Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy (1) to incorporate into its guidance approaches or practices that agencies could use to assess utilization of and the ongoing need for property—approaches such as recommendations for periodic justifications, data analytics, and utilization reviews—and (2) to develop a plan and timelines for communicating the guidance to agencies government-wide. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it had published on its website draft guidance in response to the Federal Personal Property Management Act of 2018. In addition, GSA identified several actions it planned to take in the coming months, such as publishing a comprehensive plan and timelines to address GAO's recommendation, publishing a request for information in the Federal Register to seek comments and suggestions, and engaging additional subject matter experts and related associations and standards group to improve upon the draft guidance. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should enhance the guidelines for agencies to establish the controls required by FRDAA, by clarifying the difference between FRDAA and ERM requirements, and through collaboration with agencies to determine what additional information agencies need to implement the controls. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In March 2020, the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) was enacted to improve efforts to identify and reduce government-wide improper payments, including payments that are the result of fraud. PIIA repealed and replaced FRDAA. However, OMB and the other agencies subject to PIIA essentially must satisfy the same requirements established under FRDAA, including adhering to OMB's related guidelines. OMB has not updated its published guidelines for FRDAA as we recommended. If OMB takes additional actions to supplement guidelines under PIIA, we will review the guidelines to determine whether it addresses our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should enhance FRDAA reporting guidelines by directing agencies to report complete and detailed information on each of the reporting elements specified by FRDAA, which should include information related to financial and nonfinancial fraud. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In March 2020, the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) was enacted to improve efforts to identify and reduce government-wide improper payments, including payments that are the result of fraud. PIIA repealed and replaced FRDAA, but maintained similar reporting requirements for federal agencies regarding fraud risks and also extended the time line for reporting by a year. OMB did not update its previous reporting guidance for FRDAA as we recommended. If OMB takes additional actions to supplement reporting guidelines under PIIA, we will review the guidelines to determine whether it addresses our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM, after consultation with the chief human capital officer (CHCO) Council, should explore the feasibility of improving the quality of data on employee misconduct by providing additional guidance to agencies on how to record instances of misconduct in OPM's databases. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM disagreed with this recommendation and cautioned against creating a comprehensive catalog of forms of misconduct because such an approach could expose agencies to the argument that any conduct that was not captured by OPM is not a permissible basis for discipline. In January 2020, OPM stated they are compiling disciplinary data collected from agencies under Executive Order 13839 and anticipate the data will be posted in the near future on OPM.gov.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM, after consultation with the CHCO Council, should broadly disseminate to agencies the promising practices and lessons learned, such as those described in this report, as well as work with agencies through such vehicles as the CHCO Council, to identify any additional practices. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OPM partially agreed with this recommendation. In December 2018, OPM stated that it plans to continue to use promising practices and to issue guidance on progressive discipline and tables of penalties. On July 2, 2019, OPM restated it partially concurs with this recommendation. OPM stated that it issued a guidance memorandum to Federal agencies on October 10, 2018, to aid in the implementation of Executive Order 13839, section 5, Ensuring Integrity of Personnel Files. As of January, 2020, OPM stated they are finalizing compiling disciplinary data collected from agencies under that Executive Order and anticipates it will be posted in the near future on OPM.gov. OPM also stated they are in the process of updating online employee relations training to be made available to human resources practitioners and managers later this year.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM, after consultation with the CHCO Council, should provide guidance to agencies to enhance the training received by managers/supervisors and human capital staff to ensure that they have the guidance and technical assistance they need to effectively address misconduct and maximize the productivity of their workforces. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OPM partially agreed with this recommendation. On September 17, 2019, OPM published a proposed rule pertaining to probationary periods, performance-based actions, and adverse actions. The public comment period for this proposed rule closed on October 17, 2019. As of January 2020, OPM said they received comments from 1,199 individuals. OPM stated that they are reviewing, analyzing, and adjudicating all comments received in order to prepare a final rule later in 2020. Once the final rule is published, OPM stated they will work with the CHCO Council to educate supervisors on the new rule in accordance with Executive Order 13839.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should develop a plan for monitoring continuous evaluation performance, to include assessing continuous evaluation at various phases of implementation. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI generally concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI has provided information that may allow us to close this recommendation. We are currently evaluating that information and will update this recommendation once that evaluation is complete.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should develop performance measures for continuous evaluation that agencies must track and determine a process and schedule for agencies to regularly report those measures to ODNI. At minimum, these performance measures should be clear, quantifiable, objective, and linked to measurable goals. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI generally concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI provided information that may allow us to close this recommendation. We are currently evaluating this information and once that evaluation is complete, we will update the status.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should, in coordination with the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget in the capacity as Chair of the Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council, conduct an evidence-based review of the timeliness goal of 195 days for completing the fastest 90 percent of periodic reinvestigations and the associated goals for the different phases of periodic reinvestigations, and adjust the goal if appropriate, taking into consideration available resources, the additional workload of continuous evaluation, and the risks associated with individuals retaining access to classified information without determining their continued eligibility. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI generally concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI stated that with the advent of Trusted Workforce 2.0, discussions are being held about timeliness goals and the periodic reinvestigation model writ large. Once we confirm what actions have been taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should, once ODNI has further defined the continuous evaluation program, to include issuing a Security Executive Agent Directive and developing an implementation plan, in coordination with the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget in the capacity as Chair of the Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council, assess the potential effects of continuous evaluation on agency resources and develop a plan, in consultation with implementing agencies, to address those effects, such as modifying the scope of periodic reinvestigations, changing the frequency of periodic reinvestigations, or replacing periodic reinvestigations for certain clearance holders. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI generally concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI provided information that may allow us to close this recommendation. We are currently evaluating that information and once that evaluation is complete, we will update the status of this recommendation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recommendation: To implement DOD guidance requiring the military departments to prepare readiness and Operation and Maintenance (O&M) budget impact assessments during drawdown planning, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the military departments to develop guidance that assigns responsibility for the preparation of impact assessments and includes direction on how such assessments should be conducted as part of drawdown planning.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of August 2018, we are in the process of following up with the department to determine the current status.

Recommendation: To implement DOD guidance requiring the military departments to prepare readiness and O&M budget impact assessments during drawdown planning, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Director, DSCA, to develop an internal control mechanism to determine whether the military departments have completed the required impact assessments before moving forward with drawdown planning and execution.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of August 2018, we are in the process of following up with the department to determine the current status.

Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare a level I quantitative drilldown in accordance with the FIAR Guidance.

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to prepare a quantitative drilldown. In September 2017, Navy provided a listing of certain systems (DCAS, GLs, DDRS-B, and DDRS-AFS) it considered as Level 1 assessable units. However, the listing did not include a drilldown from the financial statement amounts through DDRS-AFS, DDRS-B, and DCAS to the receipt and disbursement source systems. In July 2020, Navy officials stated that Navy is implementing a new system that will enable them to complete a quantitative drill down for its Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT). The new system is not expected to be fully implemented until March 2021. In the interim, certain FBWT reconciliations are performed at DFAS, that may provide a drilldown capability of FBWT as reported in financial statements to the applicable general ledger amounts.

Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prioritize audit readiness efforts for the key FBWT systems, prepare an audit strategy that identifies for each system (1) the Navy's plan for assessing the system to gain assurance that the system can be relied on; (2) the assessment types, including prioritizing the assessments based on qualitative and quantitative factors for each system; and (3) planned start and completion dates of these assessments for each system.

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it has actions planned, taken, or under way to prioritize audit readiness efforts for key Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) systems. In September 2017, Navy provided documentation for three systems, but this documentation did not address corrective actions for ineffective controls and the expected completion dates. Further, during our audit, Navy provided a list of 22 relevant systems. In July 2020, Navy officials stated that they are preparing an audit strategy for each system, and documenting control activities and computer controls for significant systems. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare, in accordance with FIAR Guidance, the documentation of control activities and information technology general computer controls for significant systems; system certifications or accreditations; system, end user, and systems documentation locations; and hardware, software, and interfaces.

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it had actions planned, taken, or under way to document control activities, information technology general computer controls for significant systems, systems documentation locations, and hardware, software, and interfaces. In September 2017, Navy provided documentation for 3 systems, but the documentation did not include system certifications or accreditations; system, end user, and systems documentation locations; and hardware, software, and interfaces. Further, during our audit, Navy provided a list of 22 relevant systems. In July 2020, a Navy official told us that they are preparing an audit strategy for each system, and documenting control activities and computer controls for significant systems. We will continue to monitor Navy's progress addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the Navy's implementation of the FIAR Guidance for its General Fund FBWT FIP and facilitate efforts to achieve SBR auditability, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Financial Management and Comptroller, to prepare an internal control assessment document for each assessable unit, summarizing control activities that are appropriately designed and in place.

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

Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation and stated that it had actions planned, taken, or under way to prepare an internal control assessment document. In September 2017, Navy provided support for actions taken to address this recommendation. However, the documentation provided did not summarize controls by assessable unit (DCAS, DDRS-B, or systems). Instead controls were listed by function (Treasury Reporting, Audit Readiness, and Departmental Reporting). In July 2020, a Navy official stated that documentation of overall Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) controls is in process and they are finalizing the Risk Control Matrix for FBWT to include controls at DFAS and at Treasury. The Rick Control Matrix is estimated to be completed by the end of August 2020. We will continue to monitor the progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure 18F's performance, the Administrator of GSA should direct the Commissioner for the Technology Transformation Service to assess actual results for each performance measure.

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in a March 2020 written response, GSA stated that Technology Transformation Service (TTS) leadership will be briefed on the program's performance measures on a quarterly basis. We are following up with GSA to confirm that its TTS leadership has been briefed on the results on these performance measures. We will continue to evaluate GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to ensure that all goals and associated performance measures are outcome-oriented and that performance measures have targets.

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB developed three goals for U.S. Digital Service (USDS): (1) rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; (2) expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools; and (3) bring top technical talent into public service. In addition, OMB established performance measures with targets for its third goal and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the first two USDS goals. Further, the program's third goal is not outcome-oriented. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that USDS established goals for and measured performance on each of the projects the program supports in its fall 2017 report to Congress. Although measuring performance on projects can provide USDS with valuable information, this effort does not address goals and performance measurement on the overall USDS program. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to assess actual results for each performance measure.

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB assessed the results of performance measures for one of the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) program's goals--bring top technical talent into public service--and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the other two USDS goals--rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; and expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that USDS established goals for and measured performance on each of the projects the program supports in its fall 2017 report to Congress. As of July 2019, USDS has not publicly released any subsequent reports to Congress or additional information on its goals and performance measures. Although measuring performance on projects can provide USDS with valuable information, this effort does not address performance measurement on the overall USDS program. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to update USDS policy to clearly define the responsibilities and authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and the digital service teams and require existing agency digital service teams to address this policy. In doing so, the Federal Chief Information Officer should ensure that this policy is aligned with relevant federal law and OMB guidance on CIO responsibilities and authorities.

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. In particular, OMB updated its digital service team policy to require that teams appropriately inform their chief information officers (CIO) regarding U.S. Digital Service (USDS) projects. However, the policy does not describe the responsibilities or authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and digital service teams. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that the program updated digital service team charters to address the role of agency CIOs. As of May 2020, USDS has yet to provide us with the updated digital service team charters. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure HHS has reliable data on SGEs not serving on federal boards, the Secretary of HHS should take steps to improve the reliability of data on SGEs not serving on boards. For example, the agency could reconcile human capital data with general counsel and ethics office data, or issue clarifying guidance to human capital staff on appropriately identifying SGEs in human capital databases.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, HHS submitted its action plan to address GAO's recommendations. At that time, HHS stated the agency was reviewing its internal policies and procedures related to the hiring of special government employees not serving on boards to identify policy options that might improve data reliability. In January 2017, the Office of Government Ethics issued its Ethics Program Review of HHS and commented on ongoing and planned efforts by HHS to address challenges associated with identifying Special Government Employees who do not serve on federal advisory committees. Ongoing efforts include internal coordination between the Office of General Counsel-Ethics Division and human resource officials to implement new requirements based on 5 CFR part 2638. We are following up with HHS to determine the status of actions on the new requirements. As of September 2019, HHS has not responded to our requests for an update on their actions to respond to this recommendation. In May 2020, HHS noted that its Office of Human Resources has been responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and therefore has not been able to provide an update on this recommendation. HHS expects to provide us with an update in July 2020. We contacted the agency for an update and are awaiting a response as of September 1, 2020.

Recommendation: To provide greater assurance that the Interagency Rotation Program for national security personnel will be implemented as provided in section 1107 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in collaboration with the Committee on National Security Personnel, should establish a clear leadership and oversight structure to guide future implementation efforts.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM generally concurred with the recommendations, but raised issues primarily about the roles and responsibilities that GAO addresses in the report. As of November 2019, OPM has not taken any action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: To provide greater assurance that the Interagency Rotation Program for national security personnel will be implemented as provided in section 1107 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in collaboration with the Committee on National Security Personnel, should work with the departments and agencies to identify and take action on necessary next steps to proceed with the program's implementation, including developing and issuing required guidance for implementation within identified timeframes.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM generally concurred with the recommendations, but raised issues primarily about the roles and responsibilities that GAO addresses in the report. As of November 2019, OPM has not taken any action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure that agency review processes provide frequent, regular opportunities to assess progress on agency priority goals (APG), and are conducted in a manner consistent with GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) requirements, OMB guidance, and leading practices, the Secretary of Defense should work with the COO and PIO to modify the Department's review processes to ensure that review meetings are led by the agency head or COO.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. DOD officials previously told us that they interpreted relevant guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to provide them with flexibility to delegate responsibility for conducting these reviews. However, as of July 2020, OMB's guidance continues to clearly state that the agency head and/or Chief Operating Officer, with support of the Performance Improvement Officer, are responsible for leading agency reviews. In May and June 2020, DOD officials described to us meetings that agency officials used to review progress on each of the agency's priority goals. However, neither the Secretary nor Deputy Secretary of Defense were involved in those review meetings. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure that agency review processes provide frequent, regular opportunities to assess progress on agency priority goals (APG), and are conducted in a manner consistent with GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) requirements, OMB guidance, and leading practices, the Secretary of State should work with the COO and PIO to modify the Department's review processes to ensure that progress on each APG is reviewed in an in-person review meeting at least quarterly.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The State Department concurred with this recommendation. In October 2019, State Department officials described to us actions the agency has taken to conduct reviews consistent with what we recommended. For example, they provided a document confirming that officials reviewed one of the priority goals in an in-person meeting. However, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate that review processes for the agency's other priority goals are held in-person or at least quarterly. We have requested, but as of April 2020 have not received, this additional documentation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress.

Recommendation: To help ensure that agency review processes provide frequent, regular opportunities to assess progress on agency priority goals (APG), and are conducted in a manner consistent with GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) requirements, OMB guidance, and leading practices, the Secretary of State should work with the COO and PIO to modify the Department's review processes to ensure that the reviews are led by the agency head or COO.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The State Department did not agree or disagree with this recommendation and, as of March 2020, has taken limited actions to address it. In October 2019, State Department officials described to us how the Chief Operating Officer (COO) is involved in reviewing progress on one of the agency's priority goals. However, as of April 2020, the State Department has not provided documentation we requested to corroborate the COO's involvement in this review, or reviews for the agency's other priority goals. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Commerce should ensure a reliable department-wide inventory of mobile service contracts is developed and maintained.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Commerce had not implemented this recommendation. In July 2018, the department provided an inventory that shows, by service provider and department component, the number of devices per rate plan and monthly rate; however, the inventory did not include the number of voice minutes, gigabytes of data, and text messages allowed per line per month. Furthermore, the department had not demonstrated that it had accounted for all of its mobile service contracts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Commerce should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the department had not addressed the recommendation. In July 2018, the department described steps it was taking to identify lines that were inactive for a period of three or more continuous months (zero usage). However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it has established documented procedures that address the elements of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's progress.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Defense should ensure an inventory of mobile devices and services is established department-wide (i.e., all components' devices and associated services are accounted for).

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense partially concurred with our recommendation; however, as of January 2020, the department had not implemented it. In response to our report, the department stated that it agreed that such an inventory has merits, but that maintaining one comes at considerable expense and effort. The department also stated, in 2016, that while it does not maintain a single, centralized device level inventory, the military departments track and manage their own devices and services . As we stated in our report, the inventory need not be generated centrally at the headquarters level; the department can compile a comprehensive inventory using its components' complete inventories. As of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that all its components had inventories of unique devices and associated services. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Defense should ensure a reliable department-wide inventory of mobile service contracts is developed and maintained.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense stated that it partially concurred with our recommendation; and has taken steps to address it. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it had implemented the recommendation. In response to our report, the department stated that it agreed that developing an inventory of mobile device contracts has merits, especially in a time of restricted government spending. The department also described several efforts it had undertaken to enhance mobile device management. However, as we stated in our report, any approach to managing mobile device contracts will be hampered by the lack of complete information on the contracts that are already in place. In August 2018, the department developed an inventory of mobile service contracts. However, the department had not demonstrated that the inventory included all its components' mobile service contracts. In August 2019, the department described steps it was taking to ensure that it has a complete inventory of mobile service contracts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, the Department of Health and Human Services had not implemented this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, the Department of Homeland Security developed an asset and inventory management plan for managing devices under its enterprise blanket purchase agreement. The plan includes procedures for assessing devices for zero usage; however, it does not include procedures for assessing over and under usage. The department also has not demonstrated that it has established procedures for devices not covered by its enterprise blanket purchase agreement.We will continue to monitor the department's efforts.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of the Interior should ensure an inventory of mobile devices and services is established department-wide (i.e., all components' devices and associated services are accounted for).

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of the Interior has not demonstrated that it has fully implemented this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department demonstrated that only one of its components, the Bureau of Reclamation, had an inventory of mobile devices and associated services. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of the Interior should ensure a reliable department-wide inventory of mobile service contracts is developed and maintained.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Interior had not demonstrated that it had fully addressed this recommendation. In August 2019, the department developed an inventory of mobile service contracts. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had accounted for all of its mobile service contracts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Attorney General should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Justice has made progress implementing this recommendation; however, more remains to be done. Specifically, in response to our findings, in April 2015, the department's Chief Information Officer issued a memo that required components to establish procedures for regular reviews of invoices for wireless services to identify unused and underused devices or services, as well as any over-usage charges to service plans. One of the components we reviewed, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, established procedures in July 2016 to monitor mobile device usage. In addition, the Justice Management Division (JMD) established procedures in May 2019 that apply to JMD as well some but not all other components. The other component we reviewed in our report, the Drug Enforcement Agency, had not established procedures that address our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's progress.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of State should ensure an inventory of mobile devices and services is established department-wide (i.e., all components' devices and associated services are accounted for).

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of State had not demonstrated that it has implemented this recommendation. The department has inventories of mobile device; however, the inventories do not include the services associated with each device. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of State should ensure a reliable department-wide inventory of mobile service contracts is maintained.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of State had not implemented this recommendation. In June 2019, the department said it has a Telecom Expense Management System which can be used to document an inventory of domestic service contracts; however, the department did not provide the inventory. Furthermore, the department did not demonstrate that it has an inventory of international service contracts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of Transportation should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Transportation had not addressed the recommendation. In December 2019, an official from the department's Audit Relations and Program Improvement office stated that all the department's telecommunication devices are managed through two programs and that these programs have mechanisms in place to ensure that telecommunications are managed in an effective and efficient manner. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided evidence to demonstrate that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of the Treasury should ensure an inventory of mobile devices and services is established department-wide (i.e., all components' devices and associated services are accounted for).

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Treasury had not implemented the recommendation. In August 2019, the department stated that it had established enterprise-wide procurement vehicles for mobile devices. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it has an inventory of mobile devices and associated service information. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the agency effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should ensure a complete inventory of mobile devices and associated services is established.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had not implemented the recommendation. We reported in May 2015, that NASA had an inventory of mobile devices and associated service information which included most, but not all, of the devices used by the agency. In November 2019, NASA's Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) stated that the agency was in the process of enrolling devices in a new mobile device management tool, and that when the approximately 15 percent of devices that are not currently on NASA's new End-User Services Technology contract are brought on the contract, NASA will have a monthly deliverable depicting the services of all mobile devices. We will continue to monitor NASA's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the agency effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should ensure a reliable inventory of mobile service contracts is developed and maintained.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had not demonstrated that it has implemented the recommendation. NASA's Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) stated that NASA had established, on September 1, 2019, the NASA End-User Services and Technology contract to procure mobile services, but as of November 2019, had not yet included 15 percent of its devices on the new contract. We will continue to monitor NASA's efforts to develop and maintain a mobile services contract inventory as described in our report.

Recommendation: To help the agency effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established agency-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had not demonstrated that it had implemented the recommendation. In November 2019, NASA's Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) stated that as part of enterprise mobility service contract deliverables, NASA requires monthly reports to monitor and optimize usage (zero, under, and over). NASA's OCIO also stated that the agency established role-based privileges to monitor and report on this activity agency-wide. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has established procedures to assess device usage in accordance with our recommendation. We will continue to monitor NASA's implementation of the recommendation.

Recommendation: To help the department effectively manage spending on mobile devices and services, the Secretary of the Treasury should ensure procedures to monitor and control spending are established department-wide. Specifically, ensure that (1) procedures include assessing devices for zero, under, and over usage; (2) personnel with authority and responsibility for performing the procedures are identified; and (3) the specific steps to be taken to perform the process are documented.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Treasury had not demonstrated that it has implemented the recommendation. In August 2019, an official from the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that the department was collecting and analyzing information on voice and data utilization. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it had established procedures in accordance with our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness, Congress should consider transferring the oversight of the markings of toy and imitation firearms in 15 U.S.C. 5001 from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (within the Department of Commerce) to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: This matter is an action identified in GAO's annual Duplication and Cost Savings reports. No legislative action identified. The Gun Look-Alike Case Act, H.R. 3224, which was introduced on July 27, 2015, in the 114th Congress, would transfer the authority to regulate the markings of toy, look-alike, and imitation firearms in section 5001 of title 15 of the U.S. Code from NIST to CPSC, as GAO suggested in November 2014. This bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade of the Committee on Energy and Commerce in the United States House of Representatives, and did not pass out of committee. This bill was not reintroduced in the 115th Congress and, as of March 2020, has not been reintroduced by the 116th Congress. Continued regulation of the marking of toy and imitation firearms by NIST rather than CPSC does not leverage each agency's expertise and therefore may not be the most efficient use of scarce federal resources.

Recommendation: To improve existing coordination of oversight for consumer product safety, Congress should consider establishing a formal comprehensive oversight mechanism for consumer product safety agencies to address crosscutting issues as well as inefficiencies related to fragmentation and overlap such as communication and coordination challenges and jurisdictional questions between agencies. Different types of formal mechanisms could include, for example, creating a memorandum of understanding to formalize relationships and agreements or establishing a task force or interagency work group. As a starting point, Congress may wish to obtain agency input on options for establishing more formal coordination.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: This matter is an action identified in GAO's annual Duplication and Cost Savings reports. As of March 2020, no legislation was identified that would establish a collaborative mechanism to facilitate communication across the relevant agencies and to help enable them to collectively address crosscutting issues, as GAO suggested in November 2014. Some of the agencies with direct regulatory oversight responsibilities for consumer product safety reported that they continue to collaborate to address specific consumer product safety topics. However, without a formal comprehensive oversight mechanism, the agencies risk missing opportunities to better leverage resources and address challenges, including those related to fragmentation and overlap.

Recommendation: To improve transparency in the rulemaking process, provide agencies and the public with information on why regulations are considered to be significant regulatory actions, and promote consistency in the designation of rules as significant regulatory actions, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should work with agencies to clearly communicate the reasons for designating a regulation as a significant regulatory action. Specifically, OMB should encourage agencies to clearly state in the preamble of final significant regulations the section of Executive Order 12866's definition of a significant regulatory action that applies to the regulation.

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

Comments: In a May 14, 2015 letter to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Director of OMB stated that nothing in the Executive Order 12866 prevents agencies from identifying the particular relevant definition of significance in rules, and that some rules do contain this information. The letter also stated that OMB believes it is appropriate to leave agencies flexibility in how they comply with Executive Order 12866, since such specific procedures for including such information is not a requirement of the Executive Order itself. However, in written comments submitted to GAO in March 2020, OMB stated that there are numerous examples from the past few years of agencies clearly identifying in the preambles of significant regulations the applicable section(s) of EO 12866's significance definition. OMB further stated that it encourages agencies to continue and expand this practice, especially where doing so has been found to improve agency planning for the regulatory process or to otherwise enhance decision-making. When we can further confirm that OMB has taken steps to encourage agencies to include this information in rules, we will provide an update.