reclamation for a mining operation so that this information is readily available for comparison with the financial assurance held. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, the agency has made progress in implementing this recommendation. Specifically, the agency has modified the bonding portion of the Natural Resource Manager data system to include required data fields to record the initial bond received, adjustments made to required bonding amount, and date of last annual review when a needed adjustment was determined. The agency has also added a remarks field to record any increase or decrease in the estimated cost of reclamation that resulted in the revised required bond amount. The agency is currently working to update its internal guidance so that staff are aware of the requirement and process to document these items. We agreed to check back on the status of that guidance in early 2021 and will update the recommendation status at that time.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, USDA agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should work with the Commissioner of FDA to develop a mechanism to facilitate coordination with relevant nonfederal stakeholders, including state, local, and tribal governments, on actions related to date labels as part of their efforts to reduce food loss and waste. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with our recommendation and is planning actions to implement the recommendation.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should develop a cybersecurity risk management strategy that includes the key elements identified in this report. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it is developing a Risk Management Framework implementation plan, which is to include a comprehensive Cybersecurity Strategy. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should update the department's policies to require (1) the use of risk assessments to inform security control tailoring and (2) the use of risk assessments to inform plan of actions and milestones (POA&M) prioritization. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it is developing a Risk Management Framework implementation plan which will include updates to USDA's process guide to ensure informed security control tailoring and updates to USDA's Plan of Actions and Milestones (POA&M) Standard Operation Procedure to inform prioritized POA&M mitigation strategies, through a consistent and repeatable security risk assessment process. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should establish and document a process for coordination between cybersecurity risk management and enterprise risk management functions. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it plans to establish a governance framework for USDA Enterprise Risk Management (ERM), which will provide a platform to increase coordination between stakeholders within the cybersecurity and enterprise risk management functions. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should work with Administrator of EPA and Commissioner of FDA to incorporate leading collaboration practices as they implement their interagency FLW reduction strategic plan, to include (1) agreeing on roles and responsibilities; (2) developing mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and report on results; (3)clearly defining short- and long-term outcomes; (4) identifying how leadership commitment will be sustained; and (5) ensuring that the relevant stakeholders have been included in the collaborative effort. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of December 2019, we are following up with the agency. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service should establish a process to plan and conduct regular fraud risk assessments for the school meals programs that align with the leading practices in the Fraud Risk Framework. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 12, 2019, USDA stated that it will undertake, over the course of the next year, a re-evaluation of its existing research and oversight activity to measure and assess fraud risk, its efforts to manage that risk, and its work to minimize the occurrence and impact of fraudulent activity on the school meal programs. USDA also stated that it will look to GAO's Fraud Risk Framework as a model for this effort. USDA expects this effort to include some new activity, such as a deeper examination of the underlying causes of program error in the agency's periodic studies of improper payments. USDA also views this as an opportunity to clarify and highlight how the agency's existing approach to risk management currently addresses fraud risk. USDA agrees that it is appropriate to review and refine its existing controls on a regular basis and recognizes that a more formalized assessment of fraud risk is likely to uncover gaps in existing activity that point to opportunities for further agency action. USDA commits to the development of a response to the effort that is appropriate to the scale of the identified risk and the broader mission of the school meal programs. In September 2020, USDA stated that it has been reviewing agency research and administrative data, as well as conducting new analysis. USDA is concluding work on its risk assessment and plans to circulate it within the agency for review soon. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should take action to meet the data center optimization metric targets established by OMB under DCOI. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) agreed with our recommendation and began taking action to implement it. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department subsequently reported meeting its targets for the advanced energy metering and server utilization metrics. However, the department also reported that it had not yet met its target for the virtualization metric. We will continue to monitor Agriculture's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the CIO of Agriculture establishes a consistent and repeatable mechanism to track savings and cost avoidances from the migration and deployment of cloud services. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to develop a mechanism to track savings to implement this recommendation. Specifically, Agriculture officials reported in April 2020 that the department had established an office to assist with cloud migration efforts and instituted a process that requires cloud migration efforts to submit cost data and report cloud savings in accordance with OMB guidance. Officials noted that the department would implement a mechanism within one year once OMB issues guidance related to tracking savings (OMB has not yet implemented guidance in this area). We will continue to monitor Agriculture's progress on these efforts.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development should document in the agency's tribal consultation policy how agency officials are to communicate with tribes about how tribal input from consultation was considered in agency decisions on proposed infrastructure projects. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service should follow the agency's standard operating procedures (SOP) to prioritize corrective actions for FMD preparedness. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is evaluating the agency's response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service should follow the agency's SOP to monitor progress and track completion of corrective actions for FMD preparedness. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is evaluating the agency's response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To complete the appropriate assignment of codes to their positions performing IT, cybersecurity, or cyber-related functions, in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act of 2015, the Secretary of Agriculture should take steps to review the assignment of the "000" code to any positions in the department in the 2210 IT management occupational series and assign the appropriate National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) framework work role codes. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Agriculture concurred with our recommendation and stated that it was identifying an internal team of subject-matter experts to collaborate with organizations across the department to review the assignment of the "000" code to positions and assist in determining the appropriate work role codes. As of April 2020, USDA expected to complete this activity by fall 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, USDA will need to provide evidence that it has assigned appropriate NICE framework work role codes to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should make information on their website regarding student SNAP eligibility requirements easier to understand and more accessible, as a resource for colleges and state SNAP agencies. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS partially concurred with this recommendation and in September 2019, the agency stated that it will take actions to address the recommendation by February 2020. First, FNS said it would review the information regarding student SNAP eligibility on its website and, where possible, revise this information to reduce legal and technical language. FNS also stated it will evaluate the placement of student SNAP eligibility content on its website and assess alternatives to increase accessibility of this information for colleges and state SNAP agencies. We continue to believe that changes to FNS's existing information are needed to improve the clarity and accessibility of information about SNAP student eligibility requirements on FNS's website. Once we receive additional information about improvements to FNS's website, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should coordinate with its regional offices to collect and review information about existing SNAP flexibilities and examples of approaches state SNAP agencies are taking to assist eligible college students to access SNAP benefits, and share such information with state SNAP agencies. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS partially concurred with this recommendation and, in September 2019, stated that it is currently evaluating strategies to address this recommendation utilizing existing resources. Specifically, FNS stated that by August 2020, it will assess suitable mechanisms (e.g., policy memos, webinars, conferences) for information sharing with state SNAP agencies and disseminate that material as resources allow. We continue to believe that FNS needs to work with its regional offices to identify and share additional information about state approaches to assist eligible college students with access to SNAP benefits. Once we receive additional information about FNS's information sharing activities, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should amend its analysis of selected data centers to address key elements of a cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis as defined by OMB Circular A-94 and relevant agency guidance. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, the Department of Agriculture asserted that it has implemented the recommendation but has not provided sufficient evidence to support its assertion.

Recommendation: When amending its analysis of the selected data centers, the Secretary of Agriculture should report on the assessment of each facility's protective measures, as outlined by the Interagency Security Committee guidance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, the Department of Agriculture asserted that it has implemented the recommendation but has not provided sufficient evidence to support its assertion.

Recommendation: When amending its analysis of the selected data centers, the Secretary of Agriculture should report on an analysis of the information security controls for each data center, in order to evaluate the data center's information security capabilities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, the Department of Agriculture asserted that it has implemented the recommendation but has not provided sufficient evidence to support its assertion.

Recommendation: When amending its analysis of the selected data centers, the Secretary of Agriculture should report on each data center's demonstrated history of restoring continuity of operation functions in the event of a service disruption. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, the Department of Agriculture asserted that it has implemented the recommendation but has not provided sufficient evidence to support its assertion.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should present the uncertainty around its retailer trafficking estimates in future reports by, for example, including the full range of the estimates in the report body and executive summary. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation, and stated that it will present the uncertainty around the retailer trafficking estimates in the executive summary and main body of all future trafficking reports, instead of presenting the information in appendices, as it did in past reports. In August 2020, FNS stated that it has made this change to the next trafficking report, which is in clearance at USDA. GAO will consider this recommendation implemented when FNS issues its this report.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should continue efforts to improve the agency's retailer trafficking estimates by evaluating (1) whether the factors used to identify stores for possible investigation could help address the bias in its sample, and (2) the accuracy of its assumption of the percentage of SNAP benefits that are trafficked by different types of stores. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation. FNS stated that it will evaluate whether incorporating additional factors, such as the Watch List score used to identify stores for possible investigation, could improve its estimation methodology. FNS also stated that it will work with the USDA OIG to better understand the methodology the OIG uses to estimate the share of benefits that are trafficked by a retailer who is prosecuted for trafficking, and determine whether it is feasible to apply a similar methodology to the transaction data maintained by FNS in order to improve the accuracy of its assumptions about the percentage of SNAP benefits that are trafficked. In August 2020, FNS noted that it will evaluate the feasibility of this revised methodology for the trafficking estimates covering years 2018 through 2020. GAO will consider this recommendation implemented when FNS provides information on the results of this evaluation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should assess the benefits and costs of reauthorizing a sample of high-risk stores more frequently than other stores, use the assessment to determine the appropriate scope and time frames for reauthorizing high-risk stores moving forward, and document this decision in policy and on its website. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation. In August 2020, FNS stated that it included a sample of 471 high-risk stores that had not yet reached their 5-year reauthorization cycle in its fiscal year 2020 reauthorization pool. Once fiscal year 2020 reauthorizations are complete, FNS will analyze the outcomes of these reauthorizations to determine the benefits and costs of reauthorizing some high-risk stores more frequently. At that point, FNS will determine the appropriate scope and time frames for reauthorizing high-risk stores moving forward. GAO will consider this recommendation implemented when FNS completes this work.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should move forward with plans to increase penalties for retailer trafficking. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation. In August 2020, FNS reported that it has developed a proposed rule to accomplish this change. The agency expects the proposed rule to be published in December 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should establish performance measures for its trafficking prevention activities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation. In August 2020, FNS reported that the agency has assessed existing data to develop strategies for trafficking prevention, and is taking a two-pronged approach. First, the agency stated that it has updated training materials and guidance to make them more accessible for staff. Second, the agency stated that it is continuing to assess store applications and reauthorizations for business integrity, including prior fraud and other criminal offenses by store owners or managers, as described in regulations and policy. However, FNS did not indicate whether the agency currently has plans to establish performance measures for its trafficking prevention activities.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) should identify and disseminate strategies to states and service providers for increasing the participation of SNAP recipients referred to the SNAP E&T program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS officials agreed with this recommendation and indicated they are taking steps towards closing it. Specifically, FNS officials said they plan to take the following actions to disseminate strategies on increasing participation among SNAP recipients referred to the SNAP E&T program: 1) update the SNAP E&T Best Practices Study to include strategies on increasing participation by December 2021; 2) publish results from Pilot Projects to Reduce Dependency and Increase Work Requirements and Work Effort Under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that include information regarding which outreach, referral, and enrollment processes are most effective by 2021; and 3) provide technical assistance through SNAP to Skills with new attention on increasing SNAP E&T participation and engagement among eligible SNAP participants. We will continue to monitor FNS's efforts to disseminate strategies through these mechanisms with a particular focus on ensuring these strategies reach both state officials and service providers.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should take additional steps to address data reliability issues in the state-reported data on SNAP E&T participant characteristics and outcomes, including steps to address imprecise instructions on data collection forms and staff confusion at the state level. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS generally agreed with this recommendation. They noted that they have been providing continued technical assistance to states to improve data quality and in October 2018 made updates to the SNAP E&T data report. FNS plans or has additional changes pending to the SNAP E&T data report and SNAP Quality Control guidance that it plans to use to collect improved SNAP E&T data in fiscal year 2021. In addition, FNS plans to leverage results from data and technical assistance grants upon their completion in September 2020 to disseminate best practices to help states improve outcome reporting data. We are encouraged by FNS's efforts in these areas and will evaluate the results of these actions as we continue to monitor the agency's progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should determine and communicate to states how the agency will use newly reported outcome and participant characteristics data to assess the effectiveness of state SNAP E&T programs. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS officials agreed with this recommendation. FNS officials noted that with the submission of January 2019 outcome reporting measures, the agency has a complete year of data which FNS will use to establish a baseline for each State's SNAP E&T program. However, FNS has not yet articulated how the data will be used to assess effectiveness of the programs, or provided examples of how FNS has used the data to provide feedback on the effectiveness of SNAP E&T programs. We will continue to monitor FNS's efforts to communicate to the states how the outcome data can be used to assess program effectiveness.

Recommendation: Building on ongoing efforts, the Administrator of FNS should develop and implement additional methods to widely distribute information to state agencies on an ongoing basis about successful efforts to adopt data analytics and strategies to leverage existing data, technology, and staff resources to enhance data analytics. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: FNS agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that it has been moving in the general direction of this recommendation and would build on current efforts to address it but noted that state readiness and technical capabilities are limiting factors in the adoption of data analytics.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of RUS to undertake an assessment to identify any regulatory barriers that may unduly impede efforts by tribes to obtain RUS federal grant funds for broadband deployment on tribal lands and implement any steps necessary to address the identified barriers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2020, RUS officials told us that they were documenting their tribal outreach efforts and the feedback collected on tribal needs related to the RUS broadband programs, and that they would provide this information to us when it is complete. Once we receive and review this information, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief of the Forest Service should determine whether new regulations governing timber export and substitution are appropriate. If the agency determines new regulations are appropriate, it should issue them in accordance with the 1997 act, in consultation with BLM. Otherwise, the agency should seek legislative relief from the act's requirement. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: In its May 15, 2020 correspondence, the Forest Service stated that it is putting together a Corrective Action Plan for addressing the recommendation. It expects leadership review of the plan to be completed in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Chief of the Forest Service should review agency policies for continued relevance and effectiveness in addressing the risk of illegal timber export and substitution, and based on that review--and in accordance with applicable regulations--should issue new policies as necessary. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

Comments: In its May 15, 2020 correspondence, the Forest Service stated that it is putting together a Corrective Action Plan for addressing the recommendation. It expects leadership review of the plan to be completed in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the department's IT management policies address the role of the CIO for key responsibilities in the six areas we identified. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation and, in May 2019, the agency revised its departmental policies to address 21 of the 22 responsibility gaps identified in the report. The remaining responsibility is for the Chief Information Officer (CIO) to report annually to the head of the agency on progress made in improving IT personnel capabilities. In particular, while USDA's CIO is required to conduct an annual assessment on IT personnel, there is no indication that the results are reported to the agency head. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address these requirements.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should review the policies, procedures, and related control activities to ensure that the agency's Paperwork Reduction Act review process is operating effectively. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, USDA provided an update on efforts to review its Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) policies and procedures. To ensure that its PRA process is operating effectively, USDA reviewed and updated its internal guidance on preparing information collection request supporting statements, including sections regarding the calculation of respondent burden hour and cost estimates. This updated guidance encourages consultation with potential respondents to help develop these burden estimates. A new PRA consultation checklist directs agency officials to seek input from individuals outside of USDA regarding the agency's burden estimates for an information collection request, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used in the estimate calculations. The updated guidance specifies that fringe benefits, such as paid leave, insurance, and retirement contributions, should be included in the wage rates used for respondent burden cost estimates. It also clarifies when roundtrip travel time and costs should be included in burden estimates. According to USDA officials, the agency meets with PRA Coordinators to ensure compliance with the updated guidance. These are positive steps toward improving USDA's burden calculation process. However, USDA has not yet provided evidence of a review or revision of its information collection request review process. A review or revision of this process could help USDA better identify errors in burden estimate calculations prior to the final information collection request being sent to OMB and released to the public.

Recommendation: The Administrator of APHIS should develop a timeline for (1) defining birds that are not bred for research and that are covered by the Animal Welfare Act, and (2) requiring that research facilities report to APHIS their use of birds covered by the act. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: According to APHIS officials, the agency developed a timeline and a work plan for an Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM) to define "bred for use in research" as it applies to birds (as well as to rats and mice) under the Animal Welfare Act and submitted it to USDA officials on July 18, 2019. However, as of October 2019, USDA had not established a date to publish the ANPRM and had instead placed it on the department's long-term regulatory agenda. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts and provide updated information when it becomes available.

Recommendation: The Administrator of APHIS should instruct federal agencies to report their use of animals covered by the Animal Welfare Act in federal facilities located outside of the United States. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA disagreed with this recommendation for several reasons. For example, USDA stated that the absence of an exclusion to the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act or its regulations for federal research located outside of the United States does not create a requirement to collect information about such facilities' use of animals. In October 2019, APHIS officials said the agency continues to disagree with the recommendation. However, we have no reason to believe that such facilities should be excluded under the Act, and we continue to believe that the Administrator of APHIS should instruct federal agencies to report their use of animals in activities covered by the Animal Welfare Act in federal facilities located outside of the United States. We will continue to monitor any actions taken by APHIS to address this recommendation and provide updated information when it becomes available.

Recommendation: In developing the definition of field studies, the Administrator of APHIS should provide research facilities with clear criteria for identifying field studies that are covered by the Animal Welfare Act's regulations and that facilities should report to APHIS as well as field studies that facilities should not report. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our draft report, USDA stated that APHIS agreed to issue a guidance document by December 31, 2018. According to APHIS officials, the agency prepared a draft guidance document entitled "Research Involving Free-Living Wild Species" for departmental review in April 2019. As of October 2019, APHIS was in the process of reviewing comments from the department. We will continue to monitor APHIS and USDA's actions to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) should improve its estimate of children's participation in the SFSP by focusing on addressing, at a minimum, data reliability issues caused by variations in the number of operating days of meal sites and in the months in which states see the greatest number of meals served. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) submitted its 180-day letter and a subsequent response to report recommendations in GAO-18-369. In its response, FNS stated that it anticipates completing an evaluation of how they calculate SFSP participation by summer 2020. GAO will continue to monitor FNS actions to address this recommendation, including the status of its evaluation and steps taken to improve the agency's estimate of children participating in SFSP. GAO will consider this recommendation closed when FNS provides documentation that it has addressed, at a minimum, data reliability issues in the participation estimate caused by variations in the number of operating days of meal sites and in the months in which states see the greatest number of meals served. FNS plans to provide us with the status of its efforts by the end of FY 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should communicate to all SFSP stakeholders the circumstances it considers in approving requests for flexibility with respect to the requirement that children consume SFSP meals on-site in areas that have experienced crime and violence, taking into account the feasibility of accessing data needed for approval, to ensure safe delivery of meals to children. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In late May 2018, the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) provided guidance to states regarding changes in policies related to SFSP waivers and demonstration projects and held a webinar to clarify the changes. In March 2019, FNS reported that this guidance and the webinar provided information about participation in the demonstration for exceptional circumstances, which is the means through which FNS had granted states and program providers flexibility for children to consume SFSP meals off-site in areas that had experienced crime and violence. However, the guidance documents do not directly acknowledge that FNS includes areas with crime and violence as exceptional circumstances for purposes of the demonstration, and neither the guidance nor the webinar provided new information about the circumstances FNS considers when granting the flexibility for such areas. GAO will therefore continue to monitor FNS actions to address this recommendation and consider it closed when the agency communicates the circumstances it considers in approving such requests for flexibility with response to the requirement that children consume SFSP meals on-site in areas that have experienced crime and violence. FNS plans to provide us with the status of its efforts by the end of FY 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should evaluate and annually report to Congress, as required by statute, on its use of waivers and demonstration projects to grant states and sponsors flexibility with respect to the requirement that children consume SFSP meals on-site in areas experiencing crime or violence, to improve its understanding of the use and impact of granting these flexibilities on meeting program goals. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) reported that it had drafted the report to Congress to meet its statutory requirement summarizing the use of waivers and demonstration projects. FNS also indicated that the report was being reviewed internally, and planned to submit the final report to Congress following that review. GAO will consider closing this recommendation when FNS submits the final report to Congress. FNS plans to provide us with the status of its efforts by the end of FY 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FNS should disseminate information about existing flexibilities available to state agencies to streamline administrative requirements for sponsors participating in the SFSP and other child nutrition programs to help lessen the administrative burden. For example, FNS could re-distribute existing guidance to state agencies that explains available flexibilities and encourage information sharing. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Office of the Secretary: Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: Food and Nutrition Service
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) submitted its 180-letter and a subsequent response to recommendations in GAO-18-369. In its response, FNS stated that it plans to address streamlining flexibilities that impact the SFSP and other child nutrition programs in a future regulatory action. GAO will therefore continue to monitor FNS's progress with this rule-making and any other actions taken to address this recommendation. FNS plans to provide us with the status of its efforts by the end of FY 2020.

Recommendation: The RHS Administrator should establish additional controls to check the accuracy of all loan information entered into RHS information technology systems, to help ensure complete, accurate, and reliable data for estimating rural rental housing property exit dates. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA said it would prioritize the development of options for the RHS Information Technology System , including dashboards and other protocols, to provide more analytical assessments and accurate data with respect to mortgage maturity dates and property-level information. It also said it would strengthen its partnership with Rural Development's Information Technology staff and develop more effective communication tools with RHS field personnel to highlight the importance of maintaining reliable data. USDA estimated it would complete these steps by September 30, 2019. However, as of May 2020, USDA officials had not provided us documentation of their efforts.

Recommendation: The RHS Administrator should establish a process to help ensure regular and frequent updates for the preservation tool and its underlying data. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA said it would embed quality assurance in the preservation tool to ensure that the underlying data are accurately sourced, maintained, and analyzed. USDA also said it would ensure involvement from RHS National Office staff and RHS field office staff in this process to maximize the resources allocated to ensuring that the tool's data are integral and timely. Finally, USDA said RHS National Office personnel in the Deputy Administrator's office will be assigned quality control responsibility for the accurate maintenance of the tool. USDA estimated it would complete these steps by September 30, 2019. However, as of May 2020, USDA officials had not provided us documentation of their efforts.

Recommendation: The RHS Administrator should establish performance goals and measures for its rural rental housing preservation and rehabilitation efforts and report out these outcomes. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA said it would incorporate preservation goals, objectives, and measures into its on-going updates and edits to handbook guidance. As an initial step, on June 4, 2018, the agency incorporated the guidance provided in the Unnumbered Letter titled "Dynamic Servicing Strategies for the Multi-family Housing Direct Loan Portfolio." The revisions also renamed Chapter 6 of the handbook to "Portfolio and Property Assessment." USDA said on-going guidance updates will prioritize preservation as the goal of servicing strategies and require program staff to exhaust all potential remedies to achieve this goal prior to proceeding to terminate assistance or otherwise not preserve the affordable housing property. USDA officials expected these and other steps to be completed by September 30, 2019. However, in May 2020, USDA officials said publication of the guidance had been delayed, and guidance was not expected to issue until early fiscal year 2022.

Recommendation: The RHS Administrator should monitor the results of rural rental housing preservation efforts and assess the degree to which those efforts yielded intended outcomes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA said that in conjunction with its establishment of preservation goals and objectives, it would utilize a performance tracking system and establish management routines to discuss and strategize how to achieve these goals. In November 2019, USDA officials said they had assessed the Section 515 Multi-Family Housing Preservation and Revitalization demonstration program and planned to finalize a plan that would enhance program delivery efficiency and consistency within 8 months (July 2020). However, as of May 2020, USDA officials had not provided documentation showing performance tracking or routine monitoring efforts. The officials said they planned to complete an evaluation of rural housing preservation goals or objectives by the third quarter of fiscal year 2022.

Recommendation: The RHS Administrator should identify, analyze, and respond to risks to achieving its preservation goals, including resource and staffing limitations. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: USDA said it would utilize a performance tracking system and establish management routines to discuss and strategize how to achieve its goals. According to USDA, this will include an assessment of challenges and risks that may affect the achievement of performance and preservation objectives. However, as of May 2020, USDA had not provided us documentation of its efforts to identify, analyze and respond to risks to achieving its preservation goals.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development should implement a scoring factor that awards points for proposed Native American program grant projects that address health risks from a lack of access to safe drinking water and wastewater disposal, as it does with the Colonias grant program. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, USDA stated it would prefer to use its discretionary points under its existing regulations to implement this scoring factor instead of making a regulation change to do so. USDA stated that using existing flexibility in the regulations could meet the intent of the recommendation more quickly than by permanently changing the regulation. USDA stated that it has established policy guidance to states that addresses scoring for projects with health and sanitation risks. We will monitor the actions that USDA has taken in response to this recommendation and evaluate them when complete.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should review the 2011 task force report and identify and implement additional actions to help increase the task force's collaboration at the national level. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, the task force member agencies met to discuss the status of the recommendations in the 2011 task force report. The agencies each agreed to compile information about the actions they had taken and consider new actions in 2020. USDA stated in December 2018 that the task force agencies had made progress in developing efficiencies in environmental review processes and with online tribal resources and training, in addition to other areas. We will evaluate USDA's actions after the task force has compiled all actions taken in response to the 2011 report and evaluated what further actions or responses should be conducted.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, in cooperation with other members of the tribal infrastructure task force, should direct USDA state offices to identify and pursue additional mechanisms to increase their collaboration. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2018, USDA stated that it would send a memo to its state directors and program directors encouraging them to coordinate with tribal governments, IHS, EPA, and other members of the tribal infrastructure task force on funding infrastructure projects. As of December 2019, task force members had drafted a joint memo to distribute to their field offices encouraging additional coordination. We will evaluate USDA's actions in response to this recommendation once they are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the AMS administrator to ensure that P&SP routinely conducts in-depth analysis of the transaction data that it collects. Such analysis could include but not be limited to examining competition levels in different areas of the country. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed that routine in-depth analysis of packer transaction data would enhance USDA's monitoring of the fed cattle market to ensure against discriminatory or anticompetitive practices. In April 2020, USDA officials said the agency has made progress to complete the in-depth analysis and regular monitoring of the transaction data it collects. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) should document the agency's process for deciding which products to consider for new pathogen standards, including the basis on which such decisions should be made. (Recommendation 1).

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2019, FSIS is drafting a document that will outline the agency's process for deciding which products to consider for new pathogen standards, including the basis on which such decisions should be made. FSIS estimates the document will be finalized in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. As of October 2020, FSIS has not completed this action.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FSIS should set time frames for determining what pathogen standards or additional policies are needed to address pathogens in beef carcasses, ground beef, pork cuts, and ground pork. (Recommendation 2).

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, FSIS proposed new pathogen reduction performance standards for Salmonella in raw ground beef and beef trimmings. FSIS told us the agency is developing performance standards for some pork products and plans to issue draft standards sometime in fiscal year 2020 but as of October 2020 has not completed this action.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FSIS should include available information on the effectiveness of on-farm practices to reduce the level of pathogens as it finalizes its guidelines for controlling Salmonella in hogs. (Recommendation 3).

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2019, FSIS is revising its draft guidelines for controlling Salmonella in hogs. The agency plans to include in the guidelines available scientific information on the effectiveness of on-farm practices to reduce Salmonella. FSIS estimates it will complete its revision of the guidelines in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 but as of October 2020 has not completed this action.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture, in cooperation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, should take steps to consult with respective sector partner(s), such as the sector coordinating council (SCC), Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and NIST, as appropriate, to develop methods for determining the level and type of framework adoption by entities across their respective sector. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In written comments, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation in our report, but stated that it would attempt to develop a measurement mechanism as part of its annual data calls to the Food and Agriculture Sector. Specifically, officials stated that the diversity of the sector makes it difficult to develop a method for determining the level and type of framework adoption across the sector that would apply to all members. USDA officials added, however, that the sector coordinating council frequently invites the Department of Homeland Security to semi-annual meetings to present on both the threat to cybersecurity and resources available to support the needs of the sector. However, as of January 2020, USDA officials had yet to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption. Implementing our recommendations to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by critical infrastructure sectors is essential to the success of protection efforts.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Forest Service
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that IT acquisition plans or strategies are reviewed and approved according to OMB's guidance. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with our recommendation, and in June 2018, USDA CIO delegated the review and approval of acquisition plans and strategies to the Capital Planning and Information Technology Governance Division (CPITGD) through the Associate CIO of the Information Resource Management Center. However, as of June 2020, the agency had not provided evidence to demonstrate that these reviews and approvals are taking place as required by OMB's guidance. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA includes all key monitoring provisions specified by applicable guidance as part of agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA officials have full documentation of required monitoring activities in agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

Recommendation: The FSIS Administrator should work with OSHA to assess the implementation of the MOU and make any needed changes to ensure improved collaboration; and set specific timeframes for periodic evaluations of the MOU. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: FSIS stated that it already has directives in place to recognize and report hazards affecting FSIS employees, and acknowledged that the MOU was designed to additionally have FSIS employees report hazards affecting plant employees due to the regular presence of its inspectors in plants. FSIS noted that in collaborating with OSHA, FSIS will need to ensure its primary mission is not compromised by undertaking activities that take time and resources away from its food safety inspection responsibilities. In January 2019, OSHA reported that it met with FSIS several times to discuss chemical exposures, referrals, and issues of jurisdiction in state plan states. FSIS subsequently shared the results from a NIOSH health hazard evaluation that was conducted, as well as the efforts to track the source of the infected birds. To fully implement this recommendation, FSIS should strengthen the MOU and develop a mechanism to regularly evaluate it would help ensure that the goals of the MOU are met; leveraging FSIS's presence in plants provides the federal government with a cost-effective opportunity to protect worker safety and health.

Recommendation: The FSIS Administrator should develop a process to regularly share the worker safety information it collects during its review of new chemicals with FSIS inspectors, plant management, OSHA, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: FSIS stated that the agency already has a process for sharing chemical safety information with its inspectors. However, FSIS has not provided us with evidence that it has shared the worker safety information it collects related to new chemicals, such as safety information that is specific for dilution levels and conditions of use at plants, as noted in the report. FSIS also stated that it would take certain steps to share information about approval of chemicals with other agencies such as OSHA and NIOSH, but the steps identified did not include sharing worker safety information. Incorporating worker safety information would further help enhance this information sharing. FSIS further stated that some of the information collected during its review of new chemicals may be proprietary.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the CIO of USDA establishes an agency-wide policy and process for the CIO's certification of major IT investments' adequate use of incremental development, in accordance with OMB's guidance on the implementation of FITARA, and confirm that it includes: a description of the CIO's role in the certification process; a description of how CIO certification will be documented; and a definition of incremental development and time frames for delivering functionality, consistent with OMB guidance. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, a Department of Agriculture official stated that the department was working to establish a policy to include the information noted in our recommendation and planned to finalize a policy by the end of December 2019. We will continue to monitor the department's progress on these efforts.

Recommendation: To improve agencies' physical security programs' alignment with the ISC Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities and Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government for information and monitoring, the Secretary of Agriculture should include data collection and analysis requirements for monitoring the performance of agencies' physical security programs, in the department's revised physical-security manual.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture is drafting a revised physical-security regulation and manual that is to align with risk management processes, including a tracking and monitoring component. It expects to implement a revised process by the end of 2020.

Recommendation: To improve agencies' physical security programs' alignment with the ISC Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities and Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government for information and monitoring, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of the Agricultural Research Service and the Chief of the Forest Service to implement and monitor a long-term assessment schedule with key milestones to ensure that higher-level facilities are reassessed at least once every 3 years.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recognizes the need to develop and implement a database to track and monitor physical security assessment schedules across all of its components. As a result, USDA plans to request funding in the President's Budget for fiscal year 2021 to design and build such a database. If sufficient funding is secured and development efforts go as planned, the agency anticipates having the database operational by the end of 2021.

Recommendation: To improve technical expertise and overcome fragmentation, the APHIS director of the Select Agent Program should work with CDC to develop a joint workforce plan that assesses workforce and training needs for the program as a whole. This assessment should be done in conjunction with the development of the strategic plan. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: APHIS agreed with this October 2017 recommendation and, as of January 2020, CDC and APHIS were in the process of finalizing a joint workforce assessment focusing primarily on inspections, according to officials from the Select Agent Program. However, this joint assessment does not account for other aspects of the program, such as training, which was part of GAO's recommendation. According to Select Agent Program officials, the program is developing a new information system and officials plan to conduct a follow-up workload assessment once this new system is fully implemented, as they anticipate that the program will gain efficiencies once this new system is in place. Officials from the Select Agent Program said they did not have a definitive timeframe as to when the new system would be in place and a new workload assessment could be completed but, as of December 2019, they said it would be several years. Once the updated workforce assessment is completed, GAO will review it to determine if it fulfills the recommendation. Developing a joint workforce plan as recommended would help the program to better manage fragmentation by improving how it leverages resources, which in turn would help to ensure that all workforce and training needs are met.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the Department's Chief Information Officer completes efforts to identify future telecommunications needs and areas for optimization, identifies the costs and benefits of new technology, and aligns USDA's approach with its long-term plans. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to, among other things, provide the EIS vendor community with USDA's future vision and requirements in order to enable each vendor to propose optimal solutions; and update the cost benefit analysis of new technologies while reviewing vendor proposals. However, USDA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress on these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the Department's Chief Information Officer identifies transition-related roles and responsibilities related to the management of assets, human capital, and information security, and legal expertise; develops a transition communications plan; and uses configuration and change-management processes in USDA's transition. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As we recommended, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) identified transition roles and responsibilities related to the management of assets, human capital, and information security, and legal expertise. USDA also developed a communications plan and change management plan for the transition. However, the department has not yet demonstrated that it has implemented change management, nor that it is using configuration management for the transition. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the Department's Chief Information Officer documents the costs and benefits of transition investments, identifies staff resources needed for the remainder of the transition, and analyzes training needs for staff assisting with the transition. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) officials stated that they are in the process of completing an Independent Government Cost Estimate for the transition. The officials also stated that the department is creating an EIS support organization that will address staffing needs for the transition. However, USDA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that the Department's Chief Information Officer demonstrates that the Department's transition goals and measures align with its mission, identifies transition risks related to critical systems and continuity of operations, and identifies mission-critical priorities in USDA's transition timeline. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to (1) incorporate mission-critical priorities into USDA's requests for quotes; (2) ensure that critical systems are inventoried and that their respective transition plans ensure continuity of operations; and (3) prioritize mission-critical functions within its transition timeline. However, USDA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FSIS should require as part of an equivalence determination that countries exporting catfish to the United States include in their residue monitoring plans the drugs of concern to FSIS and the corresponding maximum residue levels. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, FSIS had not yet acted on this recommendation. According to FSIS officials, the agency made a request to the USDA Office of General Counsel for their opinion on the legality of the recommendation. FSIS is waiting for OGC's response to that request. FSIS maintains that the information submitted by foreign countries as part of the equivalence determination that outlines their chemical residue monitoring plans and the review by the FSIS equivalence staff to ensure these countries employ an equivalent level of public health protection as that of the US already addresses this recommendation. We will continue to monitor how FSIS addresses this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of FSIS should coordinate and communicate with FDA in developing drug residue testing methods and corresponding maximum residue levels for imported catfish that may also be applicable to other imported seafood. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: According to FSIS officials in May 2020, the agency coordinates with FDA and EPA to carry out the National Residue Program, which entails testing FSIS-regulated products, including catfish, for chemical compounds of public health concern. FSIS officials indicated that FSIS will continue to use its own test methods that meet the agency's pre-defined quality assurance criteria, are applicable to the particular commodity under its jurisdiction, and fit its business model. Thus, FSIS currently does not have plans to work on a multi-residue method that both it and FDA can use on imported seafood, including catfish, as we have recommended.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop and implement a plan for ongoing monitoring, including testing and evaluation, of the obligation tool using relevant data. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said that implementing the recommendation would require information technology funding.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop controls to check the reasonableness of rental assistance agreement amounts calculated by the obligation tool. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said that implementing the recommendation would require information technology funding.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop controls to ensure that RHS uses the inflation rates from the President's economic assumptions in developing budget estimates. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said it would incorporate the recommended controls into the fiscal year 2021 budget cycle.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should provide guidance to Rural Development state offices that specifies that prior to obligating funds, staff are to review information related to a property's mortgage servicing status. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said it was working toward providing the recommended guidance to Rural Development state offices.

Recommendation: To address demonstrated noncompliance with section 15(k) of the Small Business Act, as amended, the Secretary of Agriculture should comply with sections 15(k)(2), (k)(15), and (k)(17) or report to Congress on why the agency has not complied, including seeking any statutory flexibilities or exceptions believed appropriate.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: For section 15(k)(2), related to the compensation and seniority of the person heading the OSDBU office, and for section 15(k)(15), related to collateral duties, on September 13, 2018, an agency official stated that the agency currently does not have an OSDBU director. The official stated that the agency does not have an estimate for when this would occur because the director is appointed by the White House. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(17), related to undue restriction on the ability of small businesses to compete, an agency official stated that the OSDBU is working on an internal policy which will include guidelines for action. The official stated that the estimated completion date is January 2019. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address this part of the recommendation.

Recommendation: To reduce year-to-year fluctuations in the administrative and operating expense subsidies that companies receive at the crop, state, and county levels, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of the Risk Management Agency to consider adjusting the administrative and operating expense subsidy calculation method in a way that reduces the effects of changes in premiums caused by changes in crop prices or other factors when it renegotiates the standard reinsurance agreement.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: To ensure the transparency and accountability of USDA's selection of countries to receive in-kind food aid, the Secretary of Agriculture should develop guidance to require documentation of the reasons for providing funding to countries that were not on the priority list.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with our recommendation. As of February 2020, USDA has not developed guidance to require documentation of the reasons for providing funding to countries that were not on the priority list. In November 2019, USDA officials notified GAO that the responsible USDA office had reorganized, which has caused a delay in their response.

Recommendation: To help ensure that, consistent with the Bellmon amendment, the provision of U.S. in-kind food aid does not result in a substantial disincentive to, or interference with, domestic production or marketing in countries receiving in-kind food aid, the Secretary of Agriculture should monitor markets during implementation of McGovern-Dole projects to identify any potential negative effects, such as unusual changes in prices.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with our recommendation. USDA reported that proposed McGovern-Dole commodities are selected in coordination with the host governments in order to ensure they will not disrupt local production, markets, or food prices. However, as of February 2020, USDA has not taken action to monitor markets during implementation of McGovern-Dole projects to identify whether any potential negative effects have occurred, such as disruptions of local production or unusual changes in food prices. In November 2019, USDA officials notified GAO that the responsible USDA office had reorganized, which has caused a delay in their response.

Recommendation: To help ensure that, consistent with the Bellmon amendment, the provision of U.S. in-kind food aid does not result in a substantial disincentive to, or interference with, domestic production or marketing in countries receiving in-kind food aid, the Secretary of Agriculture should evaluate markets after the completion of McGovern-Dole and Food for Progress projects to determine whether markets were negatively affected during project implementation or after project completion.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with our recommendation, and has reported actions to address the recommendation. GAO has requested documentation from USDA to confirm the actions taken. As of February 2020, USDA has not provided documentation confirming actions taken. In November 2019, USDA officials notified GAO that the responsible USDA office had reorganized, which has caused a delay in their response.

Recommendation: To help achieve EQIP's purpose of optimizing environmental benefits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service to direct EQIP program managers to coordinate with the leaders of USDA's CEAP to help ensure that CEAP studies consider the practical limitations and trade-offs faced by program managers and to provide program managers with better information to target EQIP funds where they will optimize environmental benefits.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help achieve EQIP's purpose of optimizing environmental benefits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service to revise guidance on state offices' EQIP allocation processes, stipulating that data on environmental concerns, where available, should be a primary factor influencing allocations within states.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help achieve EQIP's purpose of optimizing environmental benefits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service to establish a review process at the regional level for review and concurrence of EQIP payment rates above a threshold (e.g., rates greater than 50 percent, with justification).

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help achieve EQIP's purpose of optimizing environmental benefits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service to modify guidance and ranking tools so that they more accurately value an EQIP application's anticipated environmental benefits relative to estimated costs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve RUS's management of the Infrastructure Program, Broadband Program, and Community Connect by more closely following leading practices for broadband loan- and grant-program management, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct RUS to establish and implement procedures to conduct periodic evaluations of completed grant projects to determine the outcomes associated with these projects, and analyze the information gained to assess if any programmatic changes are needed to improve the Community Connect program.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 22, 2020, USDA has not provided an update regarding its plans to implement staff procedures for conducting periodic evaluations of completed grant projects to measure the success of meeting the program goals. Once RUS provides an update regarding what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To improve RUS's management of the Infrastructure Program, Broadband Program, and Community Connect by more closely following leading practices for broadband loan- and grant-program management, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct RUS to establish a timeline for implementing a centralized internal system for staff to obtain relevant and timely program data for use in managing and monitoring loans and grant awards.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 22, 2020, RUS has not provided an update on how it will more efficiently manage and monitor RUS loan and grant awards. Once RUS provides an update regarding what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To improve RUS's management of the Infrastructure Program, Broadband Program, and Community Connect by more closely following leading practices for broadband loan- and grant-program management, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct RUS to develop, update, and maintain complete written policies and procedures for RUS's programs as a way to retain and communicate organizational knowledge internally among agency staff. RUS should determine the critical documentation that should be created or updated, including considering documentation such as loan-application review guidance and employee manuals for each of the three programs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 22, 2020, RUS has not provided an update on how it plans to identify and prioritize critical manuals and instructions that will need to be developed or updated and formulate work plans to develop or update each of them. Once RUS provides an update regarding what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of APHIS and the Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service to work with the Director of CDC to develop a framework for deciding when on-farm investigations are warranted during outbreaks.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. In August 2018, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) stated that it is working closely with USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and HHS' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to develop a framework for deciding when on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities are warranted. In September 2019, according to APHIS officials, the lead agencies, including APHIS, FSIS, and CDC, have agreed that it is imperative that cross sector partners from a range of animal agriculture industries be included in developing the framework that was requested in GAO's final report. A framework for making decisions regarding on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities simply will not work without including industry sector partners in the development of the framework, according to APHIS officials. Due to the logistics of getting all of the cross sector partners together, APHIS is unable to schedule the next meeting in the series to develop the Pre-Harvest Framework until December 2019. APHIS anticipates that it will take the remainder of fiscal year 2020 to work through additional meetings with partners and finalize this framework.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services to design policies and procedures to reasonably assure that all award recipients required to submit single audit reports do so in accordance with OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS is adding a bullet that states that the Federal awarding agency must "ensure that audits are completed and reports are received in a timely manner and in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.512(a)." FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. However, to fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services to revise policies and procedures to reasonably assure that management decisions contain the required elements and are issued timely in accordance with OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS stated that it is expanding upon an existing bullet that states that the Federal awarding agency must "issue a management decision on audit findings within six months after receipt of the audit report....". FNS indicated this section of the manual will be expanded to include the four elements that a management decision must clearly state in writing as prescribed in 2 CFR 200.521(a). FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. However, to fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services to design and implement policies and procedures for identifying and managing high-risk and recurring single audit findings using a risk-based approach.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS is adding a bullet stating that the cognizant agency is responsible for "developing a risk-based approach to manage high-risk and recurring single audit findings to identify problems so that adequate resources can be dedicated to address the problem." FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will partially help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. When designing policies, we believe FNS also needs to clearly provide guidance on the risk management strategy over high-risk and recurring single audit findings, including the steps to follow for identifying problem areas and setting priorities for addressing them. To fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Rural Development to design policies and procedures to reasonably assure that all award recipients required to submit single audit reports do so in accordance with OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated that it has developed a disbursement report that will capture disbursements equal to or greater than $750,000 and is currently documenting that process and creating instructions for the program areas. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Rural Development to revise policies and procedures to reasonably assure that management decisions contain the required elements and are issued timely in accordance with OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated it has developed a Management Decision Manual template that the program areas will use and is currently creating instructions for the program areas. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Under Secretary for Rural Development to design and implement policies and procedures for identifying and managing high-risk and recurring single audit findings using a risk-based approach.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated that it has developed a process to rate each single audit finding. According to RD, the ratings will be tracked in an Access Database, where it will generate reports indicating reoccurring and high-risk findings by borrower and by program. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of the Forest Service's efforts to track and deter unauthorized grazing, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Forest Service to adopt an unauthorized grazing penalty structure that is based, similar to BLM's, on the current commercial value of forage.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Washington Office staff are finalizing directive revisions affecting the change in the excess and unauthorized use fee structure and preparing them for tribal consultation. It is anticipated that the 120-day tribal consultation period will begin concurrent with the publication in the Federal Register of a 60-day notice and comment period for the revised directives. It is expected that the revisions would be ready to be implemented prior to the beginning of the 2021 grazing fee year that begins March 1, 2021.

Recommendation: To address obsolete IT investments in need of modernization or replacement, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, State, the Treasury, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; and the Commissioner of Social Security should direct their respective agency CIOs to identify and plan to modernize or replace legacy systems as needed and consistent with OMB's draft guidance, including time frames, activities to be performed, and functions to be replaced or enhanced.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. In May 2019, the agency stated that it had conducted an assessment of its legacy system environment and identified 106 legacy IT assets across 18 components. In a March 2020 update, the agency stated that it is in the process of developing a policy to govern all legacy systems, to include modernization and decommissioning plans. The agency plans to publish this policy by March 2021. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to enhance screening of loan guarantee applicants, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to complete steps to obtain access to Treasury's Do Not Pay portal and establish policies and procedures to deny loan guarantees to applicants who are subject to administrative offsets for delinquent child support payments.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said that implementing the recommendation would require a rule change and that it anticipated publishing a proposed rule by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to strengthen oversight of lenders and servicers, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to develop and publish in the Federal Register qualification requirements for the principal officers of lenders and servicers seeking initial or continued approval to participate in the guarantee program.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it anticipated publishing a proposed rule to implement this recommendation by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to strengthen oversight of lenders and servicers, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to develop and publish in the Federal Register capital and financial requirements for guarantee program lenders that are not regulated by a federal financial institution regulatory agency.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it anticipated publishing a proposed rule to implement this recommendation by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to strengthen risk assessment and reporting, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to improve performance measures comparing RHS and the Federal Housing Administration loan performance, potentially by making comparisons on a cohort basis and limiting comparisons to loans made in similar geographic areas.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it was working with a contractor to establish more meaningful performance measures and estimated a completion date of December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to strengthen risk assessment and reporting, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to develop risk thresholds for the guarantee program, potentially in the form of maximum portfolio- or loan-level loss tolerances.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: Rural Development hired a contractor to help establish risk thresholds for the guarantee program. The contractor's October 2016 report developed and recommended portfolio-level and loan-level risk thresholds (values that trigger consideration of policy adjustments) and also recommended that program officials conduct stress tests to validate that each recommended risk threshold was appropriate for the program's overall risk appetite. As of August 2020, Rural Development said it was continuing to work with the contractor to stress test the risk thresholds and estimated a completion date of December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To improve compliance with OMB Circular A-129 standards and strengthen management and oversight of the guarantee program, and to more effectively fulfill the requirements for conducting program reviews described in OMB Circular A-129, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Undersecretary for Rural Development to develop procedures for selecting RD credit programs for review based on risk and establish a prioritized schedule for conducting the reviews.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said that its Chief Risk Officer was working with the agency on establishing procedures for selecting Rural Development credit programs for review based on risk, including a prioritized schedule. Rural Development estimated a completion date of June 30, 2021.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal departments and agencies have comprehensive and up-to-date policies and stronger oversight mechanisms in place for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and are fully addressing weaknesses identified after laboratory safety lapses, the Secretary of Agriculture should revise existing department policies for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories to contain specific requirements for reporting laboratory incidents to senior department officials, including the types of incidents that should be reported, to whom, and when, or direct the Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service to develop agency policies that contain these requirements.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) stated that its Joint Committee on Biorisk Management Policy (JCBMP) would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include department-wide incident reporting requirements and time frames. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal departments and agencies have comprehensive and up-to-date policies and stronger oversight mechanisms in place for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and are fully addressing weaknesses identified after laboratory safety lapses, the Secretary of Agriculture should review and update outdated department policies for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and direct the Administrators of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and Agricultural Research Service to update their policies and, in the case of APHIS, establish a regular review schedule.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing outdated departmental policies. In addition, officials stated that APHIS reviews and updates agency policies every 3-5 years, and that this schedule will be reflected in the updated departmental policy. In October 2019, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) updated its agency policy for its institutional biological safety committee, the entity responsible for ensuring biosafety in its laboratories. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to the departmental, APHIS, and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) policies should be completed by December 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal departments and agencies have comprehensive and up-to-date policies and stronger oversight mechanisms in place for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and are fully addressing weaknesses identified after laboratory safety lapses, the Secretary of Agriculture should routinely analyze results of the department's laboratory inspections and incident reports to identify potential trends that may highlight recurring laboratory safety or security issues and share lessons learned with laboratory personnel.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee efforts to collect and analyze laboratory inspection results and incident reports and share these reports and critical analyses with USDA senior leadership on an annual basis. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to its departmental policy-which would reflect the JCBMP's role in analyzing inspection results and incident reports, identifying potential trends, and sharing lessons learned-should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal departments and agencies have comprehensive and up-to-date policies and stronger oversight mechanisms in place for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and are fully addressing weaknesses identified after laboratory safety lapses, the Secretary of Agriculture should require routine reporting of the results of department, agency, and select agent laboratory inspections to senior department officials.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of inspection results to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal departments and agencies have comprehensive and up-to-date policies and stronger oversight mechanisms in place for managing hazardous biological agents in high-containment laboratories and are fully addressing weaknesses identified after laboratory safety lapses, the Secretary of Agriculture should require routine reporting of incidents at agency laboratories to senior department officials.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of laboratory incidents to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To strengthen USDA's ability to better manage and monitor the progress of the Blueprint, including efforts to streamline and improve administrative services, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Administration to develop a complete list identifying all of the Blueprint efforts under way and document key information needed to monitor their progress, such as status of implementation, time frames for completion, and related performance measures.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To strengthen USDA's ability to better manage and monitor the progress of the Blueprint, including efforts to streamline and improve administrative services, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Administration to reexamine the adequacy of the staff and budget resources committed to the day-to-day management of the Blueprint, and further leverage existing departmental resources as needed.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's efforts to identify and track the benefits of the Blueprint, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Administration to document the methodologies used to calculate any savings claimed for the Blueprint effort to ensure any such estimate is based on quality information.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's efforts to identify and track the benefits of the Blueprint, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief Financial Officer to develop a cost-effective method, using existing data systems, to collect and track USDA's spending on administrative services to identify baseline spending and target areas for future cost savings.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's efforts to identify and track the benefits of the Blueprint, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Administration to systematically identify and track nonfinancial benefits from USDA's Blueprint efforts to better gauge the Blueprint's progress and more fully report its results.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance USDA's efforts to share lessons learned from the Blueprint, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Assistant Secretary for Administration to maintain and promote existing web-based collaboration tools, including keeping information in these tools current, for agencies and staff offices to report their experiences and lessons learned from their Blueprint efforts to help strengthen internal information sharing and inform future efforts.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is working with the agency to determine what actions the agency has taken related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's ability to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing of GE and other crops, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) to work with all relevant USDA stakeholders, including APHIS and the Organic Working Group, to determine what additional information should be sought in future organic surveys, such as the costs of reshipping and re-storing shipments rejected because of unintended GE presence, as well as the costs associated with finding new buyers for such shipments.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. For example, there was no indication whether stakeholders internal to the department had continued to meet to discuss the 2014 Organic Survey results and how to move forward with future survey questions to obtain additional data, such as data needed to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing with GE crops. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.

Recommendation: To improve USDA's ability to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing of GE and other crops, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of NASS to include producers, growing identity-preserved crops, in addition to organic producers in USDA's survey efforts.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that USDA should survey producers growing identity-preserved crops regarding their potential economic losses from unintended GE presence, as is being done for organic producers. As we previously reported, U.S. acreage planted to identity-preserved crops is significantly greater than that planted to organic crops; yet, little is known about the economic costs to identity-preserved farmers of unintended mixing. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of federal efforts to monitor wild, native bee populations, the Secretary of Agriculture, as a co-chair of the White House Pollinator Health Task Force, should coordinate with other Task Force agencies that have monitoring responsibilities to develop a mechanism, such as a federal monitoring plan, that would (1) establish roles and responsibilities of lead and support agencies, (2) establish shared outcomes and goals, and (3) obtain input from relevant stakeholders, such as states.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2019, USDA had taken relevant and positive actions but had not yet fully implemented GAO's February 2016 recommendation for monitoring wild, native bees. According to a senior USDA official, a Native Bee Monitoring Steering Committee composed of representatives from four USDA agencies is developing a response to the recommendation. According to the official, the steering committee has taken or plans to take several steps regarding a monitoring plan. First, the steering committee held a stakeholder listening session in June 2017 to obtain public opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring program is important, (2) the type of information and data needed to adequately conduct monitoring, and (3) how the public would like to see the monitoring data used. Highlights of the input received at the listening session and the goals of the national monitoring plan were discussed in a symposium held in November 2017 at the National Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting. USDA gathered additional recommendations from symposium participants based on monitoring programs for other declining species of concern, such as birds, bats, and butterflies. Second, the steering committee drafted a prospectus that will delineate activities being conducted by relevant federal agencies with responsibilities for surveying species of concern, including plans to coordinate activities and outline individual roles and responsibilities towards facilitating a national monitoring plan. According to the senior official, the committee worked with USDA officials to ask other federal agencies associated with the Pollinator Task Force to summarize their current and future activities in support of monitoring native bee populations. The committee completed its report entitled The Current State of Federal Agency Coordination in Monitoring Native Bee Health in January 2019. Third, the steering committee held a "Scientists' Summit" in April 2018 at the National Conservation Training Center. The purpose was to obtain scientific expert opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring strategy is needed; (2) what such a monitoring strategy would measure and be used for; (3) standard minimum protocols that would improve data quality and sharing; and (4) databases that could be used to house data from a monitoring strategy. Participants included university and governmental experts on bees, statisticians, modelers and ecologists, and conservation biologists assessing other species in decline. Workshop discussion leaders subsequently drafted for publication in a scientific journal a whitepaper with recommendations on a U.S. national native bee monitoring strategy. However, as of October 2019, according to senior USDA officials, the white paper had not yet been accepted for publication. We support the agencies' efforts to date to implement the recommendation. However, we believe that the agencies must take additional steps to improve the effectiveness of federal efforts to monitor wild, native bee populations and will continue to monitor their actions. In 2020, according to a senior USDA official, a National Native Bee Monitoring Research Coordination Network is being formed to address GAO's recommendation to develop a federal monitoring plan for wild, native bees, with the project expected to begin in spring 2020. Some USDA officials told us that without a team to coordinate a monitoring plan, individual agency efforts may be ineffective in providing the needed information in trends on wild, native bees in the United States. The project is scheduled to be completed in 3 years.

Recommendation: To ensure effective oversight, strengthen internal controls, and address challenges associated with the hardrock mine plan review process, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Chief of the Forest Service to issue a rule that establishes a fee structure for hardrock mine plan processing activities and request the authority from the Congress to retain any fees it collects.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, the Forest Service said it has the statutory authority to issue a rule that establishes a fee structure, but it does not have the authority to collect and retain fees for hardrock mine plan processing activities. The Forest Service said it worked with the Department of Agriculture and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit a request through the President's Budget for authority from Congress to retain any fees collected from mine operations. The President's Budget for fiscal year 2021, developed by OMB, included such a request to Congress. If Congress grants this authority, the Forest Service said it will issue a rule that establishes a fee structure for hardrock mine operations so it can begin retaining collected fees.

Recommendation: To better monitor and provide a basis for improving the effectiveness of cybersecurity risk mitigation activities, informed by the sectors' updated plans and in collaboration with sector stakeholders, the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services (as co-SSAs) should direct responsible officials to develop performance metrics to provide data and determine how to overcome challenges to monitoring the food and agriculture sector's cybersecurity progress.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture (USDA), as the co-sector specific agency for the food and agriculture sector, with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) continues to implement cybersecurity-related activities for the sector. In particular, USDA, through the sector coordination council, routinely shares best practices and informational bulletins from the Department of Homeland Security on cybersecurity with sector stakeholders via the Homeland Security Information Network. In addition, at semi-annual council meetings, USDA has hosted roundtable discussions of cybersecurity challenges and best practices. No evidence of performance metrics to track and report on the SSAs' activities or the sector's cybersecurity progress has been provided. As USDA and HHS continue to carry out their sector-specific agency role, we will continue to monitor their efforts and associated performance metrics to be developed to demonstrate the effectiveness of these activities

Recommendation: To improve the department's IT savings reinvestment plans, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the CIO to ensure that the department's integrated data collection submission to OMB includes, for all reported initiatives, complete plans to reinvest any resulting cost savings and avoidances from OMB-directed IT reform-related efforts.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture agreed with our recommendation and has taken initial steps to implement it. Specifically, as of May 2020, the department's integrated data collection submission to the Office of Management and Budget included reinvestment plans for 37 of 68 reported cost savings and avoidance initiatives. However, the department reported about $122.8 million in cost savings and avoidances in the 31 initiatives that did not include plans regarding how these savings would be reinvested. The department expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has identified five priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. USDA states that action plans and progress updates for these goals are "coming soon". In a November 2018 letter to the Comptroller General, USDA's Inspector General acknowledged that additional efforts are needed to better describe the quality of the data supporting the APGs and said that the Department will increase the amount of information provided in the quarterly APG updates. In April 2020, we followed up and once more requested updated information from USDA officials. As of May 6, 2020, we have not received the requested information. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Performance Plan and Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Performance Report provides a general statement on how the agency uses a standardized methodology to measure its performance and that agency officials attest to the quality of the performance information. USDA also identifies its priority goals for fiscal years 2020 and 2021, but specific data quality explanation is not provided for these APGs. In a November 2018 letter to the Comptroller General, USDA's Inspector General stated that the Department agrees with the recommendation and will begin providing data quality explanation for the APGs in its next annual performance plan and report to be published in February 2019, but our review in 2019 found no such explanation. Further, as noted above the most recent plan and report do not provide the required explanation. In April 2020, we once more requested updated information from USDA officials and as of May 6, 2020 have not received the requested information. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better inform Congress in the future about crop insurance program costs, reduce present costs, and ensure greater actuarial soundness, the Administrator of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Risk Management Agency should monitor and report on crop insurance costs in areas that have higher crop production risks.

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Risk Management Agency
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: To better inform Congress in the future about crop insurance program costs, reduce present costs, and ensure greater actuarial soundness, the Administrator of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Risk Management Agency should, as appropriate, increase its adjustments of premium rates in areas with higher crop production risks by as much as the full 20 percent annually that is allowed by law.

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Risk Management Agency
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: To increase consistency and reduce time and predevelopment cost for NAHASDA grant recipients, an interagency effort similar to that of the federal infrastructure task force but specific to tribal housing should be initiated with participants from the Indian Health Service, HUD, Department of the Interior, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop and implement a coordinated environmental review process for all agencies overseeing tribal housing development. In addition, the agencies should determine if it would be appropriate to designate a lead agency in this effort.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2017, HUD provided us with documentation that an interagency Coordinated Environmental Review Process Workgroup was formed and included representatives from HUD, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), USDA, Department of Commerce, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, HHS, Interior, and the Department of Transportation. The workgroup focused on identifying measures that could be taken to coordinate agencies' environmental review processes within the existing framework, and in December 2015, presented 12 recommendations in a final report. The recommendations included developing common categorical exclusions; providing training for agency staff and tribes; continuing review of related environmental laws and authorities to identify opportunities for greater efficiencies; creating regional consortiums; and establishing an ongoing environmental review interagency workgroup. In addition, the workgroup developed a draft implementation plan, and drafted a Memorandum of Understanding whose stated purpose is "to further the shared goals of the parties to ensure comprehensive NEPA environmental reviews while facilitating access to federal assistance for housing and housing-related infrastructure projects in Indian Country involving multiple agencies by avoiding duplication of analyses and ensuring efficient environmental review processes for both tribes and agencies". In December 2018, HHS notified GAO that the final draft implementation plan remained under review by members of the interagency workgroup.

Recommendation: To improve the implementation of the act, the Secretary of Agriculture should develop and implement policies and procedures for cost-benefit analyses related to computer matching agreements to include key elements such as personnel and computer costs, as well as avoidance of future improper payments and recovery of improper payments and debts.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: Although department officials have stated that they plan to take actions to address this recommendation, as of July 2019 we have not yet received information to validate agency actions. Subsequent to the agency sending documentation, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.

Recommendation: To further improve agency controls that help prevent payments to participants whose incomes exceed eligibility limits, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of FSA to implement a process to verify that accountants' and attorneys' statements accurately reflect participants' incomes as reported on income tax returns and supporting documentation or other equivalent documents.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with this recommendation at the time of our report but, as of April 2020, has not acted to implement it because of the sensitive nature of questioning accountants' and attorneys' professional judgment. However, we believe doing so would reduce the potential for improper payments supported by taxpayers and would be an appropriate action for the agency to take.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Agriculture demonstrated that it had established an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes; however, it had not yet measured and reported them. The department conducted a survey in February 2020 that collected information such as the number of legacy systems that were identified and subsequently decommissioned, and the number of applications that have been eliminated as a result of application rationalization through use of enterprise architecture. The department stated that it will release the second survey in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021, and the differences in the responses between the first and second surveys will be presented to the CIO Council to show the impact of enterprise architecture. The department did not state when it plans to report the results. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to better ensure that servicers are effectively implementing the agency's loss mitigation programs and that distressed borrowers are receiving the assistance they need as early as possible before they become seriously delinquent, the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture should require servicers to report information about their efforts to reach distressed borrowers. For example, servicers could report on their efforts to reach borrowers and whether borrowers have responded to outreach from the servicer regarding early delinquency interventions and are receiving informal foreclosure mitigation actions.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its 60 day response letter, USDA noted that currently, its Rural Housing Service (RHS) guaranteed loan servicers are required to perform outreach and early delinquency intervention and informal mitigation actions within agency-prescribed timeframes. Also, each servicer is required to maintain automated records of these contacts and attempted contacts. According to USDA. RHS will utilize both internal and external means to analyze data obtained periodically through loan servicers. Loan level data outlining foreclosure prevention efforts such as borrower contact, loss mitigation actions attempted, loss mitigation actions implemented, and failed loss mitigation actions will be assessed in order to better evaluate the effectiveness of RHS'foreclosure prevention guidance. Data will be collected from loan servicers via monthly reporting in conjunction with data obtained through compliance reviews conducted by RHS and its program compliance agent. Utilizing these compliance reviews, USDA stated that RHS will perform a management review of the results and will provide feedback to the servicers to increase compliance. In a September 2013 status update, USDA stated that it was developing manual processes that will provide clarity with respect to lender loss mitigation performance as recommended by GAO. USDA currently captures limited loss mitigation data that yields performance results, assisting the program in its efforts to mitigate risk. These manual processes will remain in effect until USDA has completed the build-out of the enhanced electronic data reporting requirements of lenders that participate in the program. In addition, USDA noted that it was finalizing a Memorandum of Understanding with Ginnie Mae to gain access to their program default data that will provide insight into the loss mitigation retention workout performance of 502 Guaranteed borrowers. According to an update from USDA, the Memorandum of Understanding with Ginnie Mae is no longer being pursued because Ginnie Mae was not in favor of it.

Recommendation: The Secretary of USDA should determine the extent to which distressed borrowers have not been reached and assess whether changes are needed to help ensure servicers are complying with USDA's loss mitigation requirements.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In its 60 day response letter, USDA stated that it supported GAO's recommendation to require servicers to report their efforts to reach distressed borrowers and report, on a portfolio level, the extent to which servicers are complying with USDA's loss mitigation requirements. USDA also stated that data will be collected from loan servicers via monthly reporting in conjunction with data obtained through compliance reviews conducted by it Rural Housing Service (RHS) and its program compliance agent. Utilizing these compliance reviews, RHS will perform a management review of the results and will provide feedback to the servicers to increase compliance. In a September 2013 status update, USDA stated that it was developing manual processes that will provide clarity with respect to lender loss mitigation performance as recommended by GAO. USDA currently captures limited loss mitigation data that yields performance results, assisting the program in its efforts to mitigate risk. These manual processes will remain in effect until USDA has completed the build-out of the enhanced electronic data reporting requirements of lenders that participate in the program. In addition, USDA noted that it was finalizing a Memorandum of Understanding with Ginnie Mae to gain access to their program default data that will provide insight into the loss mitigation retention workout performance of 502 Guaranteed borrowers. This data, which will help evaluate the effectiveness of loss mitigation efforts on both borrower outcome and agency cost bases, will be gathered with the assistance of the consulting team now supporting lender compliance. According to an update from USDA, the Memorandum of Understanding with Ginnie Mae is no longer being pursued because Ginnie Mae was not in favor of it.

Recommendation: To better ensure that requirements for tenant eligibility are met across the FLH portfolio, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of RHS to require its loan servicers to use the Systematic Alien Verification and Entitlements (SAVE) program administered by the Department of Homeland Security to verify tenant's residency status during supervisory reviews.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, according to officials, USDA has proposed revisions to its regulations that will incorporate the usage of Systematic Alien Verification and Entitlements (SAVE) program. The proposed rule is under interagency review with the Office of Management and Budget. Publication of the final rule is planned to occur in fiscal year 2022 according to USDA officials. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of RHS to better utilize available data on demand for the FLH program--such as systematically reviewing local market analyses, further analyzing occupancy data on a statewide, regional, or national level, and retaining and analyzing application information--to help target available funding to areas of greatest need.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, according to officials, USDA has conducted an analysis of occupancy data and information retained in program applications, to determine how funding can be allocated to better meet market demand, and support community revitalization and affordable housing needs. Officials planned to use the results of this analysis to revise USDA's Farm Labor Housing Notice for Solicitation of Applications. The notice is currently undergoing an internal clearance process, which USDA anticipates completing by fiscal year 2022. We will continue to track the agency's progress on this recommendation.