Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: "Federal agencies"
GAO-21-29, Oct 8, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-21-155R, Oct 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-5130
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-567, Sep 30, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-4456
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-607R, Sep 22, 2020
Phone: (202)512-5130
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-629, Sep 22, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9342
an assessment of cyber-related risk, based on an analysis of the threats to, and vulnerabilities of, critical assets and operations;
measures of performance and formal mechanism to track progress of the execution of activities; and
an analysis of the cost and resources needed to implement the National Cyber Strategy. (Recommendation 1)
Agency: Executive Office of the President: National Security Council
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-701, Sep 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-559, Sep 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on a draft of this report, Commerce concurred with the recommendation and indicated it will take steps to implement the recommendation. We will continue to monitor Commerce's progress.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on the draft of the report, HUD said it finalized standard operating procedures for making career SES reassignments, and thus believes it has addressed our recommendation. We will follow up with the department to assess whether its actions fully address the recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM did not concur with our recommendation. In its comment on a draft of the report, OPM said it relies on federal agencies to comply with provisions governing SES reassignments. OPM further stated that it has chosen not to make reassignments a focus of its enforcement efforts, in light of scarce resources and other mandates OPM is required to meet. However, for reasons discussed in the report, we maintain that OPM should use its oversight authority to ensure agencies' reassignments of SES staff are consistent with requirements. We will continue to monitor OPM's progress.
GAO-20-575, Sep 10, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Bureau of the Census
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-602, Aug 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: United States Interagency Council on Homelessness
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-560, Aug 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-566, Aug 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3406
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language to clarify the duties and responsibilities of the CFO, including the formulation and financial execution of the budget, planning and performance, risk management, internal control, financial systems, and accounting. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language to specify that the deputy CFO shall assist the agency CFO in the performance of each of the duties of the agency CFO. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
a. The plan should include actions for improving financial management systems, strengthening the federal financial management workforce, and better linking performance and cost information for decision-making.
b. The plan should be developed in consultation with the CFO Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Chief Data Officer Council, the Chief Acquisition Officers Council, CIGIE, GAO, and other appropriate financial management experts. (Matter for Consideration 3)
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for a government-wide 4-year financial management plan and an annual financial management status report. The plan is to address actions for improving financial management systems, strengthening the federal financial management workforce, and better linking performance and cost information for decision-making. The plan is to be developed in consultation with the CFO Council, the Chief Information Officers Council, the Chief Data Officer Council, the Chief Acquisition Officers Council, CIGIE, GAO, and other appropriate financial management experts. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for the CFO of each CFO Act agency to prepare, in consultation with financial management and other appropriate experts, an agency plan to implement the 4-year financial management plan prepared by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and to achieve and sustain effective financial management in the agency. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for the Director of OMB to prepare comprehensive financial management performance-based metrics, which are to be used to evaluate the financial management performance of executive agencies. These metrics are to be included in the government-wide and agency-level financial management plans, and agencies' performance against the metrics are to be reported in annual financial management status reports. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for the head of each CFO Act agency to identify key financial management information needed for effective financial management decision-making. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for the head of each CFO Act agency to annually assess and separately report on the effectiveness of internal controls of the agency over financial reporting and other key financial management information. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: A bill (S. 3287) introduced in February 2020 proposed changes to the CFO Act. Among the proposed changes was language that calls for the financial statement auditors of each CFO Act agency to report on their evaluation of internal control over financial reporting and other key financial management information. We will continue to monitor the status of this bill.
GAO-20-528, Jul 8, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-462, Jun 30, 2020
Phone: (202)512-8678
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-441, Jun 18, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-442, Jun 17, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said that it plans to clarify and adjust its current and future guidance to its payment reporting sites to require that the sites (1) develop and maintain procedures to support implementation of its payment integrity requirements for identifying, tracking, and reporting improper payments, and (2) require payment reporting sites to certify that the procedures have been developed and implemented. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these planned actions.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said that it will (1) take measures to strengthen and enhance the existing payment integrity monitoring and quality assurance program by conducting period payment reporting site visits and (2) establish a payment integrity working group to identify best practices for incorporation into DOE processes. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these planned actions.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said they plan to develop and implement processes and procedures for tracking questioned costs to resolution. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these planned actions.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said it will conduct annual look-back analyses to the extent possible to determine if prior year reporting exceeded the $100 million threshold, and therefore could be subject to additional reporting requirements. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these planned actions.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said it will revise and enhance procedures defining the OCFO quality assurance process to (1) define the criteria for assessing the adequacy of payment reporting sites' justifications, and (2) review the payment reporting sites' justifications against the criteria defined. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these planned actions.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE disagreed with the recommendation, stating in its comments that it has an ongoing Fraud Risk Management Working Group and that officials have developed a Fraud Risk Management and Data Analytics Implementation Plan to strengthen DOE's capability to prevent, identify, and recover improper payments and fraud. However, DOE's plan is still in draft form and, according to DOE's technical comments, they will not begin using data analytics until fiscal year 2021. In addition, DOE said that existing payment recapture activities to identify and recover improper payments are sufficient. However, as we discuss in the report, DOE determined that it does not need to conduct payment recapture audits based on justifications submitted by the reporting sites. We continue to believe that by evaluating whether it could identify enough additional improper payments to make payment recapture audits cost-effective, such as by performing audits at a limited number of sites, DOE would have an opportunity to identify and recover additional improper payments or have better information to justify that payment recapture audits are not cost-effective. We plan to monitor DOE actions related to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE did not agree with the recommendation to develop and document the rationale for the scale used to score risk factors and weighting of payment sites, stating that its risk assessment evaluates the volume and dollar amount of payments by payment category, payments subject to manual controls, and fluctuations in volume and dollar amounts. However, we are recommending that the OCFO document the weighting of all its risk factors, including its decision to consider as equal the risks identified by all sites-regardless of the dollar amount of outlays. We continue to believe that, because DOE did not properly document how it developed and considered risk factors during its fiscal year 2018 risk assessment, it cannot ensure that the process produces a reliable assessment of whether DOE is susceptible to significant improper payments. Regarding the consideration of inherent risk, DOE said that the Payment Integrity Risk Assessment directs payment reporting sites to consider inherent risk as part of DOE's Internal Control Program. However, even if none of the sites identifies the known lag in identifying improper payments as a risk, based on our review of DOE's Agency Financial Reports, this lag is a risk to DOE as a whole. Therefore, we continue to believe that DOE should document in its risk assessment process its consideration of the known lag in identifying improper payments. We plan to monitor DOE actions related to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE did not agree with the recommendation, stating that sufficient processes are in place for ensuring the accuracy of payment reporting sites' risk assessments. DOE also stated that OCFO's Payment Integrity Guidance instructs payment reporting sites to maintain detailed information supporting risk assessments. However, as we discuss in the report, 5 of the 10 sites we reviewed did not provide sufficient explanation or documentation supporting their ratings for several of the risk factors. We continue to believe that by developing, documenting, and implementing policies and procedures to require the OCFO to review documentation supporting payment site risk assessments, DOE would enhance its ability to adequately monitor its decentralized improper payment risk assessment process and help ensure that individual payment reporting sites accurately score their risk factors, leading DOE to obtain a more accurate and reliable assessment of its overall risk of susceptibility to improper payments. We plan to monitor DOE actions related to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation and said that itwill clarify the quality assurance process for the payment reporting sites' ratings; however, DOE will not override the individual payment sites' risk determinations. Instead, DOE plans to work as needed with payment reporting site officials to determine the appropriate risk ratings. We will monitor and report on DOE's progress in implementing these actions.
GAO-20-384, Jun 11, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Phone: (202) 512-6240
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-123, May 27, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6240
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-382, May 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that through its coordination of the Council on Economic Mobility it will promote poverty reduction approaches that aim to provide more integrated, person-centered service delivery. It will also work to identify opportunities for collaboration, promising practices, and successful models that promote economic mobility and will develop strategies for promoting them, such as through technical assistance. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
GAO-20-322, Apr 23, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-155, Apr 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the department's efforts to address it.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the agency's efforts to address it.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the agency's efforts to address it.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the agency's efforts to address it.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the agency's efforts to address it.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up on the agency's efforts to address it.
GAO-20-404, Apr 3, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: TSA concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it by updating the BASE Cybersecurity Security Action Item section to ensure it reflects the NIST Cybersecurity Framework Detect and Recover functions. When we confirm what actions TSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-230, Apr 1, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open
Comments: DHS agreed with this recommendation and noted that it plans to work further with DOL to explore options for improving the H-2B visa program and possibly develop proposals for legislative changes.
Agency: Department of Labor: Employment and Training Administration
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. DOL said it is prepared to work with DHS to consider options for changing the H-2B program and to provide any technical assistance that Congress may need on this issue. We will monitor the agency's progress to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not agree with this recommendation. DHS said it would continue to work with DOL-as it has done in prior years--if and when Congress delegates the authority to make additional H-2B visas available beyond the statutory cap to DHS. The agency also expressed its view that Congress is better positioned to determine whether and how many additional visas should be made available to meet the needs of U.S. businesses. In fiscal years 2017 through 2020, DHS was authorized to increase the number of H-2B visas beyond the statutory cap, after consulting with DOL to determine that "the needs of American businesses [could not] be satisfied...with United States workers..." In exercising this authority in prior years, DHS stated that "[t]he scope of the assessment called for by the statute [in making this determination] is quite broad, and accordingly delegates the Secretary of Homeland Security broad discretion to identify the business needs [s]he finds most relevant." In light of DHS's broad view of its authority, we continue to believe that it would be appropriate for DHS, in consultation with DOL, to assess the advantages and disadvantages of considering current economic trends in determining the appropriate number of additional H-2B visas to provide. If they determine that using such data would be warranted, the agencies would then be well positioned to implement such an approach if DHS is granted such authority in the future. Moreover, if-as DHS stated in its response to our recommendation-the agency believes that Congress is best suited to determine what increases in visa numbers may be needed to meet the needs of U.S. businesses, consistent with protecting American workers, it may wish to work with Congress to draft a legislative proposal reflecting this view.
Agency: Department of Labor: Employment and Training Administration
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. The agency plans to draw on its data on labor market and economic trends to provide technical assistance to DHS on the determination of how many additional H-2B visas to make available.
Agency: Department of Labor: Employment and Training Administration
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. DOL noted that while further development of a system for tracking industry and occupational trends in H-2B employer violations is currently on hold due to budgetary constraints, when this system is available it will provide the capacity to take a risk-based approach to selecting employers for audits. We will monitor the agency's progress to implement this recommendation.
GAO-20-361, Mar 31, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In June 2020, GSA said the agency would validate system data through regional and broker outreach and fully utilize validated system data to manage the broker program. The agency also said it will develop a quality control plan and follow-up on outcomes. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Although GSA initially did not concur with this recommendation, the agency stated in June 2020 that it agrees with the recommendation and will take steps to implement it. Specifically, GSA plans to revise the broker performance standards and document broker effectiveness through lease cost avoidance, timely lease replacement, and earned commission credits. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.
GAO-20-216, Mar 31, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
GAO-20-187, Mar 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6888
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.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that the Office of Civil Rights and Diversity (OCRD) has identified promising practices on an ongoing basis in its Title IX compliance review reports. OCRD will develop and publicize a promising practices guide on its website for reference by university grantees. The estimated completion date is June 1, 2020. GAO will review this action once it receives documentation from DOE.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated the Office for Civil Rights will incorporate effective practices from materials posted on its website and external sources in a stand-alone list of effective practices to help universities comply with Title IX. The Office for Civil Rights will also draw from its Title IX enforcement work to update the effective practices list on an ongoing basis.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that the Office of Civil Rights and Diversity (OCRD) has developed a draft outline of complaint procedures. OCRD is benchmarking these procedures against NASA and NSF external civil rights complaint procedures. OCRD will finalize and publish Title IX complaint procedures, consistent with the Department of Justice's regulations. The estimated completion date is October 31, 2020.
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.
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.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that outside of the Title IX enforcement process, the Office for Civil Rights updated its sex discrimination web pages to inform persons on how to file complaints of discrimination directly to the Office for Civil Rights, including complaints of sexual harassment. The Office for Civil Rights has also incorporated information about Title IX rights and obligations in outreach material used on university campuses, including information addressing sexual harassment.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that the Office of Civil Rights and Diversity (OCRD) will evaluate the feasibility of receiving and reviewing concerns of discrimination, including sexual harassment, outside of the Title IX complaint process described in DOE's Title IX regulations, as well as communicating this option to individuals on DOE funded grants. The estimated completion date is December 31, 2020.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with the recommendation. According to the agency's February 2020 formal comment letter, NASA plans to assess the feasibility of receiving and reviewing concerns of sex discrimination and harassment and communicating to individuals on agency-funded grants the option to notify the agency of these concerns. In conducting the feasibility assessment, NASA will benchmark with agencies that currently have the capability to receive and review concerns of sex discrimination, including sexual harassment. NASA will also examine internal resources to ensure successful implementation. NASA estimates completion by September 20, 2020.
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.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that the Office for Civil Rights and NIH will review the current procedure for sharing information, and development and implement (as necessary) formal procedures for sharing relevant information about Title IX and sexual harassment concerns. Furthermore, an action plan to address the recommendation will be provided in the department's 180-day letter response to Congress.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that the Office of Civil Rights and Diversity will conduct research into best practices for harassment prevention efforts for university grantees and benchmark with other federal agencies. The estimated completion date for establishment of goals is January 31, 2021 and the estimated completion date for establishment of an overall plan is August 31, 2021.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation. In its February 2020 formal comment letter, the department stated that NIH has created goals for all NIH grantee sexual harassment prevention efforts, as noted in GAO's report. NIH will develop a plan to assess progress towards achieving those goals, including methods to regularly monitor and evaluate policies and communication methods. To the extent Title IX enforcement and outreach efforts may prevent sexual harassment, the Office for Civil Rights will develop a plan for leveraging enforcement efforts and outreach communications to help HHS grantees implement prevention efforts. HHS will submit an action plan that fully address department efforts regarding this recommendation in its 180-day letter response to Congress.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA agreed with the recommendation. According to the agency's February 2020 formal comment letter, NASA accepts its responsibility to establish policies and communication mechanisms to help university grantees to prevent sexual harassment, and the agency is committed to ongoing monitoring and evaluation of these efforts. At the same time, NASA judges that the most effective way to discharge these responsibilities is to adopt the approach now being developed by the National Science and Technology Council. NASA will establish goals, plans, and methods pursuant to this recommendation by adopting the policies and approaches developed through the interagency process. The estimated completion is to be determined based on timelines and milestones established by the Office of Science and Technology Policy's Safe and Inclusive Research Environments Subcommittee Subcommittee.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: NSF agreed with the recommendation. According to the agency's February 2020 formal comment letter, NSF is embarking on an assessment process to improve its policies and practices continually in order to achieve the goal of safe and inclusive research environments.
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.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Assistant Attorney General for Administration
Status: Open
Comments: DOJ generally agreed with the recommendation. According to the department's February 2020 formal comment letter, the Civil Rights Division (CRT) is prepared to delineate agencies' roles and responsibilities within the Quarterly Title IX STEM Discussion Group and is willing to develop an enhanced process for evaluating, monitoring, and reporting on the group's collaborations in enforcing Title IX that is achievable within DOJ's current resource allocation, or if more resources become available.
GAO-20-273, Feb 19, 2020
Phone: (404) 679-1875
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-274, Feb 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to DHS, in June 2020, DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics launched a Family Status Data Standards Community of Interest (COI) under the purview of the DHS Immigration Data Integration Initiative. In August 2020, DHS reported that the Family Status COI includes subject matter experts and data system managers from DHS components, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The COI's mandate includes drafting common DHS-wide and interagency data standards (common codes, common definitions, common formats) for all topics related to family status, including codes to identify the reasons for family separation, members apprehended together, and unaccompanied children. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Identifying and communicating department-wide information needs with respect to family members who have been apprehended together should help provide DHS with greater assurance that its components are identifying all individuals who may be eligible for relief from removal from the United States based on their family relationships.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) will work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on the Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. As of August 2020, DHS reported that DHS OIS continues to work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that, upon implementation of the steps the department plans to take in response to our second recommendation, CBP will issue guidance to the field to ensure that CBP agents and officers document the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members. In August 2020, DHS reported that component agencies continue to collaborate to define the process of family members apprehended together, as will be reflected on CBP Form I-213. DHS estimates issuing this guidance by March 31, 2021. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.immigration or other proceedings.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) plans to work with relevant components to develop a unique shared identifier linking family members apprehended together. According to DHS, DHS OIS launched the Family Status Community of Interest (COI) in June 2020, and the COI has since established a bi-weekly meeting schedule. The COI's initial focus is on standard codes describing the reasons for family separations. Upon completing the family separation reason standard, DHS reported that the COI will prioritize developing common codes to identify family members apprehended together. DHS estimates completing these actions by March 31, 2021. Evaluating options for developing a shared unique family member identifier across components that would allow each component access to certain information about family members apprehended together would help bridge the information gaps about family relationships between components caused by DHS's fragmented data systems.
GAO-20-294, Feb 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-206, Feb 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: DOT agreed with this recommendation. Specifically, the agency agreed that using existing data could potentially contribute to its efforts to develop the aviation maintenance workforce. DOT said it will ask the Aviation Workforce Steering Committee to consider using existing FAA data and to coordinate with other federal agencies regarding other potential data sources to support the FAA's aviation maintenance workforce goals. We will consider closing this recommendation when these and other efforts to address this recommendation are complete.
GAO-20-135, Feb 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9847
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: GSA has taken steps to address this recommendation. GSA revised certain data elements' definitions in 2020 and incorporated them into the 2020 FRPP data dictionary to enhance the accuracy and completeness of the data reported to FRPP. In addition, the Federal Real Property Council established a data governance working group that meets regularly to address challenges to reliable and complete data in the FRPP. In September 2020, that group committed to developing an action plan to outline the steps to improve the location information in FRPP that we identified in February 2020. If these efforts succeed, GAO will close this recommendation as implemented.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA has taken steps to address this recommendation. The Federal Real Property Council established a data governance working group that meets regularly to address challenges to reliable and complete data in the FRPP. In September 2020, GSA described step that the working group has taken to make V&V anomaly categories better target incorrect data. GSA is currently assessing these actions.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA staff said that the agency now agrees with this recommendation and in an September 2020 meeting said that GSA staff were working with relevant agencies to address it. GAO will continue to monitor their progress.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA agreed with this recommendation and in an September 2020 meeting said that GSA staff were working with relevant agencies to address it. GAO will continue to monitor their progress.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, GAO staff met with GSA and Interagency Security Committee officials. The officials explained that they had had discussions to determine what installations would be considered secure installations and were considering what changes to make to the data. GAO will continue to monitor their actions. In September 2020, GSA confirmed that the Federal Real Property Council was working on the issue.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA agreed with this recommendation and in an September 2020 meeting said that GSA staff summarized the actions the agency has taken to link all of the real property data sources. GAO is currently assessing the actions.
GAO-20-133, Feb 4, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6240
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: DHS has drafted a preliminary strategy to independently validate agencies' actions, using a risk-based approach. However, this strategy has not yet been finalized and needs to more clearly align to the existing directive development process, to which it serves as an addendum. The strategy should include when and how primary and secondary sources of information for independent validation are selected within the directive development process.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-66R, Feb 2, 2020
Phone: (202)512-6912
Agency: Federal Election Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-237, Jan 27, 2020
Phone: (202)512-6881
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-24, Jan 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In June 2020, EPA said that it will continue to work with its wide-ranging, existing technical assistance providers and coordinate with its stakeholders to identify additional providers as applicable. According to the agency, it is already taking action on the recommendation. While we agree that EPA should continue to work with its providers to improve technical assistance to utilities, our recommendation was for EPA to work with stakeholders to develop a network to provide coverage for the many drinking water and wastewater utilities across the country. EPA has not provided information to show that its plans will develop such a network. We will continue to monitor this recommendation to determine how the agency is working with stakeholders to build a network of providers.
GAO-20-228, Dec 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
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.
GAO-20-101, Dec 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
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.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, DOE indicated in its 180-day letter that the agency concurred with the recommendation, and will update their annual personal property reporting requirements. DOE anticipates having this recommendation implemented by September 30, 2020. GAO will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, DOL indicated in its 180-day letter that they concurred with the recommendation, and have taken steps to improve the monitoring and oversight of Job Corps Property. This includes modifying the GSAXcess approval process by elevating review of all GSAXcess requests made by Job Corps Centers to DOL's Employment Training Administration's (ETA) national office. ETA is also working with DOL's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management (OASAM) to develop a process for GSAXcess review that includes identifying approval levels for each category of property, identifying categories of property requiring additional review and approvals, and coordinating and streamlining access request procedures. These changes will be reflected in DOL's Office of Job Corps standard operating procedures (SOP), which is expected to be issued at the end of fiscal year 2020. DOL expects to provide training to Job Corps staff and Job Corps Centers in support of the SOP that will be provided annually. GAO will continue to monitor DOL's efforts to implement this recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, DOE indicated in its 180-day letter that the agency concurred with the recommendation, and will update internal policies, and provide personal property information on DOE's internal informational website known as Powerpedia. DOE anticipates implementing this recommendation by September 30, 2020. GAO will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it concurred with the recommendation, and has taken steps to revise the Personal Property Reporting Tool (tool). GSA has added relevant authorities to the tool as recently as July 2019, and will continue to contact agencies to ensure relevant authorities are included in the tool. GSA is also evaluating technical updates to the tool to ensure that reporting agencies select an appropriate authority when reporting personal property. GSA plans to complete these actions by July 31, 2020, and inform agencies of these changes in their guidance by the end of fiscal year 2020. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it concurred with the recommendation. GSA will better communicate with agencies to better understand the confusion of reporting on loaned excess property, as reporting requirements are in statute, regulations, and guidance. GSA also plans to review and update by July 31, 2020, relevant regulations and guidance in this area including Federal Management Regulation Bulletin B-27, "Annual Executive Agency Reports on Excess and Exchange/Sale Personal Property." GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.
GAO-20-126, Dec 12, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the office has not provided information on its actions to implement our recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, OMB needs to collect data on the extent to which federal agencies are using cloud services authorized outside of FedRAMP and oversee agencies' compliance with using the program. According to an OMB Associate General Counsel, the agency does not have a mechanism for enforcing agencies' compliance with its guidance on FedRAMP. However, we believe that OMB can and should hold agencies accountable for complying with its policies. By implementing this recommendation, OMB could substantially improve participation in the FedRAMP program, which is intended to standardize security requirements for federal agencies' authorizations of cloud services. We will update the status of this recommendation when OMB provides information on its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, GSA has not provided evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when GSA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, CDC stated it has taken actions to address our recommendations, but we have not received evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status once CDC provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, HHS stated CMS took actions to close this recommendation, but CMS has not yet provided evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when CMS provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, NIH stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. NIH stated it will provide an update in December 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when NIH provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, EPA stated it is taking actions to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, EPA stated it is taking action to address this recommendation, but the agency did not provide evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any evidence of its corrective actions. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA did not concur with this recommendation and as of September 2020, the agency has not provided any additional evidence. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress and update the recommendation's status when EPA provides its corrective actions.
GAO-20-130, Dec 10, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open
Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation and has developed an action plan to implement it. In January 2020, GSA officials told us that GSA will change the method for calculating the average cost per square foot performance measure by now using the actual rent agencies paid to GSA in the calculation. GSA officials also stated that GSA will post this information annually to performance.gov. We will continue to monitor GSA's implementation of these efforts.
GAO-20-119, Dec 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were proposed changes to CNCS's approach for involving key participants from across the agency in the process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) assess the extent to which they address our recommendation and (2) confirm that these proposed changes were approved. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were workforce planning and hiring based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for CNCS to address its evidence priorities. The letter stated that once those actions were completed, CNCS would revisit the roles and responsibilities of participants involved in the agency's evidence-building activities. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendations and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) confirm that these proposed changes were approved and (2) assess the extent to which written guidance for the revised process addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-20-81, Nov 21, 2019
Phone: (202)512-4645
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense partially concurred with this recommendation noting the challenge with balancing ensuring public access to research data with considerations of national security and personally identifiable information. As discussed in our report, balancing these considerations is a challenge that agency officials and stakeholders identified during our work. Accordingly, our recommendation to DOD regarding findability and accessibility of agency-funded research data was qualified to pertain to appropriate agency-funded research data--recognizing that it might not be appropriate to make certain datasets publically available because of national security or other concerns. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Education concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, the Department awarded a contract to support enhancements to its Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) to link scholarly research publications supported by the Department to its publicly accessible datasets. The Department indicated it expects to complete this work by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the Department has taken to implement this recommendation we will provide additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open
Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation and noted that it was in the process of establishing a portal on its website to increase public access to agency-funded research. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by June 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation but indicated in its comments on the report that had already taken steps to implement it. As discussed in the report, the department's efforts to ensure research data availability pertained to a portion of the agency's federally-funded research data. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: NSF concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, NSF is expanding its public access repository to include metadata records about data that support publications resulting from NSF-funded research. NSF's response stated that, by storing metadata records for supporting datasets alongside metadata records for publications, the public will be able to more easily find and access appropriate agency funded research data. We will provide an update when we obtain additional information about the status of implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation noting planned steps to complete development of data management plan requirements. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open
Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation, stating that it would develop a departmentwide management directive for research and development data as well as data management plan guidance and a template to document requirements. The department estimated that these efforts would be completed by June 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Agency for International Development agreed with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
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.
Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Agency for International Development agreed with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation, and indicated it would evaluate training needs for data management plan reviews and develop plans to fulfill any additional training needs identified. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation and identified several planned steps to identify and meet training needs for those involved in reviewing researchers' data management plans. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open
Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation stating that it would assess training needs for agency officials and others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and would develop and provide additional training if warranted. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation and stated it would assess and develop a plan to meet the training needs of internal DOE staff and external peer reviewers of data management plans. DOE estimated these efforts would be completed by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency agreed with this recommendation stating that, during fiscal year 2020, the agency will evaluate training needs for agency officials who review researchers' data management plans. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
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.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open
Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open
Comments: The National Institutes of Health concurred with this recommendation but stated that the agency already had mechanisms in place to ensure compliance with public access plan and associated requirements for publications and data. As discussed in the report, we believe our recommendation, as worded, appropriately reflected the extent to which the agency had implemented researcher compliance mechanisms at the time of issuance of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation and stated it would develop a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the department's public access plan and data management plan requirements. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with this recommendation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration indicated it was pursuing multiple mechanisms to implement it. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation stating that it would develop a compliance mechanism to identify researchers receiving funding from DOE financial assistance awards who are not compliant with DOE's public access plan for publications. DOE estimated these efforts would be completed by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation but indicated in its comments on the report that had already taken steps to implement it. As discussed in the report, the department's public access compliance mechanism covered a portion of the agency's federally-funded research data.. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, the Department will build upon existing compliance mechanisms to ensure researcher compliance with its public access plan and associated requirements. As part of this process, the Department reported that it plans to update its public access plan, and expects to complete these actions by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the Department has taken to implement this recommendation we will provide additional information.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with this recommendation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology identified several planned steps to implement it with full completion anticipated by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: OSTP disagreed with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, stating that the subcommittee had already taken steps to implement the leading practices GAO identified. However, OSTP officials did not provide documentation of these efforts and GAO continued to believe the recommendation was warranted. In March 2020, OSTP provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, noting that DOD participates in subcommittee initiatives, including a working group on disclosure risk management, which is a topic of great importance to DOD. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. DOE noted that, as a co-chair of the subcommittee, it is actively identifying areas of collaboration across agencies in implementing open science practices. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open
Comments: NIH concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. NIH stated that the subcommittee and its working groups are actively coordinating and building consensus on issues and processes to implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration across federal agencies. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NOAA concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, noting that NOAA would work with the subcommittee to identify more opportunities for collaboration to promote access to research results. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.
GAO-20-49, Nov 19, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-85, Nov 13, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-129, Oct 30, 2019
Phone: (202)512-4456
including 1 priority recommendation
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.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, the department reported actions it had taken to fully implement the activities associated with assessing competencies and needs regularly; assessing gaps in competencies and staffing; monitoring the agency's progress in addressing competency and staffing gaps; and reporting to agency leadership on progress in addressing competency and staffing gaps. The department also reported actions it had taken to address the remaining four activities and provided estimated time frames for fully implementing them. As of August 2020, we were following up with the department to obtain supporting documentation for the activities it claimed it had fully implemented and status updates for the remaining activities.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, Labor officials provided additional documentation on actions taken to address the recommendation. We plan to review the documentation, and when we confirm what actions the agency has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In December 2019, OPM stated that it had partnered with the General Services Administration's IT Modernization Center of Excellence to assess the current state of its IT workforce planning activities, but had not yet implemented any of the eight key planning activities we recommended. We will continue to monitor OPM's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, Social Security Administration officials provided the agency's recently issued IT workforce strategy for fiscal year 2019 to fiscal year 2022. We plan to review the strategy, and when we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-19, Oct 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4431
Agency: Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-141, Oct 8, 2019
Phone: 2025123841
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: Since GAO's October 2019 report, FEMA updated its guidance and has provided information to local entities on project eligibility and the industry standards it would accept for restoring the grid. In addition, in January 2020, FEMA provided training to FEMA regional officials and local entities on how to implement this guidance. Despite these efforts, uncertainty remains regarding the extent to which local entities in Puerto Rico have sufficient information to implement projects to promote grid resilience. This is in part due to challenges such as the need for written guidance on how project development will proceed after the fixed-cost estimate is finalized. GAO will continue to monitor FEMA progress towards implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2020, HUD had not published a federal notice outlining the grant process and requirements for CDBG-DR funding available for improvements to Puerto Rico's electricity grid, nor has it established time frames and a plan for issuing this notice. We continue to believe that the action we recommended is needed and will monitor HUD's efforts as part of our regular recommendation follow-up and additional work examining federal support to improve grid resilience in Puerto Rico. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: FEMA and DOE have enhanced coordination efforts between their respective agencies and with local entities involved in long-term grid recovery in Puerto Rico via the Technical Coordination Team but until the team's fiscal working group demonstrates how it will help coordinate different potential funding sources, the extent to which these efforts will enhance progress toward grid recovery is uncertain. FEMA can demonstrate this, in part, by providing documentation of efforts to coordinate funding for long-term recovery projects. GAO will continue to monitor agency efforts to support grid recovery in Puerto Rico.
GAO-19-698, Sep 30, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Army has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Air Force has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Navy has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of Defense has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
GAO-19-590, Sep 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-7141
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: State did not concur with the recommendation, indicating that it continues to collaborate with agencies regarding U.S. government activities in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. However, in May 2020, State noted that, to the extent possible, it would seek to include agencies, such as the Departments of Defense and Agriculture, into the Progress Report for the U.S. Strategy for Central America's Plan for Monitoring and Evaluation. When we confirm what actions State has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-653, Sep 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that its Administrator, in consultation with interagency committee member agencies, will determine criteria and other factors for evaluating federal agency interest and will formalize and document the interagency committee's membership process. NOAA anticipates documenting the process in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that the agency, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, will define the term "senior official" so that it can be consistently applied across all member agencies. NOAA stated it will consider seniority requirements of similar advisory committees and the ability to make decisions on behalf of an agency, among other factors, when developing the definition. NOAA plans to include the definition in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.
Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated the agency will work with interagency committee member agencies to review and update the committee's recommendations. As part of this process, the committee will develop metrics to analyze the effectiveness of the committee's recommendations and strategies. NOAA stated that the recommendations and assessment of effectiveness will be included in the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report, which NOAA expects to publish by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that it will, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, develop a process to identify priority funding needs which can be reflected in each agency's respective budgeting process and shared in the committee's biennial reports. NOAA expects to publish the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report by December 31, 2020.
GAO-19-543, Sep 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The department did not provide comments on our report or recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, Education stated that we did not sufficiently account for the limitations on its legal authority to carry out environmental justice activities. Education also stated that it does not believe this is the most appropriate course of action for the department or an efficient use of resources. We believe that Education can develop a strategic plan within its existing authorities. We will continue to review the department's actions to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department agreed to review its environmental justice strategy and to revise it if needed. It also stated that as part of that review, it will consider any guidance issued by the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJ IWG) concerning what agencies should include in environmental justice strategic plans. The department stated that it anticipated receiving such guidance by the end of 2020. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the department stated that its role is tangential to achieving environmental justice goals, but it is committed to integrating environmental justice into its responsibilities to protect workers. It stated that it has no plans at this time to update its environmental strategic plan. We agree that Labor should develop an environmental plan that contains goals consistent with its mission and authorities. We will continue to review its actions to implement our recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the agency agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department committed to updating its environmental justice strategic plan. It said that it will update its strategic plan pending the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance on what agencies should include in their plans. It also set a goal of completing the update within 6 months of EPA's issuance of guidance. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The department did not provide comments on our report or recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with this recommendation. First, DOD stated that it had achieved the intent of Executive Order 12898 by including environmental justice considerations in its decision-making processes, primarily by using the environmental review process. Second, the department stated that it is bound by its mission with limited opportunities to change where the department operates. DOD stated that these reasons make it a significant challenge for the department to meet our recommendation and therefore does not see a tangible benefit to additional reporting. As we stated in our report, DOD would be reporting on goals that it set within its mission and authorities. We will continue to review DOD's actions to carry out this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, Education stated that we did not sufficiently account for the limitations on its legal authority to carry out environmental justice activities. Education also stated that it does not believe this recommendation is the most appropriate course of action for the department or an efficient use of resources. We believe that Education can develop a strategic plan within its existing authorities, and then it should report its progress on these activities annually. We will continue to review the department's actions to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, Department of Energy officials stated that they had issued progress reports for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 and would issue progress reports annually after this point. We will review the department's reports in upcoming years to determine that it has carried out this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the department agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, the department agreed with our recommendation. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the department stated that its role is tangential to achieving environmental justice goals and therefore it has no real chance to update its progress reports. We agree that Labor should develop an environmental strategic plan containing goals consistent with its mission and authorities. It can develop progress reports annually related to these goals. We will continue to review its actions to implement our recommendation and update this information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the department stated that it partially agreed with this recommendation. It stated that it would update its progress reports as needed. As we stated in our report, leading practices for performance management indicate that annual performance reporting helps an agency to keep track of and achieve its goals. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, the department committed to issuing annual progress reports. The department also stated that it will use EPA or Interagency Working Group (IWG) guidance on methods agencies could use to assess progress towards their environmental justice goals. It stated that it would begin issuing progress reports following issuance of such guidance and per reporting schedule established by the Environmental Justice IWG. We will continue to review the department's actions and update this information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions and update this information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA agreed with this recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA disagreed with this recommendation, but also stated that it would lead efforts to update the working group's fiscal year 2016-2018 Framework for Collaboration to include guidance for strategic plans, tracking progress toward goals, and defining alignment with the executive order. We believe that if the agency carries out these actions, it will meet the intent of the recommendation. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, EPA disagreed with this recommendation and stated that it should be combined with the recommendation to update the Environmental Justice working group's strategic documents. We believe the agency misunderstood the recommendation. As we stated in the report, we believe that the MOU needs to be updated to address the matter of participation by the members who signed it but do not participate. We will continue to review the agency's actions to update its progress in implementing this recommendation.
GAO-19-561, Jul 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan to address study acceleration. This implementation plan is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of the agency's feasibility study acceleration reforms. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this evaluation, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. According to documentation provided by the agency, the Secretary of the Army will sign a memorandum by March 2020 directing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to clarify the Army's policy on entry of key study data to include milestone dates. Upon receipt of that memorandum, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will work with the Army Corps of Engineers to develop an implementation plan for this effort, which is expected to be signed by September 2020. We will continue to monitor the Corps' progress.
GAO-19-545, Jul 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In January 2020, OMB officials stated that they have incorporated agency feedback for enhancing the CyberStat program into an updated concept of operations document that is currently in draft. To consider this recommendation fully implemented, OMB needs to provide us with an updated concept of operations document for the CyberStat program, and demonstrate the expansion of CyberStat review meetings to agencies that require additional assistance due to persistent information security deficiencies. As of September 2020, OMB has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, we were still waiting to receive OMB's 180-day letter detailing the actions it plans to take to address the recommendation.
GAO-19-384, Jul 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9342
including 25 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not say whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once OMB has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
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.
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.
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Commerce did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that its intends to evaluate whether there are any gaps in its cybersecurity policy pertaining to the establishment of an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment and will establish a plan to fill in gaps as necessary. The department added that it is making strides in the implementation of a tool that can aggregate data into a dashboard for a unified visibility across the department. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it was developing a department-wide risk management plan, to include a risk management strategy, and this would be completed by May 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is drafting a cybersecurity risk management memo that will detail its risk management strategy, including how the department will assess, respond to, and monitor risk. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services partially concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is in the process of updating its policies to address the missing elements and plans to finalize the revisions by March 2021. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is drafting a cybersecurity risk management memo and capability model that will include a process for an organization-wide assessment of cybersecurity risk. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it was in the process of developing an enterprise-wide Cybersecurity Risk Management Strategy that will define cybersecurity risk tolerance thresholds and promote inclusion of cybersecurity risk management into the Department's overall risk management capabilities. The estimated completion date for this effort is July 31, 2020. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that, once developed, its Cybersecurity Risk Management Strategy will incorporate clarifications of the cybersecurity risk executive's role and will be coordinated with the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer, other offices within the DHS Management Directorate, and Department Components, as appropriate. The department estimated completing this effort by July 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department said it planned to develop a cybersecurity risk management strategy that will determine how cybersecurity risks will be identified, framed, assessed, respond to, and monitored. The Department estimated completing this effort by August 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Interior concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it cybersecurity and enterprise risk management teams would establish a process for bi-directional communication and status reporting. The Department estimated completing this effort by July 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its comments on our draft report, the Department of Justice did not state whether it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, . the department reported that it had an integrated strategy for identifying, prioritizing, assessing, responding to, monitoring, and reporting on cybersecurity risks. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its comments on our draft report, the Department of Justice did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is developing an ongoing mechanism to institutionalize coordination between its cybersecurity and ERM functions in fiscal year 2020. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is actively working to update the applicable policies and procedures. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of State concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is actively working to update the applicable policies and procedures. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it would update its cybersecurity risk management strategy to include the identified missing elements. The Department estimated completing this effort by October 1, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it would update it policies and procedures to require an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. The Department estimated completing this effort by July 1, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it plans to develop a comprehensive risk management strategy in accordance with its updated cybersecurity program directive and plans to finalize the strategy by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA stated that it plans to incorporate this requirement into its updated policies by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA stated that it plans to fully document its process for an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA described efforts under way to institutionalize coordination between cybersecurity and enterprise risk management functions and stated that this coordination will be documented in detail by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, EPA stated that its strategic plans are under review beginning in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, EPA stated that it is establishing a process to review, update, and reissue its policies. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The General Services Administration concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the agency stated that it would establish a process for conducting an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. The administration estimated completing this effort by June 30, 2020. Once the administration has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the agency stated that it is working to address gaps in its cybersecurity policy. Once NASA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, NASA stated that the agency is in the process of documenting its process for conducting an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. NASA's planned completion date for this effort is September 30, 2020. Once NASA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the commission has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the commission has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, OPM stated that it planned to update its policies to address the missing elements. Once OPM has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the office stated that it planned to formalize its process for an organization-wide cybersecurity assessment. Once OPM has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SBA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, SBA stated that it intends to finalize its process for an agency-wide cybersecurity risk assessment by March 31, 2020. Once SBA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SSA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, SSA stated that it has initiated a formal process for coordination between its cybersecurity risk management and enterprise risk management teams and that this process should be fully established by the third quarter of FY 2020. Once SSA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
GAO-19-280, Jul 8, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, EPA restated its reasons for disagreeing with this recommendation. (EPA's rationale for disagreeing was originally stated in a June 2019 letter included in an appendix in our report.) We will provide updated information regarding this recommendation when it becomes available.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, EPA notified GAO that it expects to launch an electronic financial disclosure reporting system for special government employees in January 2021. Once financial disclosure forms for these individuals are available electronically, EPA's Ethics Office will be better positioned to audit or review the forms, according to EPA officials. In addition, the electronic filing system should minimize errors (e.g. failing to record the date that the form was received) made by filers and reviewers, according to EPA officials.
GAO-19-483, Jun 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6722
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, BLM indicated that it will develop and issue policy for standard posting requirements regarding public comments and associated identity information as well as duplicative comments which will be available on BLM's website. BLM officials estimate that this will be completed in March 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to BLM remains open.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services stated that CMS already has policies for standard posting requirements, and noted that they would update their policy and communicate it on the CMS website. However, while CMS provided us with an excerpt of the updated language, as written, it does not include information about how the agency posts duplicate comments. Further, CMS did not provide us with this policy, and our review of the website does not indicate any changes have been made. HHS stated it would provide additional follow up actions by 7/23/2020. Given that we found significant variation in the way that CMS posts comments, even within a single docket, we continue to believe that it is important for CMS to develop and implement a standard policy for posting duplicate comments and their identity information, in addition to communicating this policy to the public on the CMS website.
Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open
Comments: CFPB concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, CFPB indicated that it will develop new language for consumerfinance.gov to better explain the Bureau's "post all" policy, and any exceptions to it. Additionally, CFPB is finalizing internal procedures for posting comments. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to CFPB remains open.
1. create and implement a policy for standard posting requirements regarding comments and their identity information, particularly for duplicate comments;
2. clearly communicate this policy to the public on the EBSA website; and
3. evaluate the duplicative practice of replicating rulemaking dockets on the EBSA website, to either discontinue the practice or include a reference to Regulations.gov and explanation of how the pages relate to one another. (Recommendation 4)
Agency: Department of Labor: Employee Benefits Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: EBSA concurred with the recommendation. In September 2019, EBSA stated that it will develop a written policy regarding posting of comments, including that of duplicate comments. This information will be available on their website. Additionally, EBSA will post a reference to Regulations.gov as part of each Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) webpage that includes public comments together with an explanation of its relation to Regulations.gov as a means to access public comments on EBSA's rulemaking initiatives. EBSA officials did not provide a date by which these actions will be implemented. Additionally, while EBSA noted that internal and external users prefer the agency's current practice of replicating rulemaking dockets, the agency did not provide evidence that a formal evaluation had been conducted, and did not identify plans to do so. As a result, at this time our recommendation to EBSA remains open.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA concurred with the recommendation. In January 2020, EPA indicated that it will finalize its Docket Center's Document Processing Standard Operating Procedure as well as its website. This update will include information detailing when all duplicate comments are posted to Regulations.gov and when just one representative sample of a duplicate comment is posted. EPA officials estimate that this will be completed in February 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to EPA remains open.
Agency: Department of the Interior: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Status: Open
Comments: FWS concurred with the recommendation. In December 2019, FWS stated that it will update its service manual to include all standard posting requirements regarding public comments and their identity information. Additionally, FWS will include a statement on the FWS' website to inform the public about posting of public comments and identity information to regulations.gov. FWS officials estimate that this will be completed in June 2020. Until these items are completed, our recommendation to FWS remains open.
Agency: Department of Labor: Wage and Hour Division
Status: Open
Comments: WHD concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, WHD indicated that it will add text to each webpage for any rulemaking that invites public comments which states that any personal information included in the comments (including duplicate) will be posted to Regulations.gov without change. However, the text provided by officials does not explain WHD's policy of posting duplicate comments as a group under a single document ID, and therefore does not clearly communicate the agency's posting practices to the public. As a result, at this time our recommendation to WHD remains open.
GAO-19-391, Jun 21, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of June 2020, EPA indicated that its proposed completion date is October 2020. EPA published joint and individual agency accomplishments in each of the six priority areas listed as contributing efforts on EPA's webpage (https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/winning-reducing-food-waste-federal-interagency-strategy). In addition, EPA indicated that it is coordinating with government and other stakeholders through: (1) monthly high-level check-in calls for senior USDA and FDA officials, in which the meeting chair rotates among agencies; (2) twice a month (or as needed) staff work group meetings, led by the recently appointed USDA food loss and waste liaison, to explore potential activities aligned with the six priority areas in the interagency strategy to reduce food loss and waste; and (3) participation in quarterly meetings with relevant stakeholders, such as ReFED, the Food Waste Reduction Alliance (FWRA), and Further with Food, to coordinate efforts and learn of opportunities to collaborate on reducing food loss and waste. We will continue to follow up with the agency. When we confirm what additional actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
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.
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.
GAO-19-335, Jun 19, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-346, May 31, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, BLM reported it had awarded a contract to develop a new data system that will allow for centralized data collection on acquisition method and ownership interest. In addition, the agency issued updated guidance and procedures related to data entry to help ensure complete and accurate recording, which will improve BLM's ability to track acquisition method and interest acquired in the interim.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, BLM reported it was planning to develop specific guidance to ensure land acquisition data is entered correctly into its new data system.
GAO-19-409, May 23, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6888
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. Commerce stated that it lacks the legal authority to compel action by other federal agencies, and that legal constraints aside, it believes it is bad management practice to ask institutes to respond to performance goals issued by different bodies. As of March 2020, Commerce stated that it plans to report on performance goals for Commerce-sponsored institutes effective with the 2019 annual report, which it expects to issue by September 2020. Commerce also agreed to continue working closely with other sponsoring federal agencies on program and network goals for the Manufacturing USA institutes, but did not commit to working with sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the development of network-wide performance goals, targets, and time frames as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's network-wide coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Moreover, our recommendation specifically pertained to developing performance goals for the Manufacturing USA program, not individual institutes. As we stated in our report, this would not necessarily entail new performance measures but, rather, could consist of measurable near-term performance goals corresponding to program performance measures already in place. Further, as stated in our report, GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with targets and time frames, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress toward long-term Manufacturing USA program goals and objectives.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it supports the alignment of performance measures with performance goals only for Commerce-sponsored institutes. Commerce stated that it is unable to commit to this recommendation as 13 of the 14 existing institutes were authorized under authorities other than the RAMI Act and are sponsored by agencies other than Commerce. Commerce also stated that, until additional institutes authorized by the RAMI Act are in place, it does not support additional performance measures for the single Commerce-sponsored institute beyond the RAMI Act requirements, as doing so would impose an unfair level of scrutiny. Commerce agreed to report on performance metrics for department-sponsored institutes effective with the current annual report, which is expected by September 2020. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the effort to align the network-wide performance measures with network-wide performance goals and Manufacturing USA program goals as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Our recommendation does not ask Commerce to compel actions by other agencies, nor to develop any additional performance measures. As noted in our report, the Manufacturing USA program's performance measurement structure aligns near-term performance measures directly to the program's long-term goals. This structure bypasses connecting the performance measures with the program's objectives that have been developed to break down the long-term goals more specifically. GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to ensure that the Manufacturing USA network-wide performance measures are directly aligned with the Manufacturing USA strategic program goals and objectives and the statutory purposes of the RAMI Act, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress made toward achieving the statutory purposes of the Manufacturing USA program.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it will develop criteria to evaluate the sufficiency of the Commerce-sponsored institute's sustainability plan based on the anticipated operating costs of the institute at fully operational steady state, and the likelihood of sustaining those operations through the specific efforts outlined in the sustainability plan. Commerce stated that it plans to develop the evaluation criteria by April 2020. We will update this recommendation after we learn more about these efforts.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to information DOD provided in March 2020, DOD developed criteria to evaluate whether each DOD-sponsored institute is effectively executing its mission, providing value to the department, and transitioning advanced manufacturing to U.S. manufacturers, while demonstrating progress toward business viability (diversified revenue, controlled costs, etc.). As of March 2020, DOD plans to incorporate these criteria into a strategic management plan, under which the department will review institutes' progress at the end of their agreements to determine the type and level of DOD's continued participation. DOD expects to complete work on the strategic management plan by the end of September 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In September 2019, DOE stated that it will direct the Directors of DOE-sponsored institutes to collectively work toward updating institute sustainability plans and activities and collaboratively develop criteria and metrics to assess the institutes' progress toward financial sustainability. After development of the metrics, DOE will track as appropriate. As of March 2020, DOE reported agreement with its institutes on an initial set of criteria and metrics to assess progress toward financial sustainability. We will update this recommendation as we collect more information about these efforts.
GAO-19-288, May 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9342
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS, on behalf of CMS, did not concur with this recommendation. In its February 2020 response to GAO, HHS stated that current NIST guidance to agencies was insufficient and that CMS would look forward to future guidance from NIST and OMB to help guide consideration of non-knowledge-based verification options. We continue to believe that our recommendation is valid because a variety of alternative methods to knowledge-based verification are available that CMS can consider to address the diverse population it serves. Further, NIST has agreed with our recommendation to develop additional guidance for agencies, and CMS may be able to use that guidance to identify a verification approach that does not really on knowledge-based techniques. We will continue to monitor the actions CMS may take to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, VA needs to develop a plan with milestones to document the results of their evaluation of the alternatives the department stated it is interested in pursuing.
GAO-19-185, May 15, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 5 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Bureau of the Fiscal Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Fiscal Service concurred with the results of our audit. As of July 2020, Fiscal Service developed a remediation plan and efforts are underway to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-19-299, Apr 30, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In an October 2019 written response to the recommendation contained in GAO-19-299, OMB acknowledged the importance of collecting stakeholder input and described some steps that it has taken to do so in the past. The letter also stated OMB's intention to engage key stakeholders moving forward but was not specific regarding steps it planned to take related to the potential expansion of the Central Reporting Portal. GAO will continue to monitor this issue including what specific actions, if any, OMB takes in response to this recommendation.
GAO-19-359, Apr 19, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: We will provide updated information when we confirm what steps Congress has taken related to this matter.
GAO-19-241, Apr 11, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4456
including 3 priority recommendations
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) 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 server utilization. However, the department also reported that it had not yet met its target for the virtualization and advanced energy metering metrics. We will continue to monitor Commerce's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Defense 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 established a new data center closures target. The department subsequently reported meeting its closure target for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense is taking action to implement our recommendation. In comments on our report, the department stated that it had already identified significant cost savings through activities such as the identification of system migration candidates and the use of cloud services. The department also said that while it would continue to optimize its data centers, the need for IT would continue to grow, and this growth might ultimately lead to an increase in total data center costs, despite overall per unit cost reductions. In addition, after the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department reported achieving a total savings of $102.30 million and reported plans to save an additional $109.50 million in savings for fiscal year 2020. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor the department's efforts through fiscal year 2020 to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense is taking action to implement our recommendation. 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 target for server utilization. However, the department also reported that it had not yet met its target for the virtualization metric and advanced energy metering. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Energy (Energy) 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 established a new data center closure target. The department subsequently reported meeting its closure target for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor Energy's progress in implementing this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy (Energy) 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 established new data center optimization targets. The department subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor Energy's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established a new data center closure target. The department subsequently reported meeting its closure target for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor HHS's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor HHS's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 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 established a new data center closure target. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its closure target for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 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 established new data center optimization targets. The department subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior (Interior) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established a new data center closure target. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its closure goal for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Interior (Interior) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center related cost savings targets. Subsequently, the department reported achieving $0.2 million in data center-related cost savings and planned to save an additional $0.5 million in fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts through fiscal year 2020 to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Interior (Interior) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center optimization targets. The department subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Justice (Justice) 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 established new data center optimization targets. The department subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization and advanced energy metering metrics. However, the department did not have an established target for the server utilization metric. Justice stated that, due to OMB issuance of the revised DCOI guidance and metrics, the department had not developed a baseline and target for server utilization. Once it can track server utilization for a few reporting periods, the department stated that it will finalize its definition for underutilized severs and establish an appropriate target for the metric. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (Labor) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its target for the server utilization metric. However, the department had not yet met its targets for the advanced energy metering and virtualization metrics. We will continue to monitor Labor's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of State (State) 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 established a new data center optimization closure target. The department subsequently reported meeting its closure goal for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor State's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of State (State) 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 established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor State's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Transportation (Transportation) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation and has begun 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 established a new data center closure target. The department subsequently reported meeting its closure goal for fiscal year 2019. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor Transportation's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (Transportation) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the department reported meeting its target for server utilization. However, the department had not yet met its targets for the advanced energy metering and virtualization metrics. We will continue to monitor Transportation's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Treasury (Treasury) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the department established new data center optimization targets. The department subsequently reported meeting its target for server utilization. However, the department had not yet met its targets for the advanced energy metering and virtualization metrics. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and, as of January 2020, the department reported that it had closed 16 data centers to meet its fiscal year 2019 closure target. To fully implement this recommendation, VA will need to demonstrate sustained implementation progress over time, including meeting its fiscal year 2020 data center closure target.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and, as of January 2020, the department reported that it had met its fiscal year 2019 cost savings target. To fully implement this recommendation, VA will need to demonstrate sustained implementation progress over time, including meeting its fiscal year 2020 data center cost savings target.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and, as of January 2020, the department reported that it had met its fiscal year 2019 targets for three of the four data center optimization metrics tracked by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). To fully implement this recommendation, VA will need to meet all four of OMB's metrics, and also demonstrate sustained implementation progress over time by continuing to meet the four metrics across fiscal years.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the agency established a new data center closure target. EPA subsequently reported that it based its three planned closures for fiscal year 2019 on the data center definition applicable while developing its fiscal year 2019 DCOI strategic plan. However, when OMB updated its data center guidance it changed the definition of a data center, and as a result, the three facilities EPA planned to close no longer qualified as data centers. Further, EPA did not have plans to close any additional data centers. While EPA reported to us that it completed the planned closures, the three facilities did not represent what OMB now considers a data center, and so, EPA did not report the closures in its data center inventory update. However, we acknowledge that EPA closed the facilities identified in its April 2019 plan and did not plan to close any data centers that met OMB's new definition, meaning that the agency met its revised fiscal year 2019 goal of zero closures. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor EPA's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action to implement our recommendation. The agency established new data center optimization targets after the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019. Subsequently, the agency reported meeting its targets for the advanced energy metering and server utilization metrics. However, the agency had not yet met its target for the virtualization metric. We will continue to monitor EPA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 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 agency established new data center optimization targets. The agency subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor NASA's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the agency established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the agency reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor NSF's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is taking action to implement our recommendation. After the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released the updated Data Center Optimization Initiative policy in June 2019, the agency established new data center optimization targets. The agency subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor NRC's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 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 agency established a new data center-related cost savings target. Subsequently, the agency reported meeting its fiscal year 2019 target of $7.65 million and planned to save an additional $7.65 million in fiscal year 2020. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor OPM's progress in implementing this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 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 agency established new data center optimization targets. The agency subsequently reported meeting its targets for the virtualization and server utilization metrics. However, it had not met its target for advanced energy metering. We will continue to monitor OPM's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Small Business Administration (SBA) 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 agency established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the agency reported meeting its target for server utilization. However, the agency had not yet met its targets for the advanced energy metering and virtualization metrics. We will continue to monitor SBA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Social Security Administration (SSA) 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 agency established a new data center-related cost savings target. The agency subsequently reported meeting its fiscal year 2019 cost savings target of $0. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In comments on our report, the Social Security Administration (SSA) 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 agency established new data center optimization targets. Subsequently, the agency reported meeting its targets for the virtualization, advanced energy metering, and server utilization metrics. However, given the short time to evaluate implementation efforts between when OMB released the updated policy in June 2019 and the end of fiscal year 2019, we will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to implement this recommendation through fiscal year 2020.
GAO-19-58, Apr 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to develop a mechanism to track savings to implement this recommendation. In October 2019, Commerce officials noted that the department would update its current procedures related to tracking savings and cost avoidances within one year once OMB issues guidance related to tracking cloud savings (OMB has not yet implemented guidance in this area). As of May 2020, the procedures have not yet been updated. We will continue to monitor Commerce's progress with these efforts.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (Defense) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department planned to publish guidance in this area. Specifically, in April 2020, Defense officials reported that the department planned to publish guidance by July 2020 that required all department components to rationalize business and IT applications in alignment with the department's enterprise-wide process for conducting software application rationalization and the department's Cloud Strategy. We will continue to monitor Defense's progress on this effort.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the Department of Defense (Defense) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor Defense's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Education (Education) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would complete an assessment of all IT investments for cloud services. In February 2020, Education officials reported that the department had taken action to update its guidance to include a requirement for assessing new and existing investments for cloud services. However, as of May 2020, based on our review of IT Dashboard data, Education has not yet completed an assessment of 23 investments for these services. We will continue to monitor Education's progress with this effort.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Education (Education) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would take action to address it. In May 2020, Education officials reported that the department had taken steps to identify a number of cloud investments with cost savings and avoidance data as a part of the integrated data call required by OMB. However, the department still needs to establish a consistent and repeatable mechanism to track savings for all IT investments. We will continue to monitor Education's progress with this effort.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy (Energy) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would update its IT budget guidance to address our recommendation. In February 2020, Energy officials provided a portion of a guidance document, but it did not include language that addressed our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy (Energy) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would update its IT budget guidance to address our recommendation. In February 2020, Energy officials provided a portion of a guidance document, but it did not include language on assessing investments for cloud services. In addition, as of May 2020, based on our review of data on the IT Dashboard, Energy has not yet completed an assessment of 107 investments for these services. We will continue to monitor Energy's progress with this effort.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy (Energy) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the CIO would establish a mechanism to address our recommendation. In February 2020, Energy officials reported that they had identified a number of cloud investments with cost savings as part of the integrated data call required by OMB. However, the department still needs to establish a consistent and repeatable mechanism to track savings for all IT investments. We will continue to monitor Energy's progress with this effort.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the Office of the CIO would revise its guidance by September 30, 2019 to address it. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from HHS regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor HHS's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the CIO would complete an assessment of all IT investments as part of its portfolio review for fiscal year 2021. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from HHS regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor HHS's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the CIO would take action to track savings as part of its portfolio review process for fiscal year 2021. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from HHS regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor HHS's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department was taking steps to implement it. Specifically, in October 2019, DHS officials reported that the department was in the process of accessing its remaining systems to determine whether a cloud computing assessment should be completed but did not provide a date when this effort would be finished. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from DHS regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department was taking steps to implement it. Specifically, in October 2019, DHS officials reported that the department was working on a plan to define the resources and processes needed to implement a mechanism to track savings that would be completed by October 2020. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from DHS regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice (Justice) concurred with our recommendation, and stated that it would require components to assess all investments for cloud. However as of April 2020, based on our review of IT Dashboard data, Justice had not yet completed cloud assessments for 80 investments. We will continue to monitor Justice's progress with this effort.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice (Justice) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would take action to address it. In December 2019, Justice officials reported that the department had taken steps to identify cloud investments and related savings data as part of an integrated data call required by OMB. However, the department still needs to establish a consistent and repeatable mechanism to track savings for all IT investments. We will continue to monitor Justice's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (Labor) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department was taking steps to integrate a process for assessing investments for cloud computing suitability into its budgeting process. Specifically, in February 2020, Labor officials reported that the department was updating its policy to reflect a Cloud First policy that will ensure that all department investment migrations to cloud services are Cloud smart but did not identify a time frame when the policy would be finalized. We will continue to monitor Labor's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (Labor) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department planned to undertake a full review of data center-based applications for cloud suitability. Specifically, in February 2020, Labor officials reported that the department had created an Engineering Review Board in October 2019 to review proposed IT investments to ensure compliance with the department's cloud architecture, but did not provide a time frame for when all assessments of investments would be completed. We will continue to monitor Labor's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (Labor) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to develop a mechanism to track savings to implement this recommendation. Specifically, in February 2020, Labor officials reported that the department was implementing a tool called Cloudchekr for tracking costs associated with cloud services that would also track related savings and cost avoidances, but no timeframe was provided for when the tool would consistently capture all savings from these efforts. We will continue to monitor Labor's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State (State) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would develop a prototype tracking system ready for testing by the beginning of fiscal year 2020. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from State regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor State's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. As of May 2020, we have not received any update from the department regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. As of May 2020, we have not received any update from the department regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (Transportation) concurred with our recommendation but as of May 2020, has not yet taken any actions to implement it. We will continue to monitor Transportation's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (Transportation) concurred with our recommendation but as of May 2020, has not yet taken any actions to implement it. We will continue to monitor Transportation's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (Transportation) concurred with our recommendation, but as of May 2020, has not yet taken any actions to implement it. We will continue to monitor Transportation's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would take action to address it. In February 2020, VA officials reported that the department had begun an assessment process and expected to complete this effort by June 30, 2024. We will continue to monitor VA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the department would take action to address it. In February 2020, VA officials reported that the department had begun populating a financial management application with data to track overall IT spending and cost savings, but did not provide a timeframe for when a mechanism to track this data would be finalized. We will continue to monitor VA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that the agency planned to develop a process for collecting cost savings data. Specifically, in January 2020, GSA officials reported that the agency intended to develop and document a process for collecting cost and savings data for current and new investments using cloud services. Officials noted that the documentation would provide guidance as to what savings data would be required to be collected, how frequent the data would be reported, and the process for approval, but did not provide a timeframe for when the guidance would be finalized. In addition, officials reported that, once the new process was finalized, the agency would pilot the new process in order to test the approach and the collection of data. As of May 2020, the process has not been finalized. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Small Business Administration (SBA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency would take action to address it. In November 2019, SBA officials reported that the agency had established a tool for monitoring the costs associated with the migration and deployment of cloud services. However, the documentation SBA provided did not indicate how cloud savings and cost avoidances would be isolated and reported. We will continue to monitor SBA's progress toward implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency would take action to address it. In November 2019, SSA officials provided a copy of the agency's updated guidance but the guidance did not include language that addressed our recommendation. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from SSA regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency would take action to address it. In November 2019, SSA officials reported that the agency had completed an assessment of all investments for cloud services. However, our review of the agency's IT Dashboard data in November found that 24 investments remained to be reviewed. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from SSA regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency would take action to address it. In November 2019, SSA officials reported that the agency was working toward implementing a tool that would track cloud savings and avoidances but did not provide a timeframe for when the tool would be finalized. As of May 2020, we have not received a more recent update from SSA regarding its implementation of our recommendation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
GAO-19-265, Apr 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6888
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE said the scientific integrity official will be responsible for leading and coordinating with other elements of the Department, in the development of measures to educate and communicate DOE's scientific integrity policies to staff.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE said that it was still in the process of identifying an individual to serve as a scientific integrity official.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE stated that the Department's scientific integrity official will have the responsibility to lead and coordinate with other elements of the Department in developing procedures to monitor and evaluate the implementation of DOE's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2020, the Department of Transportation provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, officials said that DOT was still working on this action. According to officials, the department will implement several mechanisms to address the recommendation, including conducting annual reviews of the scientific integrity policy and making the policy available to all relevant employees. DOT estimated it would complete these actions by the end of March 2021.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Status: Open
Comments: In Commerce's written comments, NIST had stated that, beginning in fiscal year 2019, the agency would review implementation of its policy at least annually and make recommendations to the Director of NIST as to whether any improvements were needed. In a September 2020 update, NIST provided a memorandum reporting that in fiscal year 2019 the Scientific Integrity Officer and General Counsel had discussed an allegation related to scientific integrity, and that it was determined that programmatic factors, not a lapse in scientific integrity, had occurred. According to NIST, it monitors the effectiveness of the implementation of its documented scientific integrity policy, order, and procedure by means of informal feedback from NIST researchers and supervisors, as documented in the memorandum.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In Commerce's written comments, NOAA stated that it will identify additional metrics for monitoring and evaluating its policy. As of October 2020, we have requested an update from the agency but have not yet received information to evaluate implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: U.S. Geological Survey
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2020, the Department of the Interior provided an update on this recommendation. In that update, officials stated that the expected completion date is the end of November 2022.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE stated that the department's scientific integrity official will be responsible for leading and coordinating with other elements of the Department in developing procedures for identifying and addressing alleged violations of DOE's scientific integrity policy.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA officials stated that the agency is undergoing additional internal and external reviews-with NASA officials working through the National Science and Technology Council's Joint Committee on Research Environments, which supports scientific security, rigor, and integrity-and that completion of the implementation of the recommendation is due October 31, 2020.
GAO-19-200, Mar 28, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that it actively plans and makes public the research and evaluation topics for these evaluations, but it did not identify a timeline or measures it would take to augment these basic steps. DOL also stated that it will consult with stakeholders regarding the employment and training needs of specific populations. We will consider closing this recommendation when DOL completes these efforts.
GAO-19-22, Mar 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy plans to clarify and consolidate its consultation policies and practices for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations by June 2021.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, EPA created a draft document, Guiding Principles for Consulting with Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act Corporations, and issued it for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs). The draft guiding principles seek to clarify EPA's consultation and coordination practices with ANCs. Additionally, according to agency officials, an EPA working group is in the process of developing an internal, best practices implementation guide. As of April 2020, EPA expects to finalize these guidance documents in 2020
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2019, the Department of Homeland Security provided GAO documentation supporting a planned time frame of March 2020 for developing and updating its consultation policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs in response to this recommendation. We plan to close the recommendation after reviewing documentation that the policy has been updated.
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.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers: Civil Works
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) plans to amend its tribal consultation policy with policies and procedures for communicating with tribes after consultation by December 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy indicated that it plans to document policies for communicating about how input from tribal consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects by June 2021.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-168, Mar 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, SBA analyzed FPDS-NG data to review the use of ineligible NAICS codes in the WOSB program. SBA officials also noted that they plan to conduct these reviews on an ongoing basis. As part of their May 2019 analysis, SBA identified federal agencies that had used ineligible NAICS codes. As of October 2019, SBA officials said that they were taking steps, including drafting presentation materials, to provide training on NAICS codes to agencies and planned to present quarterly at the Small Business Procurement Advisory Council FY 2020 meetings. SBA officials also noted that they had also provided training on NAICS codes as part of its FY 2019 performance reviews of procurement centers.
GAO-19-282, Mar 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In responding to the report, DOL stated that it concurs with the recommendation. DOL's subagency, OSHA, provided written comments and stated that it generally agreed with GAO's recommendation. On March 3, 2020, DOL staff said the agency will provide an update to its response to this recommendation, along with responses to open recommendations from other GAO reports, in several months.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In a subsequent response to the report, Education stated that it concurred with GAO's recommendation and is considering enhancing its current approach to overseeing compliance with the Stevens Amendment through post-award monitoring activities. On March 9, 2020, an Education Department Official stated that the planned date that work is due to be completed by the applicable program office is 9/30/2020. According to the official, the work will promote consistency across applicable grant programs and enhance their monitoring efforts. The official further stated that Education will develop general monitoring guidance to further check on compliance with the Stevens Amendment for implementation across Education's grantmaking Principal Offices. As a part of monitoring, program offices will be expected to review the Stevens Amendment statutory requirements with grantees and plans to reiterate that grantees are required to disclose for their grant project the percent of the costs financed with federal funds, the federal dollar amount, and the percentage and dollar amount financed by nongovernmental funds when issuing statements, press releases, bid solicitations, and other documents describing their grant project. Education also plans to remind grantees that they must document how the dollar amounts and percentages were calculated in the disclosures and maintain this documentation with their grant file. We will update the action taken in response to this recommendation when further action is confirmed.
GAO-19-144, Mar 12, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 10 priority recommendations
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Commerce concurred with the recommendation, but as of January 2020, it had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation but as of January 2020, it had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. As of January 2020, it had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, DOD will need to provide evidence that it has assigned appropriate National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education framework work role codes to its positions in the 2210 Information Technology management occupational series and assessed the accuracy of position descriptions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with the recommendation and stated that it would complete a review of the assignment of the "000" code to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series and assign the appropriate NICE framework work role codes. As of March 2020, HHS has made significant progress toward reviewing the assignment of work role codes to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series and ensuring that such positions are not coded with the "000" code. To fully implement this recommendation, HHS will need to provide evidence that it has assigned the appropriate NICE framework work role codes to all or nearly all of its remaining positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with our recommendation. DHS conducted an audit of its components' cybersecurity coding efforts in fiscal year 2018 and identified actions that components needed to take to complete the assignment of appropriate NICE framework work role codes and assess the accuracy of position descriptions; a second audit for fiscal year 2019 is underway, and the department expects to complete its coding efforts by December 2020. As of January 2020, DHS has not yet provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it has implemented this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, DHS 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 and assessed the accuracy of position descriptions.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) agreed with this recommendation. In January 2020, HUD stated that it was in the process of reviewing its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series and assigning appropriate work role codes. To fully implement this recommendation, HUD will need to correctly categorize the work roles and functions performed by IT and cyber-related personnel in order to be able to identify critical cybersecurity staffing needs.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of State concurred with the recommendation. In January 2020, we confirmed that State had assigned National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) framework work role codes to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series. However, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it has completed its efforts to assess the accuracy of position descriptions. To fully implement this recommendation, State will need to provide evidence that it has assessed the accuracy of position descriptions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Treasury partially concurred with the recommendation and stated that some positions may not align to work roles in the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education's (NICE) cybersecurity workforce framework. Treasury stated that it planned to review and validate the work role codes of its IT, cybersecurity, or cyber-related positions by March 2019. However, as of February 2020 Treasury had not provided evidence that it has implemented our recommendation. Until it assigns work role codes that are consistent with the IT, cybersecurity, and cyber-related functions performed by these positions, Treasury will continue to have unreliable information about its cybersecurity workforce that the department will need to identify its workforce roles of critical need.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency concurred with the recommendation but as of January 2020, it had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency concurred with the recommendation and stated that it would complete a review of the assignment of the "000" code to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series, assign the appropriate NICE framework work role codes, and assess the accuracy of position descriptions. As of January 2020, EPA has not yet provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it has implemented this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, EPA 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 and assessed the accuracy of position descriptions.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration did not concur with the recommendation. As of January 2020, it had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would complete a review of the assignment of the "000" code to its positions in the 2210 IT management occupational series, assign the appropriate NICE framework work role codes, and assess the accuracy of position descriptions. In March 2020, NASA indicated that it expected to implement the recommendation by September 30, 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA 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 and assessed the accuracy of position descriptions.
GAO-19-94, Mar 7, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2660
implementation goals, a timeline, and milestones for agencies to transition from one provider to another;
transparent reporting mechanisms on key milestones; and
a process for capturing and communicating lessons learned.
(Recommendation 1)
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB staff did not agree or disagree with GAO's March 2019 recommendation. As of January 2020, OMB had not addressed this recommendation. According to OMB staff, they are still deliberating goals and milestones for NewPay. In addition, OMB is working on a knowledge library to capture lessons learned for shared services initiatives. However, OMB staff did not provide a timeline for when they will complete these efforts. Without a detailed monitoring plan that includes goals, transparent reporting mechanisms on key milestones, and a process for capturing and communicating lessons learned, it will be more difficult for OMB and GSA to provide oversight of the transition and its effects on providers and customers, including whether there are interruptions to delivery of services. Additionally, this information could help OMB and GSA avoid gaps in service or costly delays as agencies transition to the new model for obtaining payroll and work management services.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB staff did not agree or disagree with GAO's March 2019 recommendation. As of January 2020, OMB had taken some steps to address this recommendation. OMB designated GSA as the Quality Service Management Office (QSMO) for NewPay. As QSMO, GSA will be responsible for managing the payroll marketplace. However, OMB has not documented how GSA and other key stakeholders will work together. For example, OMB has not documented which agency will review and approve task orders. Until OMB and GSA clearly identify, communicate, and document key roles and responsibilities, they run the risk of not achieving their objectives. They also risk repeating past problems associated with the delivery of shared services, such as the inconsistent implementation and interpretation of standards and migrations that encounter costly delays should agencies not follow available guidance.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB staff did not agree or disagree with GAO's March 2019 recommendation. As of January 2020, OMB had not addressed this recommendation. Without up-to-date information on providers -- such as the services OMB and GSA plan to offer, their level of performance, and their costs -- it will be time- consuming and difficult for potential customers to compare providers. This lack of information could slow the rate of shared services adoption.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB staff did not agree or disagree with GAO's March 2019 recommendation. As of January 2020, OMB had not addressed this recommendation. According to OMB officials, OMB will collect cost-savings data via the integrated data collection process, which requires agencies to publicly post their cost savings and avoidance data. However, OMB has not demonstrated how it plans to use data from the IT Integrated Data Collection Instrument to track cost savings specifically related to shared services overall and for individual projects. Until OMB and GSA finalize a plan for collecting the needed data and evidence to effectively measure cost-savings goals, it will be difficult to demonstrate progress -- a recurring challenge associated with previous shared services efforts.
GAO-19-257, Mar 7, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-7215
including 1 priority recommendation
BLS could expand existing worker or firm surveys to ask respondents whether advanced technologies have resulted in worker displacements, work hour reductions, or substantial adjustments to work tasks.
BLS could expand its employment projections work to regularly identify occupations projected to change over time due to advanced technologies.
ETA could expand the O*NET data system to identify changes to skills, tasks, and tools associated with occupations, as the information is updated on its rotational basis, and consider how this could be used to track the spread of advanced technologies.
(Recommendation 1)
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. DOL stated that it will continue coordinating with the Census Bureau on research activities in this area, and plans to identify and recommend data collection options to fill gaps in existing information about how the workplace is affected by new technologies, automation, and AI. In February 2020, DOL's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) issued a public report evaluating data gaps and providing recommendations for data collection options. In June 2020, DOL reported that BLS plans to host a seminar to discuss the report findings and potential pilot data collection options. DOL also plans to release its first annual employment projections data in September 2020 (previously released every 2 years). In addition, DOL reported that the Employment and Training Administration has undertaken three research efforts, which are still underway, to test ways to analyze O*NET data elements for their potential to track changes in occupations over time and to flag areas for further study on the workforce effects of automation. This recommendation will be implemented when DOL completes more of its activities.
GAO-19-221, Mar 7, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) did not provide comments on our draft report and therefore neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. As of October 2020, OMB had not provided evidence of any actions taken to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB did not provide comments on our draft report and therefore neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. As of October 2020, OMB had not provided evidence of any actions taken to implement this recommendation.
GAO-19-166, Jan 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3149
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of State has revised its integrated country strategy guidance to inform posts that they have the option to include a climate risk assessment annex when they change or update their strategies. State noted that they plan to disseminate this guidance to posts in 2020.
GAO-19-31, Jan 3, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2020, the U.S. Coast Guard informed GAO that the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research (ICCOPR) review of non-member agencies was complete and that the formal process to invite the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for membership has been initiated. To formalize membership, a majority of current ICCOPR members must approve USGS by vote, which is expected. This will be followed by a letter of invitation from the Coast Guard Commandant to USGS making the membership official.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2020, the Coast Guard informed GAO that the ICCOPR FY 2022-2027 Research and Technology Plan will include a process to engage Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) trustees. Once updated and finalized, ICCOPR will execute this plan to coordinate with the NRDA trustee councils.
GAO-19-138, Dec 20, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, GAO contacted OMB to determine if any progress has been made implementing this recommendation. GAO is awaiting OMB's response.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, GAO learned that DHS has recently completed the "Physical Access Control System (PACS) Modernization Working Group Charter." This charter was created under the direction of the Co-Chairs of the Federal Chief Information Security Officer Council, Identity, Credentialing and Access Management Subcommittee, and the Program Director of the DHS Interagency Security Committee. The purpose of the PACS Modernization Working Group is to facilitate the implementation and use of the technology and processes related to modernizing electronic-PACS within the federal government, thereby increasing security, coordination, and compliance with national-level policies and standards. GAO is following up with DHS to obtain additional information about this effort and to determine whether it addresses this recommendation.
GAO-19-105, Dec 18, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-6244
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS provided evidence in December 2019 but it was insufficient to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with DHS.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.
GAO-19-17, Dec 18, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) within OMB concurred with our recommendation, noting that it plans to coordinate with federal agencies on the extent to which they have developed training and guidance. Based on this information, OFPP will work with agencies to determine the most appropriate course of action to address gaps, if any. As of August 2020, OFPP stated that it had not taken any additional actions to implement the recommendation because it is currently focused on implementing Executive Order 13881 "Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products and Materials".
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred and has since taken action to address some of our three-part recommendation. For example, VA revised its "Procurement Policy Memorandum 2017-12", on April 9, 2019, to better clarify its existing Buy American Act guidance and highlight key factors contracting staff should consider when determining the applicability of Buy American Act exceptions and waivers. Additionally, in October 2019, VA provided GAO briefing slides for a new training to be offered at the agency's acquisition academy that includes specific instruction pertaining to the use of Buy American Act exceptions and waivers. However, VA has yet to address our recommendation that the agency clarify guidance or provide training to help contracting officers identify sources of information regarding product origin and the steps to be taken to verify inconsistent product origin information. We plan to keep this recommendation open until VA implements guidance or training of this nature and we are able to assess the extent to which it fully addresses our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation and has taken steps to implement it. HHS issued a memorandum in February 2019 requiring all contracting officers as part of their continuous learning program to complete the Buy American Statute course, FAC063, offered by the Federal Acquisition Institute. As of February 2020, about 90 percent of contracting officials had taken the required training. However, due to its COVID-19 Pandemic response activities, HHS stated that all of its contracting officials had not completed the training as intended. HHS also developed checklists and guidance related to the Buy American Act and Trade Agreements Act. We plan to keep this recommendation open until HHS completes its training initiative.
GAO-19-34, Dec 4, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-6722
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.
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.
GAO-19-33, Nov 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA developed and distributed a Standard Operating Procedure that established the Office of Administrative Services as having jurisdiction and program oversight for all internal agency exchange/sale transactions. GSA's Office of Administrative Services had also taken steps to coordinate with other GSA offices to coordinate annual exchange/sale data reporting for the agency. We will continue to monitor GSA's actions in addressing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, VA's Office of Acquisition and Logistics, in conjunction with Veterans Health Administration's Procurement and Logistics Office, was working on updating the status of two policy notices to amend existing policy to include details on the exchange/sale authority and to collect data on exchange/sale usage within the agency as a basis for reviewing progress and compliance with VA utilization officers. We will continue to monitor the status of VA's actions to address our recommendation.
GAO-19-57, Nov 5, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, OMB has developed guidance to help federal agencies implement the capital planning requirements described in OMB's November 6, 2019 Memorandum 20-3, "Implementation of Agency-wide Real Property Capital Planning." According to OMB officials, this guidance was distributed to agencies in July 2020. Agency plans were due to OMB by August 15,2020. This recommendation remains open pending further information from OMB on the status and contents of these plans.
GAO-18-672, Sep 27, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-656, Sep 26, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation despite expressing some concerns about required resources and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019, the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Energy agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation (NSF) agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken some steps to implement it. In November 2018, the Interagency Working Group on Synthetic Biology was formally established under the Biological Sciences Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council. The co-chairs of the Interagency Working Group on Synthetic Biology are officials from the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and NSF. The charter for the working group states that the group is to facilitate coordination and collaboration across 16 federal agencies. In October 2019, the working group hosted an Interagency Synthetic Biology Workshop to examine a roadmap that included basic science, enabling technologies, infrastructure and workforce needs in the area of synthetic biology. The workshop included 100 participants across the federal government, academia and industry, according to NSF officials. On the final day of the workshop participants from federal agencies used the input from the workshop to prepare a list of priority areas for investment along with agencies interested in participating in those priority areas. In January 2020, NSF officials reported that among the next steps for the working group was to develop a federal strategic roadmap for synthetic biology. Officials also reported that the working group is actively preparing a memorandum of understanding to create policies that will enable more sharing of information and collaboration. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in synthetic biology. When we confirm what additional actions the working group has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-491, Sep 20, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2757
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB staff provided us with oral comments stating that the agency partially concurred with our recommendations. For our second recommendation, OMB agreed that user feedback data regarding the Career Roadmap Builder and Grants Training 101 is useful. However, OMB stated that while it will continue to collect data on the number of users, it believes that federal agencies should be responsible for collecting specific, detailed user data if they are using those resources. We continue to believe that OMB and CFOC would benefit from collecting specific, detailed user data on these tools, which they devoted time and multiple resources to developing. Collecting detailed data metrics that go beyond the number of users can help OMB and CFOC to better evaluate the effectiveness of these grants training tools. Additionally, OMB stated the agency is committed to working with CFOC to review the Grants Training 101 module to determine how useful it is and if any improvements or adjustments are needed. In May 2019, OMB staff said that no action had been taken to date in response to this recommendation. In January 2020, OMB responded in writing to this recommendation stating that it was continuing to collect data on usage for both training tools on the CFO.gov site. OMB specified, however, that the usage data was for the number of visitors on the two sites and on users by agency. OMB went on to say that each agency is responsible for the professional development of its own workforce, and that Federal agencies can, at their discretion, collect user data if the Roadmap and Grant Training 101 are part of their official training program. In addition, OMB stated it had made the Grants Training 101 available publicly for federal and non-federal personnel on CFO.Gov, and that collecting specific user data is not considered by them to be beneficial to demonstrate the usefulness of the materials. Based on this response, we will continue to inquire as to the availability and use of metrics and effectiveness measures for the Career Roadmap and the Grants Training 101 modules.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with our findings and recommendation. In its comment letter, HHS stated that its Office of Grants Policy, Oversight, and Evaluation, within the Office of Grants and Acquisition Policy and Accountability, Division of Grants, in conjunction with the HHS ReInvent Grants Initiative would be developing and implementing a department-wide financial assistance training and certification program to improve the functional effectiveness of the financial assistance management workforce in the areas of internal controls and risk mitigation. The program is designed to support the professional development of the HHS grants management workforce through both instructor-led and online courses. HHS' ReInvent Grants Management (RGM) staff and GAO held a conference call on November 30th, 2018 to discuss how RGM intended to address the recommendation in GAO-18-491 by developing a generalized framework for the Grants Management Training and Certification (GMTC) program for HHS. An HHS official reported that at its December 2019 quarterly meeting, the HHS Division of Workforce Development (DWD) reported they had in the past quarter: briefed the HHS Executive Committee on Grants Administration Policy (ECGAP) on the DWD mission and goals for training the grants workforce; developed briefing documents and presentations based on a RGM developed framework to develop competencies and outline curriculum of the GMTC program; continued to review and refine the program framework to incorporate DWD mission and goals; drafted the initial policy to further inform the structure and procedures of the GMTC program (e.g. certification levels, required coursework, career development requirements), which should be issued by HHS Office of Grants within Federal Fiscal Year 2020; and collaborated with the HHS Grants Closeout Business Process Reengineering Team to discuss current grants closeout status and how DWD can support grant staff and grant recipient closeout training efforts. Given the ongoing nature of HHS efforts, GAO will continue to monitor progress on a quarterly basis.
GAO-18-593, Aug 15, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In its April 9, 2020 correspondence, BLM stated that a proposed rule continues to be reviewed by Departmental officials. BLM identified December 31, 2020 as a new target date for completing this recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: In its April 9, 2020 correspondence, BLM stated that any action to address this recommendation is contingent upon the completion of Recommendation #2. Once BLM's response to that recommendation is completed, the agency will address this recommendation.
GAO-18-537, Aug 6, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: Since August 2018, Interior's Office of International Affairs has updated its contact list for international repatriation assistance with information on the Department's roles and responsibilities in support of international repatriation. In addition, Interior's interagency working group members have developed a description of the interagency working group. However, the statement does not include outcomes and objectives for the group's work. GAO made the same recommendation to each of the four agencies covered in the review because implementing leading collaboration practices will require the collective participation of group members. GAO will keep the recommendation open until further collaborative actions are taken.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: Since August 2018, the Department of State shared a statement of its roles and responsibilities with other working group members. However, the statement does not include outcomes and objectives for the group's work. GAO made the same recommendation to each of the four agencies covered in the review because implementing leading collaboration practices will require the collective participation of group members. GAO will keep the recommendation open until further collaborative actions are taken.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, Interior is working to develop an assessment of legislative options for discussion with the interagency working group, and plans to meet with tribes later this fall to discuss the assessment. Interior anticipates a September 30, 2020, completion date for the assessment of these legislative options. Interior has also reviewed legislative proposals related to the export, theft, and trafficking of Native American cultural items and has prepared for Congressional hearings on this topic.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, we have reached out to the Department of Justice and are awaiting a response on actions they may have taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, the Department of State, in conjunction with other interagency working group members, circulated a draft legal assessment and draft legislative options. The interagency working group members conducted a listening session with tribal members in November 2019, and conducted a tribal consultation in January 2020. GAO will continue monitoring the agencies' efforts toward implementing this recommendation.
GAO-18-445, Jul 26, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Status: Open
Comments: NIST concurred with this recommendation and, as of May 2020, had taken some steps to implement it. Specifically, NIST provided information indicating it uses multiple information sources to identify potential measurement service gaps. For example, the Associate Director for Laboratory Programs (ADLP) reviews quarterly reports from NIST's laboratory divisions that include information on measurement services. The ADLP may identify measurement service gaps as part of this review. Also, the NIST Measurement Services Council serves the ADLP in an advisory role to identify and address NIST-wide issues related to the quality, relevance, performance, operations, and resources allocated to the health and improvement of NIST measurement services. The Council produces an annual report that addresses the health of NIST's measurement services, including potential changes needed to meet future customer needs. Further, NIST employees may suggest new services through processes established in suborder 5901.01. Many of these efforts also include consideration of potential gaps in NIST's participation in standards development activities. Additionally, NIST Order 5301.00 delegates responsibility to review standards activities and participation across several levels of NIST management. Although these actions may help identify gaps in NIST's participation in standards development activities as well as identify gaps in the measurement services it provides, it is not clear how or whether they fulfill the periodic review of the effectiveness of NIST's participation in documentary standards activities that the ADLP is to conduct under NIST's standards participation policy. We will update our evaluation of NIST's implementation of this recommendation when the agency provides additional information on how the activities described above fulfill the effectiveness review called for by NIST's policy, or provides information documenting that the ADLP has conducted such a review.
GAO-18-519, Jul 18, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9816
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2018, Treasury issued its fiscal year 2018 agency financial report and included information about all civil monetary penalties within its jurisdiction. However, it did not adjust two civil monetary penalty amounts for inflation and indicated that it planned to complete the regulations to adjust these two amounts for inflation by the end of 2018. In November 2019, Treasury issued its fiscal year 2019 agency financial report and included information about all civil monetary penalties within its jurisdiction. However, it did not adjust one of the two civil monetary penalty amounts for inflation in our finding. As of June 2020, Treasury has not taken the necessary corrective actions to completely address this recommendation.
GAO-18-446, Jul 18, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and stated that the department expected to complete actions to address it by the end of calendar year 2018. In August 2019, Navy officials told us that they had reviewed data on reverse auctions to determine a root cause of single bidders, and describing the factors that indicate that conducting a reverse auction are appropriate. However, they had not yet provided this information to contracting officials as of July 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and stated that the department expected to complete actions to address it by the end of calendar year 2018. In August 2019, Navy officials stated that memorandum of understanding with reverse auction providers, including fee information, are distributed to contracting officials. However, as of August 2020, they had not provided us with evidence that they had distributed a memorandum related to the primary reverse auction provider currently used by the Navy.
GAO-18-48, Jul 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2757
including 2 priority recommendations
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.
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.
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.
GAO-18-381, Jul 11, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2660
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2019, we requested information from OMB on the agency's implementation of our recommendation but as of May 2019 have not received any status updates. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2019, we requested information from OMB on the agency's implementation of our recommendation but as of May 2019 have not received any status updates. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, HHS provided a statement of actions it had taken to address this recommendation. HHS stated that it had added reporting tools to its Common Data Element Repository (CDER) Library that could help improve tracking of information related to HHS's Information Collection Requests. HHS also stated that it had launched daily emails to Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) staff to inform them of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Notices of Action related to Information Collection Requests. Additionally, HHS released an information collection burden calculator tool in the CDER Library to give PRA staff the ability to create burden tables for consistent use across multiple platforms for a single Information Collection Request. According to HHS officials, this tool incorporates both wages and employee benefits in the burden calculations. As of August 2019, HHS's burden calculator tool has been included as a resource on PRA.Digital.gov, a new OMB website that serves as a PRA knowledge base for federal staff. While these are important steps, we are awaiting additional details on how these changes have affected HHS's PRA review process. We will continue to monitor HHS's progress toward addressing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, HHS stated that it continues to leverage consultation mechanisms for input on the burdens imposed by information collections. According to the agency, it plans to increase the use of the eRulemaking program's Federal Docket Management System for all information collections, including non-rule Information Collection Requests. HHS also stated it plans to contact stakeholders to discuss potential information collections and receive burden estimates. As of August 9, 2019, we have not received an update about HHS's actions or plans. We will continue to monitor HHS's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2019, no relevant legislation has been enacted. We will continue to monitor legislation to see if it addresses our matter for congressional consideration.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In its September 2018 recommendation implementation update, Department of Transportation (DOT) stated that the departmental Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Officer has reviewed the Notice templates and checklist with DOT component PRA Officers during monthly PRA meetings and has applied additional scrutiny in the review process. DOT officials stated that the department began an internal review of the Paperwork Reduction Act program operations, policy, and guidance that will include additional aids to support Notice development. Officials reported that they anticipate issuing an updated policy by September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: According to IRS, agency officials met with representatives of external stakeholder organizations on the Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) to seek input on the burden experience of their participants and the communities they represent. As a result of these discussions, the IRPAC has added the burden experience as defined by the PRA as a monthly agenda topic for the 2019 session. As of September 2019, IRS officials reported that the IRPAC has not yet met in 2019. Once we receive documentation confirming this action, we will update the status of the recommendation accordingly.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reported that it continues to standardize the review process by developing a checklist that ensures all required elements are included in the Federal Register notice. Agency officials stated that the agency will complete the development and delivery of training for employees with responsibility for PRA compliance in fiscal year 2019. We will continue to monitor IRS's progress toward completing these actions.
GAO-18-365, Jun 25, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open
Comments: American Battle Monument Commission (ABMC) officials stated they are working to implement GAO's recommendations by the end of fiscal year 2020.
Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open
Comments: American Battle Monument Commission (ABMC) officials stated they are working to implement GAO's recommendations. On February 18, 2020, ABMC published proposed revised FOIA regulations which are pending final rule in the Federal Register.
Agency: U.S. Agency for Global Media
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Agency for Global Media (formally known as the Broadcasting Board of Governors) performed a comprehensive review of its FOIA regulations and updated its regulations in accordance with GAO's recommendation. The agency anticipates publishing proposed updates for notice and comment in spring 2020, followed by a final rule.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2018, the Department of Homeland Security initiated a department-wide compliance assessment and stated that it plans to use the results of the assessment to help guide the department in identifying best practices and areas of improvement. The department does not have an estimate for when the plan will be complete.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, the Department of Interior informed GAO that the department has created a preliminary backlog reduction plan that includes expanding the use of automation tools, expanding the use of interim responses, and closing the Department's 10 oldest requests. Currently, GAO is awaiting a copy of the Department's backlog reduction plan.
Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Status: Open
Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations..
Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Status: Open
Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, the Department of Justice acknowledged that it plans to reexamine its progress and take steps for continued improvement in reducing its backlog. Currently, GAO is awaiting a response from the Department on a publication date.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, NASA agreed to provide agency records of final opinions online. NASA noted that final opinions will be provided online as they are issued and released for public posting. To date, the Department has not posted any final opinions.
Agency: National Transportation Safety Board
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, NTSB provided a plan that laid out tasks for reducing its backlog. The plan did not, however provide milestones or dates for when these tasks would be completed. GAO is currently waiting for the finalized backlog FOIA plan.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations.
Agency: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation stated that it has designated the deputy director as the chief FOIA officer. It also noted that the director is at the Senior Level. However, this position is not equivalent to the assistant secretary level identified by GAO.
Agency: Tennessee Valley Authority
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2018, TVA provided a response to GAO's recommendation to ensure their FOIA tracking systems is compliant with section 508 requirements. TVA is currently performing an in-depth assessment of their tracking system to identify where updates can be made to ensure 508 compliance. TVA expects the assessment to be completed by the end of January 2020.
Agency: African Development Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: U.S. African Development Foundation officials have stated that their FOIA regulations are currently under review and expect them to be published in the first half of calendar year 2020.
GAO-18-327, Jun 19, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. In August 2020, Commerce officials stated that the next annual report to the President and Congress was in the review process and is expected to be published this fall.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process and the purpose of licensing royalties will be addressed through a related initiative. The expected completion date for this action has been revised to November 2020.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. The actions to address it have been discussed by the Interagency Workgroup for Technology Transfer and the FLC, including adding a licensing guide and community of practice for licensing terms to the FLC website. In August 2020, Commerce stated that the expected completion date for this action has been revised to September 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD officials stated that DoDI 5538.08, which would require military departments and defense agencies to instruct their laboratories to document their licensing processes as appropriate, is in the review process as of August 2020.
GAO-18-400, Jun 14, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2717
Agency: Office of Special Counsel
Status: Open
Comments: OSC is revising its practice of granting extensions when the agency provides a plausible explanation for the delay. Instead, OSC will be informing agencies at the outset of the referral that, with few exceptions, extension requests are less likely to be granted. OSC will also be communicating that failure to produce an investigative report within the statutory timeframe will result in notification of the agency's failure to the President and congressional committees under 5 U.S. C. 1213(c) (4). According to OSC, this new practice will be reflected in standard operating procedures for the OSC Disclosure Unit that the agency is currently revising.
Agency: Office of Special Counsel
Status: Open
Comments: OSC has incorporated explicit language in its acknowledgement letters to whistleblowers that investigations may exceed the statutory timeframe. OSC has also now implemented a standard operating procedure of adhering to the 45-day timeframe for making a substantial likelihood determination under 5 U.S.C. 1213(b). According to OSC, it will be revising its acknowledgement letters to whistleblowers to reflect that OSC expects to make a referral determination within 45 days.
Agency: Office of Special Counsel
Status: Open
Comments: The Special Counsel convened an Effectiveness and Efficiency Working Group tasked with evaluating every unit's case process activities. The group issued recommendations in the spring of 2018, after which the Special Counsel announced a significant reorganization of OSC in the spring of 2018. Specifically, effective October 1, 2018, OSC created a new Intake Unit and merged the headquarters CEU with the Investigations and Prosecution Division (IPD). According to OSC, it continues to develop standard case processes, including procedures for prioritizing cases, obtaining favorable actions, establishing qualitative and quantitative performance expectations, and reviewing cases.
Agency: Office of Special Counsel
Status: Open
Comments: The Clerk of OSC has identified and is implementing the following controls and tools needed to ensure closed case files can be tracked and located efficiently: (1) creation and utilization of file plans according to the OSC disposition scheduled for each unit (including inventory of records); (2) creation of an Archives and Records Centers for Information Sharing (ARCIS) account to manage functions related to OSC's Electronic Records Management System (ERMS), including retiring temporary records to the Federal Records Center (FRC), transmitting and tracking records requests to FRC, and transferring permanent records to the National Archives and Records Administration. According to OSC, the Clerk is further establishing policies and procedures, as well as staff training, for records retention, including but not limited to routine evaluations and assessments. OSC employs FOIA Xpress to locate open and closed cases in response to records requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
GAO-18-459, May 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
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.
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.
GAO-18-420, May 22, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: GSA agreed with the recommendation. GSA officials are in the process of developing a tool to estimate the full operations and maintenance costs of design choices during the planning and design, including how those choices will impact areas discussed in our report, e.g., cleaning, energy, and landscaping costs. This tool is scheduled for completion in 2020. Based on a demonstration from GSA, we believe that upon implementation this tool will address our recommendation by allowing officials to better understand the impact of design choices as they are being made. We will follow up with GSA in later in the year to validate that the tool is operational.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation. GSA officials are the process of developing a tool that will include the ability to consider building functionality, e.g., purpose or function of the building and spaces, when estimating operations and maintenance costs during planning and design. This tool is scheduled for completion in July 2020. Based on a demonstration from GSA, we believe that upon implementation this tool will address our recommendation by allowing officials to better understand the impact of functional design choices as they are being made. We will follow up with GSA later in the year to validate that the tool is operational.
GAO-18-379, Apr 26, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with our recommendation. DHS created a national RECCWG website as part of the Homeland Security Information Network in fall 2019, and began a phased roll-out of 10 regional sub-pages available to all RECCWG members can post content and share information on exercises and training. In August 2020 FEMA officials confirmed the national site and all 10 regional sites were operational. They said that briefings on how to use the website for the regions are ongoing. We will continue to follow up on DHS's actions to implement the recommendation.
GAO-18-205, Mar 29, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials noted a number of federal initiatives underway to evaluate the timeliness, accuracy, and accessibility of overdose data. For example, ONDCP discussed its participation in a new Interagency Working Group led by the National Security Council to consider the implementation of overdose tracking and analytic capability, such as the expansion of ODMAP, as well as evaluating the appropriate federal role to engage in this initiative. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that it had suspended its ODMAP working group in the summer of 2018, after determining that this effort would be more effective for the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to work together through the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program Initiative. Nevertheless, as of April 2019, ONDCP officials reported that they continue to provide grant funding and training and technical assistance towards the expansion and use of ODMAP by state and local jurisdictions. Further, ONDCP reported supporting other federal data initiatives, such as providing funding to develop software for the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Data that could better read narrative fields in death certificates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of the data. While ONDCP's efforts are directed towards supporting and improving existing data sources, the recommendation asks ONDCP to lead a review which it has not done. Further, ONDCP's initiatives to date have not addressed issues raised in our report related to balancing law enforcement's access to restricted health data while protecting patient privacy. We will continue to monitor ONDCP's efforts towards implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials stated that they had engaged with leaders from HIDTA participating in the Heroin Response Strategy to develop performance measures. According to ONDCP, as of early May 2018, eleven performance measures had been established--nine mandatory measures and two optional measures--and four of these measures constitute outcome-oriented measures. The June letter also noted that the HIDTA Performance Management Process database was being updated to reflect the new measures and ONDCP expected the system to be fully operational by the end of September 2018. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that, throughout the summer of 2018, it had revisited the performance measures it had developed and settled on ten revised performance measures (eight mandatory measures and two optional measures) for the newly branded Opioid Response Strategy (formerly known as the Heroin Response Strategy). According to ONDCP, these measures were implemented in HIDTA's Performance Management Process as of February 1, 2019. We will continue to coordinate with ONDCP to obtain documentation of these new measures. Once we obtain them, we will review and work toward closing the recommendation, as appropriate.
Agency: Department of Justice: Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, officials from the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) noted the output metrics and statistics that OCDETF is tracking as part of its National Heroin Initiative. For example, the letter states that OCDETF will track statistics on opioid overdose deaths, however it is unclear how this tracking effort is being incorporated into the National Heroin Initiative. While our report noted that statistics on overdose deaths have been used as outcome-oriented measures by agencies like the Office of National Drug Control Policy to assess its efforts, it is unclear how OCDETF is using these statistics to assess its performance and inform its efforts under the National Heroin Initiative. In October 2018, OCDETFs National Heroin Initiative Coordinator told us that the OCDETF Regional Directors were in the process of establishing and tracking region-specific metrics, such as local data on drug overdoses. In January 2020, we reached out to OCEDTF officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. In August 2020, OCDETF officials told us that the National Heroin Initiative had evolved and they are no longer positioned to collect and report on drug overdoses as a performance measure for the initiative. However, officials stated that the initiative is measuring the number of OCDETF cases that are produced that result in the disruption or dismantlement of criminal networks involved in heroin and opioid trafficking. We asked OCDETF to provide documentation of the current state of the initiative and its related goals and performance measures. Once received, we will review and follow-up with OCDETF, if needed, to work towards the closure of the recommendation as implemented.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, DOJ officials reported a number of output measures, such as conviction rates, that they will use to assess the effectiveness of the department's efforts to respond to the opioid epidemic. However, it is unclear how, if all, these measures have been incorporated into the department-wide strategy or if additional outcome-oriented metrics are being developed. In October 2018, DOJ officials reported that while they have not updated the strategy, then-Attorney General Sessions had issued a memo to the U.S. Attorneys that communicated some goals for their efforts, such as reductions in overdose deaths, and called for the U.S. Attorneys Office's Regional Opioid Coordinators to develop metrics specific to their regions. In October 2019, DOJ officials reported that the department is currently working on finalizing its Annual Priority Goals and related performance measures with respect to opioids, however they could not provide additional details nor a timeline for when these efforts are to be completed. We reached out in January 2020 to receive additional details and the Department did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to coordinate with DOJ to learn more about these efforts and when officials expect them to be implemented.
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60-Day Letter, dated June 26, 2018, DEA officials noted the steps they had taken to develop performance metrics for its enforcement and diversion control activities under the 360 Strategy and reported that DEA had implemented outcome-oriented performance metrics for the 360 Strategy's community engagement activities for fiscal year 2019. Further, DEA officials noted applying DEA's Threat Enforcement Planning Process (TEPP) specifically to the 360 Strategy to develop outcome-oriented metrics. Further, according to DEA officials, the TEPP includes an impact report that assesses the outcomes of the activities undertaken under 360. In October 2018, DEA told us that TEPP was still in development and they did not give a date for projected completion. In January 2020, we reached out to DEA officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to follow up with DEA officials on their progress.
GAO-18-319, Mar 22, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA has provided GAO with some documents that indicate steps toward addressing this recommendation. For example, the documents cover topics on workplace and space design. GSA officials said that they are working on a document that focuses on the relationship between space planning and telework that will more directly address this recommendation. The estimated completion date for this document is the end of fiscal year 2020.
GAO-18-183, Mar 13, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2020, OMB staff stated that they believe they have addressed the recommendation. They reiterated a statement made shortly before we issued our report that they already take steps to check agencies' compliance with the Congressional Review Act (CRA) during the regulatory review process. We published this statement in our report, but noted that OMB staff did not provide supporting documentation. Nor does the update we received in March 2020 provide supporting documentation and, thus, we cannot verify it. The update from OMB staff in March 2020 also refers to an April 2019 memorandum the Acting Director of OMB issued to the heads of executive agencies outlining updated guidance for complying with CRA. While the memorandum reminds agencies of the CRA requirement that they delay the effective date of a major rule to allow time for congressional review and following publication in the Federal Register, unless there is good cause to not delay the effective date, the Acting Director does not explain whether his office has made changes to the regulatory review process as we recommended. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts to address our recommendation.
GAO-18-257, Feb 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) officials said legislation passed in 2019 (Federal Personal Property Management Act of 2018) made action by OMB unnecessary. When OMB provides documentation to support this view, GAO will determine whether this information is sufficient to close the recommendation.
GAO-18-252, Jan 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) indicated that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) is working to implement the recommendation and plans to complete implementation in July 2020. When we confirm what actions NHTSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) indicated that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) is working to implement the recommendation and plans to complete implementation in July 2020. When we confirm what actions NHTSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the Department of Transportation (DOT) indicated that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) is working to implement the recommendation and plans to complete implementation in July 2020. When we confirm what actions NHTSA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-207, Jan 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SBA agreed with the recommendation. As of January 2020, SBA officials said they plan to continue working with participating agencies to determine a feasible way to implement the Commercialization Benchmark. According to SBA officials, SBA is leading an interagency Commercialization Working Group with participating agency officials and has implemented a commercialization reporting tool on the SBIR.gov site. Agency officials participating in the interagency working group have identified challenges with a single model for the benchmark and are working to resolve the issues.
GAO-18-233, Jan 23, 2018
Phone: (617) 788-0580
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In early 2020, the federal government created the schoolsafety.gov clearinghouse website to compile and publicize emergency preparedness resources from across multiple agencies including the Departments of Education, Homeland Security, and Justice. The website houses key emergency preparedness resources we identified during our work as well as newer information that was not part of our review, such as guidance related to the Coronavirus Pandemic. DHS issued a press release when the website was launched, but does not prominently publicize it on it website, including on its webpages that are specifically focused on colleges and universities. We will monitor the agency's efforts to publicize these resources and consider closing it at that time.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In early 2020, the federal government created the schoolsafety.gov clearinghouse website to compile and publicize emergency preparedness resources from across multiple agencies including the Departments of Education, Homeland Security, and Justice. The website houses key emergency preparedness resources we identified during our work as well as newer information that was not part of our review, such as guidance related to the Coronavirus Pandemic. DOJ issued a press release when the website was launched, but does not prominently publicize it on it website, including on its webpages that are specifically focused on colleges and universities. We will monitor the agency's efforts to publicize these resources and consider closing it at that time.
GAO-18-16, Dec 14, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not concur with our recommendation that the Coast Guard assess the rates of commercial fishing vessel accidents, injuries, and fatalities to determine whether certain factors-such as vessel length and region of operation-affect these rates. DHS officials stated that the Coast Guard has limited resources and capabilities to conduct such assessments and noted that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) studies marine incidents to identify causal factors in fishing vessel casualties, which could more effectively determine casualty rates. The Coast Guard uses this information to update and develop commercial fishing vessel safety standards and policy, as appropriate. GAO agrees that NIOSH plays an important role in identifying commercial fishing fatalities and regional risk factors, but such assessments typically focus on fatalities in specific fisheries, and generally did not consider such factors as vessel length or whether the vessel has been classed. As of July 2020, Coast Guard officials stated the Coast Guard continues to work with other Federal partners on data collection strategies through the established work group to determine the best reliable data in order to establish credible rates of casualties, injuries, and fatalities in the commercial fishing vessel industry. This recommendation will remain open pending a decision by the working group on the appropriate agency to conduct these assessments.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with our recommendation that the Coast Guard issue regulations or guidance to clarify and implement the alternative-to-class approach. As of November 2018, the Coast Guard made a presentation to the commercial fishing industry clarifying the alternative-to-class approach as it relates to commercial fishing vessels including discussion topics such as understanding the language of 46 USC 4503 and State Licensed Naval Architect and Marine Engineers' scope of responsibilities when incorporating standards equivalent to those prescribed by a classification society. As of June 2020, Coast Guard officials stated they have formalized work instruction guidance regarding implementation of the alternative-to-class approach. This guidance is expected to be released by the end of 2020.
GAO-18-91, Dec 7, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2717
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation and said that by August 2018, OPM would (1) track Governmentwide data to establish a baseline of agency use of the seven Title 5 special payment authorities by occupation with a focus on mission-critical occupations; and (2) work with the CHCO Council to determine what changes may be needed to improve the seven authorities' effectiveness. OPM said agencies are in the best position to analyze the extent to which special pay authorities, when used in conjunction with other human resources flexibilities, improve their ability to recruit and retain their employees. However, we noted that by working with the agencies through the CHCO Council, OPM would be better positioned to track government-wide data to analyze the extent to which Title 5 special payment authorities improve employee recruitment and retention. In December 2018, OPM told us that it established a baseline to measure changes over time, on an annual basis, regarding the use of the seven special payment authorities. OPM also stated that it is working with the CHCO Council to administer a survey to obtain agency input on how to improve the authorities' effectiveness. In May 2019, OPM provided documented analyses of the extent agencies use special payment authorities for various occupations, but provided no information on actions taken with the CHCO council as we recommended. More specifically, to fully implement the recommendation OPM needs to work with the CHCO Council to analyze changes in government-wide data and the extent to which the seven special payment authorities are effective. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with recommendation and said that by February 2019, it would (1) develop guidance on assessing the effectiveness for the range of Title 5 special payment authorities, and (2) work on any guidance or tools that the CHCO Council identifies that would improve their use of the special payment authorities. After our report was issued in December 2017, OPM also posted new templates on its website to help agencies provide required information and facilitate the request and approval process for waivers of the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2018, provided documented procedures for reviewing agency requests to waive the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives; and for reviewing agency requests for special rates and critical position pay. However, the procedures generally restated the types of information that agencies must submit and did not provide criteria to assess the information supporting requests. For example, the procedures for assessing special rates and critical position pay requests only referred to lists of required information items. Furthermore, the guidance on assessing agency requests to waive the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives did not provide criteria, such as to assess the soundness of the methodology or reliability of underlying data for calculating payment amounts or the sufficiency of prior agency efforts to recruit and retain employees without having to resort to additional pay. Although the procedures documents OPM provided referred to periodic annual reviews of the procedures beginning in May 2019, the documents did not provide information on whether and how such reviews were to consider and identify ways to streamline the procedures. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any additional documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.
GAO-18-51, Nov 21, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9286
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: We have been requesting periodic updates from OMB on actions it has taken to address the recommendation. As of April 2020, the agency did not have any updates.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB has not taken actions to address this recommendation, stating that the Federal CIO is not typically involved with overseeing individual IT programs. However, we continue to believe it is important for OMB to take this action, as the results of past CIO-led reviews of troubled programs show that CIO oversight can have significant positive results, including producing significant savings. In December 2019, OMB stated that it had no ongoing or planned action to address the recommendation, noting that the recommendation represents a "fundamental disagreement" between OMB and GAO on the role of the Federal CIO in overseeing programs.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: We have been requesting periodic updates from OMB on actions it has taken to address the recommendation. As of April 2020, the agency did not have any updates.
GAO-18-69, Nov 16, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Status: Open
Comments: As part of an effort to overhaul its IMS data system, EEOC has begun developing an Employer Master List that will provide a source of employer information, including industry codes, but EEOC told us that it has not yet completed this effort. It anticipates this system will be more fully developed by spring 2020. It is important for EEOC to collect sufficient information through its Employer Master List and use it to analyze charge data by industry.
Agency: Department of Labor: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, OFCCP officials reported that OFCCP's procedures outlined in the Active Case Enforcement Directive (DIR 2011-01) caused delays in case closures, but OFCCP did not indicate that this conclusion resulted from the recommended analysis of internal process data from closed evaluations. OFCCP officials reported that the agency's aged case rate-defined as a case which is open for more than 730 days and has not been referred for further enforcement-has dropped from 27.7 percent in fiscal year 2017 to 20.9 percent in fiscal year 2019. However, it did not report on changes in case outcomes. In September 2019, OFCCP officials told us they continue to look for ways to address delays with effective policies that make the agency more efficient. We maintain that OFCCP should determine the root causes of delays based on data analysis of actual evaluations to demonstrate that its policy changes are accurately targeting the causes of these delays.
Agency: Department of Labor: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In its agency response to our November 2017 report, OFCCP officials reported that the agency was exploring the use of U.S. Census Bureau and administrative data to refine its selection process to focus on industries with a greater likelihood of noncompliance. In January 2019, DOL officials reported that DOL had revised its scheduling methodology to include industries with the highest rates of violations. OFCCP published the scheduling list in March 2019 and its field offices started scheduling cases in May 2019. OFCCP stated it will continue to monitor results from this revised scheduling methodology to determine its effectiveness. It will be important for OFCCP to refine these methods based on its experiences with them. This new process is a step toward focusing efforts on industries at greater risk of potential noncompliance with nondiscrimination or affirmative action requirements. We will consider closing this recommendation when these efforts are complete.
Agency: Department of Labor: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In fiscal year 2019, OFCCP evaluated its current approach for identifying subcontractors for review. OFCCP stated that the current approach does not reliably include subcontractors in the pool from which contractors are scheduled because there is no government or public database that captures the complete universe of subcontractors and other important data. In June 2019, OFCCP submitted revisions to its process to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. We will consider closing this recommendation when these efforts are complete.
Agency: Department of Labor: Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
Status: Open
Comments: OFCCP has taken steps to encourage contractors to use the FAAP program without fully evaluating it as an alternative to the establishment-based program. Evaluating the FAAP could help OFCCP improve its ability to achieve its objectives and may provide broader insight for OFCCP's overall enforcement approach. We will consider closing this recommendation when these efforts are complete.
GAO-18-148, Nov 7, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9286
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.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has taken action, and stated that it would draft a policy to address our recommendation. In November 2019, a VA official stated that the department is working to address our recommendation but did not identify timeframes for when all activities would be completed. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to develop a policy to implement this recommendation and other FITARA issues. Specifically, EPA officials reported in July 2019 that the agency was continuing to work to address the recommendation but did not provided a time frame for when a policy would be finalized. We will continue to monitor EPA's progress on these efforts.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency was in the process of addressing it. Specifically, NASA officials reported in June 2020 that its guidance is currently being updated to include the information noted in our recommendation and will be finalized by September 2020. We will continue to monitor NASA's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would update its policies and processes to include the elements we recommended. Specifically, OPM officials reported in November 2019 that guidance on CIO certification was being developed but the agency had not yet determined a time frame for finalizing the policy. We will continue to monitor OPM's progress on these efforts.
GAO-18-145, Oct 19, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6412
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: CDC 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.
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.
GAO-17-775, Sep 29, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 2 priority recommendations
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.
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.
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.
GAO-17-738, Sep 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services agreed with the recommendation and has developed a template and instructions for quarterly reporting from its divisions. The Department identified some performance measures that it will monitor on a quarterly basis, such as contracts closed on time and total backlog. Due to competing priorities and focus on the COVID-19 response, the Department plans to provide additional steps toward progress at the next reporting cycle.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice agreed with the recommendation and in early fiscal year 2020 enhanced its financial management system to allow the Bureaus to assess whether a contract needs to be closed out. The Department anticipates that the associated guidance, which includes performance measures, will be issued in late summer 2020.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State agreed with the recommendation and is upgrading its system to improve data quality and enable the tracking and sharing of contract closeout information. The enhancements to the contracting system would allow the Department to establish a baseline and develop metrics to measure progress on closing contracts. The Department anticipates that the upgrades and data utilization will continue into fiscal year 2021.
GAO-17-464, Sep 21, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4456
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.
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.
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.
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.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Labor (DOL) officials stated that the agency is in the process of developing an inventory of its telecommunications assets and services that are associated with GSA's expiring contracts (e.g., Networx). The officials noted that, as part of the department's transition to EIS, DOL plans to include only limited non-GSA/commercial telecommunications assets and services in its initial transition efforts and inventory. The officials further stated that DOL will not focus on these non-GSA/commercial assets and services until the department completes its transition of assets and services associated with GSA's expiring contracts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to develop a complete telecommunications inventory, including assets and services associated with both GSA and non-GSA/commercial contracts, and associated maintenance processes for this inventory.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (DOL) provided documentation demonstrating that it has identified certain future telecommunications needs for the department, but DOL did not identify these needs using a complete inventory of its current telecommunications assets and services. In addition, the department demonstrated that it had completed a draft strategic analysis of its telecommunications requirements, but this analysis was not yet finalized and approved. Further, the department has not yet demonstrated that it has aligned its identified telecommunications needs with its long-term plans and enterprise architecture. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Labor (DOL) officials stated that the department is in the process of selecting a project manager to develop the Transition Project Plan and other supporting documentation for the transition, including a communications plan. DOL expects to develop this documentation around March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Labor (DOL) officials stated that the department is in the process of selecting a project manager to develop the Transition Project Plan and other documentation that would address this recommendation. The officials expect to develop this documentation around March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Labor (DOL) officials stated that the department is in the process of selecting a project manager to develop the Transition Project Plan and other documentation that would address this recommendation. The officials expect to develop this documentation around March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) concurred with our recommendation. SEC stated that it plans to establish an EIS planning team comprised of key IT personnel from across the agency to identify, among other things, future needs and areas for improvement, so that SEC can incorporate the results into its transition planning. However, SEC has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress implementing this recommendation.
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it plans to document the roles and responsibilities of key EIS transition team members across the agency. The agency also plans to develop a transition communications plan that includes configuration and change management practices. However, SEC has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress implementing this recommendation.
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In response to our recommendation, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) provided a high-level budget estimate for the transition. However, it was unclear what costs were included in this estimate and the agency did not provide documentation that justified the costs identified. In addition, SEC has not yet provided an analysis of the staff resources it needs for the transition, nor an analysis of the training needs for the staff assisting with the transition. We will continue to monitor SEC's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has demonstrated that its transition goals and measures align with its mission. In addition, the commission has identified transition risks related to continuity of operations. However, SEC has not yet identified transition risks related to its critical systems, nor identified mission-critical priorities in its transition timeline. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Social Security Administration (SSA) officials stated that the agency is in the process of making significant changes to its procedures and policy for its telecommunications inventory. The officials expect to have a complete inventory of their telecommunications assets and services by 2021. We will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Social Security Administration (SSA) officials stated that the agency's priority is to transition its telecommunications services on a like-for-like basis, in order to complete the transition before its existing contracts expire, as well as to receive immediate cost savings. Officials also stated that, once SSA has released its EIS solicitations, they plan to analyze the alignment of their future telecommunications needs with the agency's enterprise architecture. However, SSA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed this analysis. We will continue to monitor SSA's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) provided documentation demonstrating that it has implemented a change management process, including establishing a change control board that is scheduled to meet on a weekly basis and tracking change requests in its IT Service Management tool. However, SSA has not yet demonstrated that it has implemented configuration management processes for its transition. We will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to implement these processes.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) provided documentation demonstrating that it has identified the staff resources and required training for staff working on the transition. However, SSA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has identified the funding resources needed for the full transition, nor documented the costs and benefits of transition investments, such as for resource requests related to transition program management staff. We will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to fully implement this recommendation.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Social Security Administration (SSA) has identified transition risks related to critical systems and continuity of operations. In addition, SSA officials stated that the agency is in the process of identifying (1) agency-specific measures of success for the transition and (2) mission-critical priorities that need to be incorporated into its transition timeline. However, SSA has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has completed these efforts. We will continue to monitor SSA's efforts to fully implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that the department has developed a comprehensive inventory of its telecommunications assets and services, and maintains this inventory on a regular basis. However, as of August 2020, the department has not yet provided documentation of its inventory or the associated maintenance processes. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to complete this inventory and establish a maintenance process for it.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that they conducted an assessment of the department's future telecommunication requirements. According to officials, the results of this analysis were included in an EIS Statement of Work. However, DOT has not demonstrated that it used its complete inventory of existing services to identify its future needs. DOT also stated that it has conducted extensive research to identify areas for optimization and sharing, but did not provide documentation of this research. Further, DOT has not provided evidence that the department has aligned its transition approach with its long-term plans and enterprise architecture. We will continue to follow-up with DOT regarding these efforts.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (DOT) developed a transition communications plan and identified roles and responsibilities related to legal expertise, the management of assets and human capital. DOT has also provided evidence that they are requiring the use of change management in the transition. However, DOT has not demonstrated that it is applying configuration management processes to DOT's transition efforts. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Transportation (DOT) developed a transition resource plan that identifies functional roles needed for the transition, such as network engineers and staff to place new telecommunications orders. However, the transition resource plan did not identify the staffing levels needed for each of the functional roles, such as how many network engineers are necessary, and DOT did not provide other documentation that fully identifies these resources needs. In addition, DOT has not yet provided documentation that it has identified the funding needed for the full transition, justified requests for transition resources, or fully analyzed training needs for staff assisting with the transition. We will continue to follow-up on DOT's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Transportation (DOT) provided evidence that its transition goals and measures align with its mission and that it has identified the risks associated with the EIS transition. However, DOT has not yet provided documentation demonstrating that it has identified mission-critical priorities in its transition timeline. We will continue to monitor DOT's efforts to implement this recommendation.
GAO-17-726, Sep 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) did not concur with this recommendation. In July 2020, FRTIB officials told us they expect to award the mutual fund window contract in the last quarter of 2020 and that one of the goals in offering the mutual fund window is to ensure that Thrift Savings Plan participants have a variety of funds from which to choose. However, FRTIB has not changed its position on the recommendation. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid and will monitor FRTIB's efforts to address it.
GAO-17-674, Aug 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2717
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In response to our recommendation, OPM drafted a retention schedule for its pre-appointment review case files. As of June 2019, according to OPM, National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) was in the process of reviewing the draft retention schedule. Once NARA approves and OPM finalizes the schedule, OPM will be better able to maintain complete documentation to justify conversion request decisions and ensure such documentation is available for subsequent review. On July 8, 2020, OPM informed us it is getting closer to fully responding to this recommendation and providing us with appropriate documentation to support is efforts.
GAO-17-675, Aug 25, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Logistics Agency
Status: Open
Comments: For section 15(k)(2), related to the compensation and seniority of the person heading the OSDBU office, DOD concurred with this part of the recommendation. Agency officials stated that the agency requested that DOD seek Congressional approval to authorize a new Senior Executive Service position for the OSDBU director, and the agency has been waiting for this authorization to make this change. An agency official said that DLA recently hired a new Office of Small Business Programs director at the GS-15 equivalent level. This hire is not consistent with the requirements of section 15(k)(2). We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation. For section 15(k)(7), related to supervisory duties, DOD did not concur with this part of the recommendation. An agency official said that the management structure of DLA and its subordinate elements precludes assigning supervisory authority by the DLA OSBP over all agency personnel involved in small business functions. The official said that DOD OSDP is working to submit legislative proposals for the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. These proposals may address DLA's compliance with section 15(k)(7). For section 15(k)(11), related to advise on insourcing, DOD concurred with this part of the recommendation and said that future insourcing actions will be coordinated with the DLA OSBP as required. The agency official said that as of August 10, 2018, there have not been any insourcing actions. DOD provided a memo documenting that a future update of DOD policy will include language about complying with section 15(k)(11) requirement. The information provided is sufficient to close this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(17), related to responding to undue restrictions on the ability of small businesses to compete, DOD concurred with this part of the recommendation. DOD provided a memo that includes information on how the agency will comply with the section 15(k)(17) requirements and that these procedures will be included in a future DOD policy update. The information provided is sufficient to close this part of the recommendation as implemented.
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.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation, related to assigning small business technical advisors, because it said that the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement delegates the authority to appoint small business technical advisers to the head of the contracting activity. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid because when a statutory provision such as section 15(k) and regulations such as the acquisition regulation conflict, the statute controls. An agency official said that the DOD OSBP recommended, as part of the legislative proposal process, changes to the National Defense Authorization Act to align with the DOD OSBP's interpretation of the statute, but it did not make it out of DOD. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: For section 15(k)(5), related to identifying and addressing bundling of contract requirements, DOD did not concur with this part of the recommendation because it said that no contracting or bundling occurs at the level of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid because if DOD believes that the situation of this office supports that it is in compliance with section 15(k)(5), the agency should report to Congress on how it believes it is in compliance, and seek any statutory flexibilities or exceptions believed appropriate. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(8), related to assigning small business technical advisors, DOD did not concur with this part of the recommendation because it said that the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement delegates the authority to appoint small business technical advisers to the head of the contracting activity. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid because when a statutory provision such as section 15(k) and regulations such as the acquisition regulation conflict, the statute controls. An agency official said that the DOD OSBP recommended, as part of the legislative proposal process, changes to the National Defense Authorization Act to align with the DOD OSBP's interpretation of the statute, but it did not make it out of DOD. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this part of the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: For section 15(k)(3), related to reporting to the agency head or deputy head, an agency official stated that a deputy secretary was confirmed in May 2018 but that the previous OSDBU director was no longer with the agency and a new director would be appointed to the OSDBU director position. The agency official also said that once a new OSDBU director is assigned, the deputy secretary will provide oversight to the OSDBU director including signing the director's performance appraisal. We will continue to monitor the Department of Education's efforts to address this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(11), related to advise on insourcing, on July 20, 2018, an agency official provided guidance on insourcing which states that the OSDBU will review and advise on any decision to convert an activity performed by a small business concern to an activity performed by a federal employee. The information provided is sufficient to close as implemented this part of the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation, related to assigning small business technical advisors, because it said that the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement delegates the authority to appoint small business technical advisers to the head of the contracting activity. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid because when a statutory provision such as section 15(k) and regulations such as the acquisition regulation conflict, the statute controls. An agency official said that the DOD OSBP recommended, as part of the legislative proposal process, changes to the National Defense Authorization Act to align with the DOD OSBP's interpretation of the statute, but it did not make it out of DOD. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: For section 15(k)(3), related to reporting requirement (head of agency or deputy head), a VA official stated that the agency has changed the reporting relationship of the OSDBU director. The official stated that the Deputy Secretary will now act as rating Official for the Executive Director, OSDBU, and will sign the initial draft rating. The official also provided a Senior Executive Leaders FY 2018 Rating Scheme (dated January 2018) which shows that the Deputy Secretary rates and reviews the OSDBU director. The information provided is sufficient to close as implemented this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(8), related to assigning small business technical advisors, an agency official stated that VA has circulated a draft Memorandum of Understanding for concurrence which would address among other things, the extent of supervisory authority to be exercised over the Small Business Technical Advisor personnel by the Executive Director, OSDBU, while the advisor personnel remain employees of the contracting activity. The official stated that VA's revised target completion date for this effort is September 30, 2019. We will continue to monitor VA's efforts to address this part of the recommendation. For section 15(k)(11), related to advise on in-sourcing, as of January 18, 2018, VA updated its Small Business Procurement Review Program Policy to include language about the role of the OSDBU as it relates to the requirements for section 15(k)(11). A VA official also stated that the policy was distributed by email to VA's acquisition workforce and was also posted to the agency's intranet on February 12, 2018. The official stated that this policy has been distributed to OSDBU staff and provided a copy to GAO. The information provided is sufficient to close as implemented this part of the recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-524, Jul 12, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remained open. Treasury believes that its current remediation plan, including its various corrective action plans (CAPs), is comprehensive, appropriate, and effective, with robust and ongoing monitoring processes in place. However, we continue to note that the CAPs in these three areas do not include sufficient steps to effectively address related control deficiencies involving processes used to prepare the CFS. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-17-240, Mar 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In October, 2018, the Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing, Committee on Technology of the National Science Technology Council released a Strategy for American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing. This strategy provided some information on progress toward achieving the objectives of the prior National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing; however, it is unclear what information is to be collected from agencies and likewise how progress toward achieving the goals of the current strategy will be measured. We will update the status of this recommendation when the Office of Science and Technology Policy identifies the information to be collected from federal agencies and how this information will be used to assess progress in achieving the current goals, objectives, and priorities.
GAO-17-204, Mar 23, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6912
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2017, we found that USCIS does not track or monitor whether SAVE users have completed training and therefore does not have reasonable assurance that users have mastered SAVE policies and procedures prior to accessing the system. We recommended that USCIS develop and implement a mechanism to oversee agencies' completion of training on additional verification in accordance with SAVE provisions and program policies. The USCIS Verification Division reported that it planned to address providing additional training for SAVE users developed by December 31, 2017. The SAVE Program would then offer training events for agencies on the new material reflecting the agency user requirements for additional verification as well as system enhancements. In September 2017, the Verification Division implemented part one of this recommendation, a monthly webinar training session on user agency responsibilities and additional verification. This training can also be delivered to user agencies upon request. For part two of this recommendation, the SAVE program also developed training features to oversee agencies' completion of training. These training features are a system enhancement that will be incorporated into SAVE's overall modernization effort and was expected to be completed by September 30, 2019. In the interim, SAVE is implementing several other enhancements that will reduce the number of cases sent to additional verification, including the completion of modernized matching logic and initial verification screens and retiring less efficient access methods. In September 2019, SAVE officials told us that SAVE has reduced the number of cases sent to additional verification by retiring inefficient access methods and completing modernization of SAVE matching logic and initial verification screens. However, SAVE officials said they also determined that they must update the SAVE tutorial platform and content to account for these and other changes. Officials said that while SAVE is updated, the program continues to provide training, resources, and other support to user agencies to help ensure they are performing additional verification in accordance with SAVE MOA provisions and program policies. The new estimated completion date is February 28, 2021.
GAO-17-58, Feb 7, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In its February 26, 2018 report to Congress on actions NRC has taken in response to GAO recommendations, NRC continued to disagree with the recommendation to expand its existing data collection requirements or to transition such information from its existing NRC databases to the NSTS. NRC stated that, as required by 10 CFR Part 37, "Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material," the NRC currently collects the number of shipments and mode of transport for domestic transfers, and the import and export of Category 1 quantities of radioactive material. Additionally, under the provisions of 10 CFR Part 110, "Export and Import of Nuclear Material," the NRC stated that it collects the number of shipments and mode of transport for the import and export of shipments containing Category 2 or higher quantities of radioactive material. The NRC stated that it is the agency's position that the current information collected provides the NRC with an understanding of the potential modes of transport for Category 1 and 2 quantities of radioactive material and existing regulatory requirements provide robust protection for all such modes. The NRC stated that it does not consider the proposed additional information collection activity to be of sufficient safety or security benefit to justify the associated regulatory actions it would require. In August 2019, and again in August 2020, the NRC reaffirmed its disagreement with this recommendation and that it did not intend to take action to implement it. Despite its disagreement with this recommendation, we will continue to monitor whether NRC takes any actions that would result in addressing the concern GAO raised.
GAO-17-189, Jan 31, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: According to HHS, FDA issued draft guidance (a document of frequently asked questions) in January of 2018 that describes the QIDP designation. However, this document is in draft form and has not yet been finalized. As of August 2020, FDA reported it is working to finalize this guidance this year. GAO will revisit this recommendation when the final guidance is issued.
GAO-17-8, Nov 30, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9286
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The department agreed with the recommendation and stated that it plans to fully implement it. In October 2019 (in GAO-20-129), we reported the results of our evaluation of the department's progress in implementing the eight IT workforce planning activities. Specifically, we reported that the department had substantially implemented the activity to develop competency and staffing requirements, minimally or partially implemented four activities, and not implemented the remaining three activities. In July 2020, the department provided a summary of actions it claimed it had taken to close the recommendation. The department also provided supporting documentation. We are reviewing the documentation to determine whether it fully addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. In October 2019 (in GAO-20-129), we reported the results of our evaluation of the Department of Defense's progress in implementing the eight IT workforce planning activities. Specifically, we reported that the department had fully implemented the activities to develop competency and staffing requirements and assess competency and staffing needs regularly, substantially implemented four other activities, and partially implemented the remaining two activities. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The department agreed with our recommendation and identified plans for (1) collecting and analyzing additional workforce data and (2) conducting targeted recruitment, staff planning, career development, and training. In October 2019 (in GAO-20-129), we reported the results of our evaluation of the department's progress in implementing the eight IT workforce planning activities. Specifically, we reported that the department had substantially implemented the activity to develop competency and staffing requirements, partially implemented three other activities, and either minimally or not implemented the remaining four activities. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The department agreed with the recommendation and stated that it plans to fully implement it. In October 2019 (in GAO-20-129), we reported the results of our evaluation of the department's progress in implementing the eight IT workforce planning activities. Specifically, we reported that the department had fully implemented the activity to develop competency and staffing requirements, but had not yet fully implemented the remaining seven activities, including developing a workforce planning process. In January 2020, the department stated that its Office of the Chief Information Officer and Office of Human Resource Management had established a workgroup to lead and conduct workforce planning activities, and had defined the strategic goals and objectives for the department's IT workforce. The department also stated that the workgroup was planning on subsequently completing additional activities, including completing a workforce analysis with a competency gap assessment, by the end of calendar year 2020, and developing strategies to address any identified gaps by the end of 2021. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement our recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The department agreed with our recommendation and identified planned and ongoing efforts to address it. In October 2019 (in GAO-20-129), we reported the results of our evaluation of the department's progress in implementing the eight IT workforce planning activities. Specifically, we reported that it had fully implemented the activity to develop competency and staffing requirements, but had not yet fully implemented the remaining seven activities, including developing a workforce planning process. In January 2020, the department stated that its Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and Office of the Chief Information Officer would be presenting a decision paper to the Human Capital Advisory Council that month to request approval and resources to complete an IT Competency Framework, conduct a competency assessment, and conduct a department-wide workforce planning study for the 2210 (IT management) occupation. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement our recommendation.
GAO-17-4, Nov 15, 2016
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with this recommendation believing it to be unnecessary because it is already providing accurate information. Specifically, DOD noted that the information provided in several documents GAO reviewed is accurately based on statute whereas Education's updated requirement to automatically apply the cap is based on policy that could change in the future. Moreover, the automated process applies only to federal and commercial FFEL student loans in contrast to other types of debt. DOD said that providing information based on statute rather than policy would cause less confusion and was a better approach than what we recommend. However, our report noted that Education formalized the automated process through federal regulations, effective July 2016, which legally require servicers to use this process for all federal and commercial FFEL loans. In addition, DOD said it was unable to verify whether DOD's Military OneSource website inaccurately states that the SCRA rate cap does not apply to commercial FFEL loans. However, our searches of the website still turned up this inaccuracy. DOD said it would look into a means of verifying website information but that in the meantime, it is satisfied that its training provides correct information. Given that Military OneSource is a key source of information for servicemembers and that some documents DOD provided state that the SCRA rate cap does not apply to student loans, we continue to believe that servicemembers are not always receiving accurate and up-to-date information. In August 2018, DOD reiterated that it continues to disagree with this recommendation based on the rationale above. DOD did not provide an update for 2020.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated that its current package of proposed legislative changes provides benefits to servicemembers with all kinds of loans, including private student loans. Rather than requiring servicemembers to submit written notice and a copy of military orders, they need only give oral or written notice of eligibility for the cap to their creditors. Creditors would then have to search the Department of Defense's records to verify the servicemembers' military service and apply the SCRA interest rate cap, when applicable. DOJ believes that these changes would significantly benefit all servicemembers with loans while providing a uniform standard for all types of creditors. The department added that it will consider its proposed changes to SCRA in future legislative proposals and plans to obtain feedback from stakeholders on how to improve SCRA's protections for servicemembers. However, as stated in our report, servicemembers with private student loans would still need to be aware of the rate cap in order to give notice, whether written or oral. Therefore, we encourage DOJ to consider updating its current proposal to require use of the automatic eligibility check by all student loan lenders and servicers. Not only would this ensure that servicemembers with private student loans receive a benefit for which they are eligible, but also that the interest rate cap is applied consistently across all types of student loans. DOJ did not provide an update for 2020.
Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open
Comments: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) stated that it is committed to working with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and federal financial regulators, when possible, to facilitate oversight of SCRA compliance and that it will support all relevant federal agencies in using their respective authorities to identify and address SCRA violations as efficiently and effectively as possible. While CFPB coordinates with DOJ and other federal regulators in general, there is still no single agency authorized to enforce SCRA compliance among nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers, and no entity is conducting onsite supervisory reviews of these lenders and servicers. In addition, while CFPB may refer complaints from servicemembers about the SCRA rate cap for private student loans to DOJ and other financial regulators, we believe this does not constitute routine, proactive oversight and also presumes servicemembers are aware of the SCRA rate cap. GAO will consider closing this recommendation when the bureau has provided evidence of actions it has taken to facilitate routine oversight of SCRA compliance for all nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers. CFPB did not provide an update for 2020.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice (DOJ) believes that it is in full compliance with this recommendation and that the four federal financial regulators do not have statutory authority to examine nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers unaffiliated with a depository institution. DOJ stated that it already coordinates extensively with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the financial regulators concerning SCRA compliance through such mechanisms as referrals from CFPB for any SCRA-related violations and access to its consumer complaint database, and regular meetings with CFPB, and that it will continue to be built upon these efforts. While these mechanisms are commendable, GAO believes they do not constitute exercising routine oversight of nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers who are not affiliated with a depository institution. We believe that additional interagency coordination, including working with CFPB to seek additional statutory authority, as needed, is necessary to ensure routine SCRA compliance. DOJ did not provide an update for 2020.
GAO-17-15, Oct 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2623
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: In fiscal year 2020, the Senate passed S.4104, which included language to address the recommendation. In the context of the Do Not Pay (DNP) working system, the bill, if enacted, would authorize comparison of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) full death file with personally identifiable information reviewed through the working system and would allow redisclosure of such comparison of information to any federal or state agency authorized to use the working system. As of July 15, 2020, the House has not introduced a related bill for fiscal year 2020. Additionally, in February 2020, the administration released its President's 2021 Budget, which proposes legislation to allow the DNP Business Center full access to the SSA full death file. This proposal would include the Department of the Treasury and the SSA working together to determine the most efficient manner to make full death information available for use in preventing improper payment and fraud. We will continue to monitor congressional legislation to address this recommendation. .
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB agreed with the concept of monitoring mechanisms and will continue to work with agencies to reduce improper payments and encourage agencies to establish goals to improve payment accuracy that will be monitored and evaluated by OMB. In fiscal year 2019, OMB provided us a status update on July 31, 2019, stating that Treasury does this monitoring and reports updates to OMB on a quarterly basis and that monitoring will occur in conjunction with the President's Management Agenda. In August 2020, Treasury provided us examples of reports that it provides to OMB to assist OMB with evaluating agency use of the DNP working system. We plan to meet with OMB to discuss how it uses these reports and will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed with the concept of ensuring that data are reliable and will consider the feasibility of a process to compare agency submissions to available sources to reasonably assure that agency-reported information on use of the Do Not Pay working system is reliable. OMB provided us a status update on July 1, 2019, stating that OMB will work with Treasury to determine feasibility of doing this review and establishing a process during fiscal year 2019. As of February 2020, OMB has not provided any new status updates for this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed with ensuring the completeness of data and will continue to work with agencies and the Chief Financial Officer community to ensure that agency-reported information on the use of the Do Not Pay (DNP) working system is complete. In fiscal year 2019, OMB provided us a status update on July 1, 2019, stating that this recommendation was addressed in OMB's Circular A-136. Additionally, we met with OMB officials on July 31, 2019. During the meeting, OMB officials informed us that the OMB Circular A-136, Section II.4.5 (bullet 3) (dated June 28, 2019) states that "Agencies should provide a brief narrative of the reduction in improper payments that is attributable to the DNP Initiative, as applicable. See OMB Circular A-123, Appendix C, Part V for a thorough overview of the roles and responsibilities of agencies to use centralized data sources such as the Treasury Working System and other government databases to prevent improper payments." We have reviewed OMB Circular A-136 and confirmed that the circular does contain the statements above. However, we do not believe that the OMB Circular A-136 meets the intent of our recommendation. GAO issued its recommendation, in part, because GAO found that OMB guidance does not indicate whether agencies should report on all uses of the DNP working system, including those outside payment integration that the DNP working system does not track. For this reason, GAO report concluded that without complete and reliable data and clear guidance on what information agencies should report, OMB cannot effectively monitor and evaluate the use of the DNP working system. Therefore, we do not believe that the OMB Circular A-136 sufficiently clarifies whether agencies should report on their uses of all of the functionalities of the DNP working system in their agency financial reports. As of February 2020, OMB has not provided any new status updates for this recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-17-127, Oct 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2700
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM agreed with the recommendation. In December 2018, OPM told us it will establish a plan to make payroll data available through analytical tools such as FedScope no later than the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM will need to improve the availability of payroll data-either from the existing EHRI system or the new employee digital record-by ensuring the data are prepared and made available for analytics research.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM agreed with the recommendation. In December 2018, OPM reported that it plans to begin follow-up efforts with agencies and shared service providers on payroll data errors and anomalies and to notify data providers of problems. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM will need to follow up with shared services centers and agencies regarding issues identified with the payroll data they submit to EHRI. These steps will help ensure the quality of historical and current payroll data. They will also ensure that system detected errors are resolved and do not compound over time.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with our recommendation, but has not yet developed a plan for integrating payroll into the larger suite of EHRI databases.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: While OPM concurred with our recommendation, the agency has not evaluated or implemented, for Payroll data, the control activities and edit checks that are currently used to support the reliability of the other EHRI datasets.
GAO-16-667, Sep 8, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6304
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, Congress has not yet considered if it plans to amend FOIA regarding the reporting of costs for defending lawsuits in which the plaintiffs prevailed.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, Congress has not yet considered if it plans to amend FOIA to require Justice to make changes to its Litigation and Compliance reports.
GAO-16-680, Aug 31, 2016
Phone: (404) 679-1875
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In June 2019, DOD reported that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had developed a sophisticated risk assessment tool which could potentially be used to both define and assess exceptionally high risk buildings in a cost-effective manner. DOD said that it was in the process of determining the suitability of the tool for use by its components, and potentially other federal government partners. According to DOD, further action to address this recommendation will depend on both a favorable determination of the tool's suitability and the availability of funding to conduct assessments and complete the mitigation actions identified by the assessments. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address this recommendation.
GAO-16-686, Aug 26, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6244
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) partially concurred with this recommendation, but does not intend to directly issue guidance as recommended. As of June 2020, OMB has not provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented this recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In response to our report, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation; however, DOD subsequently concurred with the recommendation and is taking steps to implement it. The department stated that the issuance of an updated Cyber Incident Handling guidance is on track to be completed and coordinated in the third quarter of fiscal year 2018. As of June 2020, it has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State (State) concurred with this recommendation. However, as of June 2020, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. When we receive additional evidence from State, we will review it to determine whether the department has addressed the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (DOT) concurred with the recommendation and is currently updating its Cybersecurity Policy. The Department plans to be complete by June 29, 2019. As of June 2020, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. Upon receiving additional evidence from DOT, we will review it to determine whether the department has addressed the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation (DOT) concurred with the recommendation and is currently updating its Cybersecurity Policy. The Department plans to be complete by June 29, 2019. As of June 2020, the department has not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. Upon receiving additional evidence from DOT, we will review it to determine whether the department has addressed the recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) concurred with our recommendation. As of June 2020, NASA stated that the agency is working to update the relevant policy to address this recommendation, but the update is taking longer than expected; NASA expects the policy to be updated and the review process to be completed by November 30, 2020. We will examine the evidence when NASA provides it.
GAO-16-768, Aug 24, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3149
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of May 2020, State had taken some steps to coordinate with OMB and USAID to improve the quality of data reported for ForeignAssistance.gov. Notably, in May 2020, State and USAID submitted a joint report to Congress outlining a plan to consolidate the two federal websites reporting foreign assistance spending--ForeignAssistance.gov (managed by State) and explorer.usaid.gov (managed by USAID). As part of the plan, State and USAID will establish a joint data governance structure to reduce discrepancies in data, bolster the capacity of agencies to submit data, and ensure the accuracy and quality of data. Once the governance structure is finalized, they will send a copy to GAO. GAO will then review this information to assess if it sufficiently addresses GAO's recommendation.
GAO-16-602, Aug 15, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9286
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-16-521, Aug 2, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2757
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM agreed with this recommendation and has taken actions to address it since GAO's August 2016 report. In April 2019, OPM issued final regulations implementing changes to direct hire authority to provide certain agencies with the ability to hire urgently needed information technology professionals more quickly. It also plans to provide in-person support to the Chief Human Capital Office council, Chief Information Officers Council, and human resources professionals and managers on how to use this new authority. In its fiscal year 2021 Congressional Budget Justification released on February 10, 2020, OPM noted that it was seeking to improve hiring by using flexibilities that exist within current authority. These include, for example, noncompetitive term-limited appointments of highly qualified experts, expansion of term/temporary hiring authorities, and limited noncompetitive hiring of students and recent graduates. However, some of these plans were initially introduced in the prior year's justification and progress continues to be unclear. Additionally, OPM said that it is currently reassessing administration priorities and was unable to provide further updates. While OPM has made some progress in this area, it will be important for the agency to prioritize and follow through on its planned actions to streamline hiring authorities. Expanding access to hiring authorities found to be highly efficient and effective while eliminating those found to be less effective would help simplify and improve the federal hiring process.
GAO-16-695, Jul 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In its fiscal year 2017 congressional justification, IRS modified how its budget data were organized, including linking requested increases to future state themes, but did not clarify how current spending by themes relates to appropriation accounts. Information on current spending by theme and account is important to ensure transparency on the current funding levels to assist Congress in making informed budget decisions. As reported in October 2018 in GAO-19-108R, the themes under the Future State vision are now being pursued as part of IRS's strategic plan for fiscal years 2018 to 2022-issued in May 2018. IRS has been phasing out the use of the term Future State and did not include it in its fiscal year 2020 congressional justification. Including data on the themes in the strategic plan would provide additional transparency and improve the quality of the information available to Congress for budget deliberations.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2017, Treasury Department officials took steps to address the need to manually correct budget data for the fiscal year 2017 budget request. However, as of October 2019, we have not received documentation that they have done so for future budget years. Improved information would help Treasury and IRS better account for information technology resources. We will continue to monitor Treasury's progress.
GAO-16-546, Jul 19, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: At the time of our report, OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation but stated that it did not believe convening a forum was the most strategic use of resources because agencies were not far enough along with their data collection efforts. We disagree with OMB's assertion because 7 of the 10 data collection efforts have been in place for more than 10 years, and several have been in place for multiple decades. As of December 2019, OMB has not provided information on any new efforts to establish a federal interagency forum on sexual violence statistics.
GAO-16-548, Jul 15, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6806
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.
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation. EPA also stated that its vision for grants management includes having grant recipients submit performance reports and other information to the agency through a web-based portal. The portal would incorporate capabilities such as key word searches to allow for easier access to performance report information. EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its general agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will apply it, where appropriate and cost effective, to program-specific databases, not only the Office of Water databases. EPA noted that not all data from program-specific databases may be appropriate for direct electronic transfer to the national performance system; some individual grant data may need to be analyzed before being rolled up into national data. As of December 2018, EPA officials said that continued work on this recommendation is dependent upon EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer's deployment of a new performance tracking system and individual program funds for developing systems that interact with it. As of April 2020, GAO is following up with EPA on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will make conforming changes to the implementation guidance for the Environmental Results Order (directive). In December 2018, EPA stated that its existing environmental results directive may be superseded or incorporated into a different policy as part of the agency's migration to a new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). EPA stated that it would incorporate the recommendation into its new policy. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its agreement with this recommendation and stated that it will make conforming changes to existing policy. In December 2018, EPA stated that its existing policies may be superseded or incorporated into different policies as part of the agency's migration to a new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). EPA stated that it would incorporate the recommendation into its new policy. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In correspondence to GAO, EPA reiterated its general agreement with this recommendation. However, EPA emphasized that identifying and deploying appropriate data quality controls is a long-term effort subject to budgetary considerations, completion of its new grants management system, and extensive collaboration with internal and external stakeholders. EPA officials said that the agency expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.
GAO-16-559, Jul 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, BLM is reviewing comments from the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor on the revised grazing handbook. In addition, BLM will need to develop and roll-out a communication strategy and plan. Therefore, the recommendations will not be fully implemented until December 31, 2020.
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.
GAO-16-468, May 25, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. However, in July 2020, OMB stated that the implementation of this recommendation would be counter to the Administration's focus of prioritizing modernization activities specifically for High Value Assets and, as a result, it does not intend on implementing this recommendation. We disagree and believe that identifying and publishing a specific goal aimed at reducing non-provisioned spending (i.e., spending associated with systems that are not cloud or shared service-based) aligns with the Administration's Cloud Smart strategy to accelerate agency adoption of cloud-based solutions. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. In July 2020, OMB stated that agencies were directed to manage the risk to High Value Assets associated with legacy systems in OMB's December 2018 guidance. While OMB's guidance does direct agencies to identify, report, assess, and remediate issues associated with High Value Assets, it does not require agencies to do so for all legacy systems. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The agency had no comment on the recommendation. In June 2017, Treasury provided an update on the IRS's efforts to ensure that operational analyses are performed on investments in the operations and maintenance phase. However, the recommendation is intended to address issues at the department level and not just at the IRS. In 2017, Treasury declined to provide an update at the department level. As of April 2020, Treasury has not responded to requests for updates. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The agency had no comment on the recommendation. In June 2017, Treasury provided an update on the IRS's efforts to modernize the IRS's legacy systems. However, the recommendation is intended to address issues at the department level and not just at the IRS. In 2017, Treasury declined to provide an update at the department level. As of April 2020, Treasury has not responded to requests for updates. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
GAO-16-263, Apr 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, OMB staff maintained their position of disagreement with this recommendation as summarized in our April 2016 report. As of January 2020, OMB has not provided any plans to implement this recommendation.
GAO-16-76, Apr 8, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to improve the accuracy of its calculation of coding intensity, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is reevaluating the design of the risk adjustment data validation audits to ensure their rigor in the context of all the payment error data acquired since the original design of the audits. As part of this work, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to use to select contracts for audit. As a result, in October 2018, CMS told GAO that rather than coding intensity, it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver beginning with audits for payment year 2014. Additionally, CMS was taking steps to modernize its audit system to improve reliability. For example, it initiated a project to explore how to directly receive electronic medical record documentation. As of January 2020, the agency is continuing to reevaluate the design of these audits. Unless CMS takes this and other actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to modify the selection of MA contracts for audit, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the initial RADV audit design was based on a limited set of payment error data available at the time. As part of efforts to improve the audits, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to select contracts for audit. In October 2018, CMS told GAO that it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver-rather than coding intensity-beginning with audits for payment year 2014. As of January 2020, the agency is using the revised methodology on the 2014 and 2015 payment year audits. They expect to conclude this process in late fiscal year 2020 and 2021, respectively. Unless CMS completes actions to improve the RADV contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification. HHS reaffirmed its commitment to identifying and correcting improper payments in the MA program. It has begun taking steps to improve the timeliness of the contract-level RADV audit process, such as aligning the time frames in CMS's contract-level RADV audits with those of the national RADV audits. Once completed, CMS needs to provide evidence that the actions taken by the agency have enhanced the timeliness of CMS's contract-level RADV process.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to improve the timeliness of the agency's contract-level risk adjustment data validation appeals process, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is actively considering options for expediting the appeals process. For example, CMS is considering the appropriate number of days for rendering reconsideration decisions while allowing for a complete and thorough adjudication. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO they expect to issue a final rule in January 2021 that will establish uniform timelines to expedite the appeals process. Specifically, they plan to require that a findings determination be made within 60-90 days of an arbiter's receipt of each party's arguments at each stage of an appeal. Unless CMS takes such actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS has attempted to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the Medicare Advantage program, as GAO recommended in April 2016. After failing to receive any proposals when CMS first issued a request for proposals (RFP) in 2014, CMS issued a request for information to industry in December 2015, which included a draft Statement of Work to solicit feedback, gauge interest, and conduct market research regarding CMS entering into a contract with a recovery audit contractor to identify underpayments and overpayments associated with diagnosis data submitted to CMS by Medicare Advantage Organizations. CMS reported that it subsequently issued another RFP in 2016 and did not receive any proposals for a second time. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO that the functions of the Part C recovery Audit programs are being performed through other program integrity mechanisms. CMS subsequently reported in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification that CMS believes the proposed scope of the Part C RAC has been subsumed by RADV and CMS will demonstrate that the RADV program satisfies this recommendation. Until CMS completes efforts to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process and demonstrates that it has satisfied the requirement to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the MA program, CMS will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
GAO-16-325, Apr 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the department was in the process of addressing it. Specifically, a HHS official reported in August 2020 that the department had created a team to address cloud computing best practices and intended to finalize guidance on SLA key practices by June 2021. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, an official from the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) reported that the department was in the process of addressing the recommendation. Specifically, a Treasury official reported that the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer was working with the Treasury Senior Procurement Executive to incorporate the key practices identified in our report into Treasury acquisition policy, which was expected to be completed by January 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the department was in the process of addressing it. In August 2020, a VA official reported that the department's Office of Information Technology was working to re-write existing SLA documentation following a review from the Office of Inspector General but did not provide a date when the guidance would be finalized. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
GAO-16-165, Jan 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to a letter received from the agency in April 2016, BLM expressed concern about whether promulgating a rule to assess cost recovery fees for environmental assessment would result in faster permitting times and noted that such an undertaking may be challenging to complete given resource limitation as a result of other high priority rule making efforts currently underway by BLM. The agency proposed conducting an internal analysis to determine whether requiring cost recovery would result in reduced permitting times and expected that report to be completed by the end of 2017. We contacted the Department of the Interior in April 2020 and it had no new information to provide at that time. We will update the status of this recommendation as more information becomes available.
GAO-16-110, Dec 21, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2757
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: According to OMB, during the last two years OIRA has significantly improved the ease of access to and findability of documents on OMB's information quality website. OMB says it has a number of additional improvements in progress. We have requested information on those additional improvements. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts related to this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: According to OMB, it worked with the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to improve the accessibility of their Information Quality Act guidance. In addition, OMB stated that FHFA took it upon themselves to update their guidelines. OMB has not provided any information regarding its work with DOD in this area. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts related to this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: According to OMB, in conjunction with its annual data call, the agency has and will continue to provide guidance to agencies about improving the transparency and usability of their websites, including the need to update broken links. In addition OMB issued M-19-15, designed to address a number of related and additional implementation concerns, including transparency and procedural improvements. OMB's guidance to date has not included specific items as specified in the recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's efforts related to this recommendation.
GAO-16-14, Dec 3, 2015
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE generally agreed with this recommendation. DOE's Office of Science began collecting investigator demographics during the second quarter of fiscal year 2015 and already retained complete records that enabled the calculation of success rates. According to DOE officials, since September 2017, the other three grant-making components included in our audit have been taking various actions to implement the recommendation. These three components, the Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), all complete steps to ensure that they retain complete grant life cycle information for each individual award, including complete records of pre-proposal, proposal, and award data in linked electronic files, thus fulfilling the first part of our recommendation. In 2019, EERE coordinated the development of a Federal Register Notice (FRN) regarding data collection jointly with NE and ARPA-E. The FRN drafted by EERE was finalized and published on February 11, 2020 (Vol. 85, Issue 28, Pages 7759-7760 [FR DOC# 2020-02674]). Under the proposed information collection request, an interface will be implemented in DOE grant application systems to allow external users to voluntarily provide a minimal amount of demographic information to comply with this recommendation, pursuant to review by the Office of Management and Budget. On June 30th, DOE officials shared with GAO the draft FRN for the 30-day notice and request for public comment prior to implementation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and noted it is in the process of revising current DOD guidance which will address its Title IX enforcement requirements. In September 2017, a DOD official stated that the agency is in the process of formulating instructions related to both Title IX and Title VI that they believe will address the recommendation regarding Title IX enforcement. In a memorandum issued in December 2017, a DOD official described the agency's corrective action plan (CAP), including drafting an updated rule for the Code of Federal Regulations and the development and issuance of internal DOD policy documents regarding Title IX enforcement requirements. Both of these activities were expected to be completed by June 2019. DOD reported in March 2020 that it is continuing to revise current DOD guidance to address its Title IX enforcement requirements. The Director of DOD's Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) stated in a letter to GAO that the revised Titile IX policy is in the early stages of DOD's policy process. ODEI expressed its commitment to developing the revised policy and ensuring Title IX compliance reviews are conducted as per the revised policy and GAO's recommendation. In September of 2020, DoD sent an update indicating that they will issue a policy memorandum, specifically outlining the requirement for DoD Components who provide financial assistance to educational programs or activities conduct periodic compliance reviews. This is expected to be complete by December 31, 2020.
GAO-16-57, Nov 17, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3604
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.
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.
GAO-16-39, Oct 20, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, GSA has informed us that it submitted a legislative proposal as part of the FY 2018 and FY 2019 budget cycle that was subsequently not included in the President's budget. We have asked GSA to provide us a copy of this proposal. We will evaluate whether this proposal is sufficient to close this recommendation.
GAO-15-671, Sep 28, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, FDA released for public comment its new Draft Guidance for Industry #256 - Compounding Animal Drugs from Bulk Drug Substances. The draft guidance describes FDA's policy regarding the compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances including the conditions under which FDA does not intend to take enforcement action for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act's requirements for approval, adequate directions for use, and current Good Manufacturing Practices. We will review the updated guidance when it is finalized and determine if it addresses this recommendation. In August 2020, FDA indicated that, in response to numerous requests from external stakeholders, the comment period on the draft guidance has been extended to October 2020. Once the comments have been reviewed, FDA anticipates finalizing the guidance by the end of calendar year 2021.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, FDA reported to GAO that when the Draft Guidance for Industry #256 was issued that calendar year, FDA intended to develop a risk-based compliance program to address compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances. As part of that compliance program, FDA reported that it intended to consistently document the basis for its decisions about what actions are taken, for example, warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints. In August 2020, FDA reported that a working group has been formed to develop a risk-based compliance strategy, which will include a process for documenting the basis for FDA's decisions about how or whether it followed up on warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints about drug compounding for animals. FDA anticipates implementing this strategy simultaneously with the finalization of Guidance for Industry #256, which is anticipated to occur at the end of calendar year 2021. We will follow-up with FDA regarding these actions and determine if the actions address our recommendation.
GAO-15-617, Sep 15, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9286
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.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development agreed with, and has taken initial steps to implement, our recommendation. Specifically, as of May 2020, the department's integrated data collection submission included reinvestment plans for one of the eight cost savings and avoidance initiatives reported. However, the seven remaining initiatives, with savings and avoidances totaling approximately $6.3 million, did not include reinvestment plans. The department expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury has not yet taken steps to implement our recommendation. Specifically, as of May 2020, the department had not yet updated its Information Resources Management (IRM) Strategic Plan to include information regarding the approach to reinvesting savings from the consolidation of commodity IT resources. In addition, in an April 2020 e-mail, the department's GAO liaison stated that Treasury had not yet updated its IRM strategic plan, but might have other, more current, strategic documents that described its reinvestment plans. The department expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury has not yet taken steps to implement our recommendation. Specifically, as of May 2020, the department's quarterly integrated data collection submission to the Office of Management and Budget did not include reinvestment plans for 15 of the 27 reported cost savings and avoidance initiatives. For example, the department reported about $100 million in cost avoidances from its data center consolidation and optimization initiatives, but did not provide information regarding how it plans to reinvest these avoidances. The department expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs agreed with, and took initial steps to implement, our recommendation. Specifically, in November 2015, the department's Chief of Staff stated that the Office of Information and Technology was working to establish an office to close monitor program performance, deliver, cost, schedule, return on investment, and total cost of ownership, which will enable reinvestment opportunities. However, as of May 2020, the department's quarterly integrated data collection submission to the Office of Management and Budget did not include reinvestment plans for five of the 10 reported cost savings and avoidance initiatives. For example, the department reported about $229 million in cost avoidances associated with renegotiating an enterprise license agreement with Microsoft, but did not provide information regarding how it plans to reinvest these avoidances. The department expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency agreed with our recommendation, but has not yet taken steps to implement it. Specifically, as of May 2020, the agency's quarterly integrated data collection submission to the Office of Management and Budget did not include reinvestment plans for any of the 12 reported cost savings and avoidance initiatives. For example, the agency reported about $34.0 million in cost savings and avoidances in 2019 related to data center, commodity IT, and software licensing initiatives, but did not provide information regarding how it plans to reinvest these savings and avoidances. The agency expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the agency's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) agreed with our recommendation, but has not yet taken action to implement it. Specifically, in November 2015, OPM's Acting Director stated that information regarding the approach to reinvesting savings from the consolidation of commodity IT resources (including data centers) would be included in future updates to OPM's Strategic IT Plan. In August 2019, OPM's GAO liaison stated that the agency intended to update its Strategic IT Plan in fiscal year 2020 and intended to include reinvestment language as part of the update. However, as of May 2020, the agency had not yet updated its strategic plan to include this information. The agency expects to provide an update in June 2020. We will continue to evaluate the OPM's progress in implementing this recommendation.
GAO-15-788, Sep 10, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
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.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) has identified three priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. DOD states action plans and progress updates are "coming soon" for Performance.gov. In March 2020, DOD officials reported that they continue to work to address our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior (Interior) has identified six priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. Interior states on Performance.gov that action plans and progress updates are "coming soon". We will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.
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.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense's (DOD) Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Annual Performance Plan and FY2019 Annual Performance Report states that, "each goal owner has attested the performance results and narrative information included in this report is complete, accurate, and reliable; and that data validation and verification procedures are documented and available upon request," and DOD refers readers to Performance.gov for more information about its priority goals (APGs). However, the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 requires agencies to publish more specific data quality explanation for each APG in performance plans and reports and on Performance.gov. DOD's performance plan and report does not contain the more specific explanation required. Nor did our review of Performance.gov find the required explanation. In March 2020, DOD officials reported that they continue to work to address our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address our recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Interior's (Interior) 2021/2020 Annual Performance Plan & 2019 Report (APP&R) includes a section concerning data accuracy and reliability and describes in general terms how Interior ensures the accuracy and reliability of performance information and how it addresses the five data quality requirements in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. Interior states in this section that measurement procedures for agency performance goals are described on Performance.gov. As of May 2020, our review found that Interior has not provided specific data quality explanation for its APGs on Performance.gov. We will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.
GAO-15-752T, Jul 29, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB issued guidance in June 2019 that provides an overview and timeline for merging DATA Act reporting with implementation of a federal program inventory. To fully address this recommendation, OMB needs to provide additional details on the implementation of these requirements.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB issued several guidance documents in 2019 that set out key aspects of a process for agencies to establish standards for, and practices for governing, managing, and protecting, all federal data. These and related efforts represent significant progress, but OMB needs to ensure this broad guidance is followed by clear and specific requirements for agency data governance to ensure the quality of their DATA Act reporting.
GAO-15-588, Jul 9, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify the policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. According to IHS officials, the timeline for completion of the new regulation is December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. Further, the officials stated that once the new Buy Indian regulation is promulgated, IHS plans to identify a plan to collect data on area office implementation of key policy requirements, including monitoring authentication of contractor credentials. According to IHS officials, due to limitations within the Federal Procurement Data System- Next Generation IHS is unable to collect the necessary data until the rule is promulgated.
GAO-15-579, Jul 7, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
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.
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.
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.
GAO-15-432, Jun 17, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, GAO requested information on the status of the recommendation. We will update the recommendation's status when information is received from OMB.
GAO-15-368, Apr 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In comments printed in the April 2015 final report, HHS concurred with the recommendation and stated that it would review current links to guidance documents and explore ways to enhance their visibility and usability. As of June 2020, GAO is working with HHS officials to obtain additional updates and documentation regarding the department's implementation of this recommendation.
GAO-15-356, Mar 18, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, Congress has not acted on this matter.
GAO-15-113, Dec 18, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation. The Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016 enacted in December 2016 included a requirement for HHS to develop a strategy for conducting ongoing evaluations of programs related to mental illness--including serious mental illness--and substance use disorders. HHS has said that it is in the process of preparing a report that identifies key programs and activities across the department, as well as summarizes data on those programs and develops criteria for use in prioritizing programs for evaluation. However, as of June 2019, HHS has not indicated that this report is complete or provided a copy to GAO. We will continue to monitor HHS's efforts in this regard and look for documentation of HHS plans for future evaluations of programs for individuals with serious mental illness.
GAO-15-52, Nov 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-8678
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.
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.
GAO-15-83, Oct 31, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 8 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: No executive action has been taken. As of October 2020, OMB had not taken action to include tax expenditures in the federal program inventory, as GAO recommended in October 2014. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 requires OMB to publish a list of all federal programs on a central, government-wide website. The federal program inventory is the primary tool for agencies to identify programs that contribute to their goals, according to OMB's guidance. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In June 2019 and July 2020, OMB issued guidance (Circular No. A-11) that states that beginning with the 2021 budget cycle, agencies' program activities will be used for the inventory's program-level reporting requirements. According to OMB, this will allow OMB and agencies to present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements nor the actions GAO recommended including designating tax expenditures as a program type. By including tax expenditures in the inventory, OMB could help ensure that agencies are properly identifying the contributions of tax expenditures to the achievement of their goals.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: No executive action has been taken. As of October 2020, OMB had not taken action to include tax expenditures in the federal program inventory, as GAO recommended in October 2014. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 requires OMB to publish a list of all federal programs on a central, government-wide website. The federal program inventory is the primary tool for agencies to identify programs that contribute to their goals, according to OMB's guidance. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In June 2019 and July 2020, OMB issued guidance (Circular No. A-11) that states that beginning with the 2021 budget cycle, agencies' program activities will be used for the inventory's program-level reporting requirements. According to OMB, this will allow OMB and agencies to present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements nor the actions GAO recommended including designating tax expenditures as a program type. By including tax expenditures in the inventory, OMB could help ensure that agencies are properly identifying the contributions of tax expenditures to the achievement of their goals.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not taken any actions in response to our recommendations related to the federal program inventory. Although OMB published an initial inventory covering the programs of 24 federal agencies in May 2013, OMB decided to postpone further development of the inventory in order to coordinate with the implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for doing so. OMB's guidance 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 present program-level spending data, by leveraging what is reported on USASpending.gov as required by the DATA Act. However, OMB's guidance does not cover other inventory information reporting requirements, nor the actions we recommended. We will continue to monitor progress.
GAO-15-28, Oct 29, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, a FEMA official stated that FEMA intends to implement the recommendation in full eventually, but it is unlikely that it will happen as a cohesive effort in 2020, given other ongoing flood insurance reforms. As of August 2020, the status of this recommendation remains unchanged.
GAO-15-79, Oct 17, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-2717
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the other new categories of paid leave, and (2) the proper recording and reporting of these types of paid leave. In July 2017, OPM proposed new rules to regulate paid administrative leave, but has not finalized all these rules. In April 2018, OPM issued final regulations for "weather and safety leave" and announced that it would issue separate final regulations for "administrative leave," "investigative leave," and "notice leave" at a later date. In July 2019, OPM officials told us that they have not finalized the remaining regulations due to legal and practical concerns related to employees serving overseas. For example, the proposed rules could conflict with overseas personnel observing local holidays for security, diplomatic, and practical reasons. OPM also announced that it is reconvening its interagency working group for dismissal and closure procedures to update its "DC Dismissal and Closure Procedures" guidance to reflect the new "weather and safety leave" procedures. In addition, in response to our recommendation, in May 2015, OPM issued a fact sheet on administrative leave, which discusses the appropriate use of an agency's administrative leave authority, including a definition of administrative leave as well as applicable government-wide, individual agency, and emergency policies on the use of administrative leave. However, this fact sheet will need to be revised to reflect the newly issued regulations for "weather and safety leave" in addition to the regulations for the other categories of paid leave when they are in effect. Once all regulations are finalized, the proposed rules, along with updated fact sheet guidance, should help agencies and federal employees appropriately use, record, and report administrative leave. We will be contacting OPM to receive an update on the status of this recommendation once all the regulations are finalized and the fact sheet guidance is revised.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the other new categories of paid leave, and (2) the proper recording and reporting of these types of paid leave. In July 2017, OPM proposed new rules to regulate paid administrative leave, but has not finalized all these rules. In April 2018, OPM issued final regulations for "weather and safety leave" and announced that it would issue separate final regulations for "administrative leave," "investigative leave," and "notice leave" at a later date. To accompany the final regulations for "weather and safety leave," OPM issued two new data standards for agencies to report Paid Holiday Time Off and Weather and Safety Leave Hours Used that became effective in May 2018. Also, in November 2018, OPM released an update to its "DC Dismissal and Closure Procedures" guidance to reflect the new "weather and safety leave" procedures. Once all regulations are finalized, the proposed rules, along with updated guidance to payroll providers for reporting paid administrative leave and the new leave categories, should help agencies report comparable and reliable data to EHRI. We will be contacting OPM to receive an update on the status of this recommendation once the regulations are finalized and the guidance is revised.
GAO-14-648, Sep 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9627
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest information on DHS headquarters consolidation efforts when it is provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading capital planning practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150), enacted on April 29, 2016, mirrors GAO recommendations in this area. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS's headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. We will review the latest information on DHS's headquarters consolidation efforts when it is provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of these recommendations at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading practices for capital planning and cost and schedule estimation is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes updated cost and schedule estimates for the consolidation project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest DHS headquarters consolidation cost and schedule estimates when they are provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading cost and schedule estimation practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes updated cost and schedule estimates for the consolidation project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest DHS headquarters consolidation cost and schedule estimates when they are provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading cost and schedule estimation practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of March 2019, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes: a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region; an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project; and updated cost and schedule estimates for the project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. A comprehensive report to Congress on DHS headquarters consolidation, along with reliable project cost and schedule estimates, could inform Congress's funding decisions.
GAO-14-714, Sep 11, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-6806
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.
GAO-14-677, Jul 31, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-2757
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In January 2020, OPM told us that it continues to concur with GAO's recommendation, however, in order to pursue examining such changes, OPM would need to be appropriately resourced. OPM reported that during 2019, it began studies to identify challenges agencies may experience with implementing OPM-issued classification standards. OPM believe this information, in addition to other prior studies and lessons learned, would help inform the examination going forward at a point in time OPM is resourced to do so. OPM reported it has continued to review and update individual series, despite broader efforts to evaluate the GS system as a whole. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM still needs to work in conjunction with key stakeholders such as OMB and unions; complete its review of studies and lessons learned; and if warranted, develop a legislative proposal to make the GS system's design and implementation more consistent with the attributes of a modern, effective classification system.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, OPM reported that it is active in monitoring oversight of classification policy and in issuing classification appeals decisions. However, OPM has experienced staff turnover in the past several months, resulting in the need for key subject matter experts to reconsider the actions proposed in this recommendation. OPM plans to provide GAO with an additional status update at the end of 2018. We will continue to monitor the steps OPM is taking to address this recommendation. GAO reached out to the agency in November 2019 and January 2020 and have yet to receive an update. GAO will continue to monitor the progress.
GAO-14-543, Jun 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Over the past few years, Treasury has made progress by (1) improving the accounting for and reporting of General Fund transactions and balances, (2) working to resolve significant differences between the General Fund and federal entity trading partners, and (3) including differences involving General Fund activity and balances in the quarterly scorecard process. However, significant differences between the General Fund and federal entity trading partners existed as of the end of fiscal year 2019. Also, Treasury continues to work on obtaining audit assurance on the activity and balances. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury did not perform corrective actions in FY 2019 to address this recommendation. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-14-413, May 22, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2018, the Department of Commerce reported that training will be concurrent with the implementation of the new inventory. It estimates the completion of this to be June 30, 2019. In October 2017, the department reported that they were reaching out to another federal agency to learn about the software license management training they offer to incorporate lessons learned into the Commerce's future training plans. However, as of November 2019, the department has not provided an update on these efforts. GAO will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2018, the Department of Transportation stated that it has developed a policy addressing components of centralized management and management of software licenses through the entire life cycle. However, Transportation's Order 1351.21 was issued in June 2009 and has not been updated since our report was issued to include the weaknesses we identified. Specifically, the order identifies the roles and responsibility, and central oversight authority for managing enterprise license agreements and does not specify policy on establishing goals and objectives of the software license management program and considering the software license management life-cycle phases to implement effect decision making and incorporate existing standards, processes, and metrics. We will follow up with the department to obtain evidence of the department-wide implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2018, the Environment Protection Agency reported that it is currently taking steps to develop a comprehensive policy that will address a centralized management program of licenses, an analysis to inform decision making, education and training goals and overall management throughout the lifecycle. In addition, The Agency stated that it is still leveraging the efforts of the Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation project as well as its Office of Acquisition Management's consolidation of its Microsoft suite. We will follow up with the agency to obtain supporting documents and continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2018, the Environment Protection Agency reported that it is currently taking steps to develop a comprehensive policy that will address a centralized management program of licenses. In addition, the agency stated that it is still leveraging the efforts of the Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation project as well as leveraging its Office of Acquisition Management's consolidation of enterprise licenses. We will follow up with the agency to obtain supporting documents and continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2019, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reported that the agency's IT asset management program requires training and communication, as appropriate for all key personnel. The agency also reported that on September 19, 2018, personnel associated with software asset management attended relevant training and will also participate in software training is currently being developed by the Office of Management and Budget, the Federal Acquisition Institute and the Defense Acquisition University. We will follow up with the agency to obtain supporting documents and continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation and in September 2015, reported that it had developed a guide to capture enterprise architecture lifecycle activities including software licensing management, acquisition, and requirements during several points of the project lifecycle. In April 2018, the office reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation, but expect substantive updates later this year. We will continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with this recommendation and in September 2015 reported that it is finalizing a revised Life Cycle Management draft policy which will use stage gate reviews to evaluate the progress of projects including software licenses throughout the agency. According to OPM, once the new policy is approved, OPM subject matter experts will review project documentation during stage gates reviews to make written recommendations on whether projects should continue. OPM's Investment Review Board will then review that recommendation and other procurement documentation to make a final recommendation to the OPM Director. In April 2018, OPM reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation, but expect substantive updates later this year. We plan to continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with this recommendation and in September 2015 OPM reported that it acquired an enterprise architecture repository tool and is collecting information on its software applications. OPM also reported that it is assembling and performing quality reviews on hardware and software lists currently maintained in spreadsheets, in its enterprise architecture systems database, and Remedy database in order to consolidate the entire hardware and software asset inventory. In April 2018, OPM reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation, but expect substantive updates later this year. We will continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with this recommendation and in September 2015 OPM reported that it acquired an enterprise architecture repository tool and is collecting information on its software applications. In April 2018, OPM reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation. We will continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with our recommendations and noted actions the agency plans to take. In April 2018, OPM reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation. We will continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with our recommendations and noted actions the agency plans to take. In April 2018, OPM reported they have no changes to the status of this recommendation. We will continue to monitor its progress in implementing this recommendation.
GAO-14-274, May 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9345
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: On December 9, 2013, OSHA issued a Request for Information seeking, among other things, comments on potential revisions to its Process Safety Management standard and its Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard. The Request for Information specifically invited comments on safe work practices for storing, handling, and managing ammonium nitrate and on regulatory requirements to improve its approach to preventing the hazards associated with ammonium nitrate. As of July 2017, OSHA reports it has completed a Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Review Act panel to gather feedback from small businesses on updating its Process Safety Management (PSM) regulation. During the panel, the agency discussed the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of chemicals covered by PSM and collected comments. As of June 2018, the PSM rulemaking is on the regulatory agenda under Long Term Action. According to OSHA officials, the agency will continue to collect comments on the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of highly hazardous chemicals covered by the PSM regulations as dictated by the rulemaking process. We will close this recommendation when OSHA decides what action to take as a result of the rulemaking process.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2017, EPA issued a final rule to modify its Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations. The agency decided not to propose any revisions to the list of regulated substances and therefore, did not address ammonium nitrate in the revised regulations.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: OSHA previously (December 3, 2014) issued guidance to Regional Administrators to assist OSHA officials in enforcing the ammonium nitrate storage requirements in the Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard. In addition, on December 9, 2013, OSHA issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking, among other things, comments on potential revisions to the Explosives and Blasting Agents Standard, which includes ammonium nitrate storage requirements. According to OSHA officials, the agency discussed the option of adding ammonium nitrate to the list of chemicals covered by the Process Safety Management (PSM) regulations and collected comments. As of June 2018, the PSM rulemaking is on the regulatory agenda under Long-Term Action. We will close this recommendation when the agency decides what action to take as a result of the rulemaking process.
GAO-14-323, May 5, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, we are not aware of any legislation being enacted to address this matter for congressional consideration.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, BIA and EPA had selected a cleanup option for Tuba City Dump, but BIA had not created schedule or cost estimates for the cleanup action. BIA stated it anticipated completing the cleanup design, which will include cost and schedule estimates, by September 2022. GAO will assess BIA's actions once they are complete.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, BIA and EPA had selected a cleanup option for Tuba City Dump, but BIA had not initiated the acquisition planning process for the future cleanup contract. BIA stated it anticipated completing the cleanup design work, including the acquisition package, by September 2022. GAO will assess BIA's actions once they are complete.
GAO-14-288, Mar 31, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the Department of Agriculture has not taken action to implement this recommendation.
GAO-14-44, Jan 13, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-6244
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.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Although department officials have stated that they are taking actions to address this recommendation, as of August 2020, we have not yet received information to validate agency actions. Subsequent to the agency sending documentation, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Although department officials have stated that they are taking actions to address this recommendation, as of August 2020, we have not yet received information to validate agency actions. Subsequent to the agency sending documentation, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Although department officials have stated that they are taking actions to address this recommendation, as of August 2020, we have not yet received information to validate agency actions. Subsequent to the agency sending documentation, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred
GAO-14-108, Dec 9, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-4841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In providing comments on this report, OMB generally concurred with this recommendation. The FAR Council members issued a timetable in Spring 2020 for the proposed regulatory changes to address the use of reverse auctions in response to GAO's recommendations and 2015 guidance released by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). The notice of proposed rulemaking was planned for August 2020. As of August 10, 2020, the notice of proposed rulemaking had not been published. OMB officials did not provide a revised date when they planned to publish the notice.
GAO-14-58, Nov 26, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-2623
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: To address the recommendation, OMB should issue guidance on internal control for disaster relief funding, including criteria for identifying additional risks and mitigating controls related to the funding and a requirement to link these incremental risks to ongoing efforts to address known internal control risks. On July 15, 2016, OMB issued the revised Circular No. A-123, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control. The Circular requires agencies to implement enterprise risk management, which includes the development of a risk profile that analyzes the risks faced in achieving strategic objectives and identifies options for addressing them. In April 2017, OMB staff stated that they believe that the implementation of enterprise risk management through Circular No. A-123 satisfies the intent our recommendation. Because the responsibility for implementing enterprise risk management lies with agency management, Circular No. A-123 does not include specific guidance for identifying risks related to disaster funding. Further discussion and documentation to support OMB's position that the revised Circular addresses our recommendation will be necessary. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, Sec. 21208(c) requires OMB to issue standard guidance for Federal agencies to use in designing internal control plans for disaster relief funding in order to proactively prepare for oversight of future disaster relief funds. The Act states this guidance shall leverage existing internal control review processes and shall include, at a minimum, (1) robust criteria for identifying and documenting incremental risks and mitigating controls related to the funding, and (2) guidance for documenting the linkage between the incremental risks related to disaster funding and efforts to address known internal control risks. GAO reviewed OMB's actions to implement the law. On June 28, 2019, GAO, 2017 Disaster Relief Oversight: Strategy Needed to Ensure Agencies' Internal Control Plans Provide Sufficient Information, GAO-19-479 (Washington, D.C.: Jun 28, 2019) reported the 2013 recommendation remains open and that we plan to continue monitoring OMB's progress in implementing this priority recommendation. Further, the report stated that OMB did not have an effective strategy to ensure that agencies timely submitted internal control plans; and OMB's Memorandum M-18-14, Implementation of Internal Controls and Grant Expenditures for the Disaster-Related Appropriations lacked specific instructions to agencies on what to include in their internal control plans. As such, a new recommendation was warranted. As of February 2020, OMB has not provided any new status updates for this recommendation.
GAO-14-15, Nov 6, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS officials had previously indicated that DHS's Office of Infrastructure Protection (IP) and Office of Cyber and Infrastructure Analysis (OCIA) have discussed an update of the GPS risk assessment. Additionally, information from DHS shows that DHS has continued other efforts to collect potentially relevant threat, vulnerability, and consequence data for various GPS equipment in use. For example, according to DHS officials, DHS has conducted visits to major maritime, finance, wireless communications, and electricity firms to gauge their understanding of GPS vulnerabilities and of technology- and strategy-based efforts to improve GPS resilience, and DHS documentation shows that DHS has held events to test GPS receivers as part of assessing vulnerabilities. In August 2020, DHS officials provided GAO with additional information regarding their progress on implementing the recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation after we review the additional information from DHS.
GAO-14-65, Nov 6, 2013
Phone: (202)512-9286
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2019, OMB had taken steps to improve transparency of and accountability for PortfolioStat, as GAO recommended in November 2013. In October 2015, the agency started displaying actual data consolidation savings data on the federal information technology (IT) dashboard. As of April 2018, however, OMB was not requiring that agencies report planned PortfolioStat cost savings stating this was as a result of agency feedback, and streamlining of data collection efforts based upon the decision that reporting on realized cost savings is more valuable than reporting on planned or projected cost savings.In March 2019, OMB stated that it was "exploring better approaches to cost savings as reported by agencies to the IT Dashboard." We are following up with OMB to determine whether these approaches include publicly disclosing planned and actual data consolidation efforts and related cost savings by agency.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, the Commerce described its process for updating its IT asset inventory as part of the budget formulation process and provided a mapping of investments to its enterprise architecture as evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. However, the department did not provide any policies and procedures supporting the process it described to us. In addition, it did not provide any evidence of controls to ensure that all investments had been captured in the enterprise architecture. In January 2020, the department told us that its Office of the Chief Information Officer had new leadership and as a result the department was expected to make significant progress in addressing the recommendation this year.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, Commerce officials told GAO about actions taken that they believed addressed the recommendation and provided supporting documentation. Specifically, they stated that they send out an annual data call for bureaus to provide their IT asset inventory as part of the budget submission process. They stated they also perform department-level validation of the bureaus' inventories and aggregate them into a single department inventory. As evidence, they provided a data call memo with supporting instructions and a template for bureaus to establish an IT asset inventory. They also provided examples of three bureau inventories received in response to data calls. In addition, they provided the final aggregated inventory (for fiscal year 2017) and department-level validation of bureau submissions. However, the department did not provide any policies or procedures documenting the process they described. In addition, we could not determine whether the creation of the department-wide inventory was a one-time effort or a recurring activity. In January 2020, the department told us that its Office of the Chief Information Officer had new leadership and as a result the department was expected to make significant progress in addressing the recommendation this year.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense partially concurred with the recommendation and stated that it had efforts underway to further define the department's commodity IT baseline. In January 2019, our contact from the Office of the Chief Information Officer told us that the department had recently established an IT Purchase Request (ITPR) process for controlling spending that had a built-in IT asset inventory process that would address the recommendation. In August 2019, we received documentation on the ITPR process as part of an ongoing engagement. We are reviewing the documentation to determine whether it is sufficient to close the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense did not concur with the recommendation, stating that the commodity IT construct implemented by OMB with PortfolioStat did not work with the department's federated management process. However, the department agreed that a strategy, consistent with the intent of achieving better buying power and control of commodity IT items, should be developed and implemented within the department using existing authorities and stated that it was in the process of implementing this strategy. In January 2019, the Office of the Chief Information Officer's Director for Performance Management stated that while the CIO did not have the authority to consolidate commodity IT spending, the department had taken actions he believed addressed the intent of the recommendation to gain visibility into IT spending. Specifically, he stated that the department established a policy to leverage its buying power for commodity IT purchases (for example for software licenses). In addition, the department recently established an IT Purchase Request (ITPR) process for controlling IT spending. In August 2019, we received documentation related to those actions as part of an ongoing engagement. We are reviewing the documentation to determine whether it is sufficient to close the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The department of Defense concurred with the recommendation and stated that it already reported data center consolidation savings and would continue to realize savings from the Enterprise Software Initiative, other strategic sourcing efforts and the implementation of the General Fund Enterprise Business System initiatives. Through other engagements, in August 2016, we had collected support for data center consolidation and Enterprise Software Initiative savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015. In January 2019, the Office of the Chief Information Officer's Director for Performance Management told us that the department had not been tracking savings generated by other commodity IT initiatives due to the difficulty in doing so, however, it was tracking an "other" category of savings through OMB's integrated data collection instrument (IDC) process which he believed the intent of our recommendation. He noted that the "other" category tracks savings from various OMB IT reform initiatives. Mr. Johnson said he had sent a recent IDC report along with supporting documentation to GAO to address a recommendation made in GAO-15-296. We are reviewing the documentation to determine whether it is sufficient to close the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation and stated that, in the future, USACE would fully describe the four action plan elements when reporting to OMB. In August 2016, the department reported that it had addressed and closed the recommendation in February 2015 and cited policies, procedures, and other supporting documentation as evidence. However, the department did not provide the supporting documentation. In April 2018, the department provided several documents as evidence of its efforts to address this recommendation, including an order outlining the capital planning investment management process for the fiscal year 2017. We determined that the documents did not support the department's claims. In January 2019, the department told us it would provide an update on the status of actions to address the recommendation. As of August 2019, the department had not yet provided any update.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense partially concurred with the recommendation and stated that it had efforts underway to further define the department's commodity IT baseline. In August 2016, the department reported that it had addressed and closed the recommendation in October 2014 and described several actions that it believed contributed to addressing the recommendation, including, continued improvements to data center reporting, and greater understanding of IT infrastructure costs. However, the department did not provide any documentation to support its claims. In January 2019, the department told us it would provide an update on the status of actions to address the recommendation. As of August 2019, the department had not yet provided any update.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2016, we reported that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Registry of Environmental Protection Agency Applications, Models and Databases (READ) system had a complete inventory of enterprise IT and business systems-two of three categories of IT assets that make up a commodity IT baseline-and that the agency had processes in place to regularly update this inventory to ensure its completeness (see GAO-16-511). We have been following up with EPA to obtain its inventory of IT infrastructure systems-the third commodity IT category--and determine the agency's process to ensure the completeness of this inventory. In a December 2019 update, EPA told us that it was working on a response to the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported making progress in addressing the three action plan elements through implementation of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) and efforts to assess applications in its inventory. In June 2019, the agency provided supporting documentation. We are reviewing the documentation to determine whether it fully addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: Between July and December 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that it had implemented a managed print service contract for headquarters in 2014 and was preparing to award a new contract to also cover its regions. The agency also reported that it plans to use one of the government-wide contracts identified in OMB's policy on improving the acquisition and management of common IT for its end user computing needs. EPA, however, did not provide documentation supporting these efforts. In a December 2019 update, EPA told us that it was working on a response to the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the department stated that its budget formulation process ensures that all investments are included in its enterprise architecture (EA). Specifically, the department stated that, as part of the budget formulation process, the EA group reviews investments and aligns them to the business areas within the EA framework by assigning them business reference model codes. To support its claims, in November 2019, the department provided a list of investments showing their alignment with the business reference model codes for the fiscal year 2021 budget formulation process. However, the department did not provide evidence of the EA group's review process. As of January 2020, we were following up with the department to obtain this evidence.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2018, NASA reported that it was making revisions to its enterprise architecture policy that would assist with ensuring that 100 percent of the agency's information technology investments are in the enterprise architecture. In July and December 2018, the agency provided updates on its efforts along with supporting documentation, though not enough to fully address the recommendation. In July 2019, the agency stated it also had efforts underway to centralize IT governance under the Chief Information Officer and this would contribute to reflect all investments in the enterprise architecture. The agency stated it would continue to update us on the status of its efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, OPM stated that it was developing a service catalog with cost information and allocation components which together with the agency's software inventory would be used for cost avoidance moving forward. However, OPM did not provide supporting documentation. In addition, it was not clear whether the service catalog and software inventory would together include enterprise IT, IT infrastructure, and business systems, the three categories of IT assets that comprise a commodity IT baseline. We will continue to monitor OPM's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2018, OPM provided evidence that it had addressed the action plan element regarding the migration of two commodity IT areas to shared services. Specifically, OPM provided an August 2016 interagency agreement showing plans to migrate its financial management system to a shared service and a May 2018 interagency agreement showing plans to migrate its human resources and time and attendance system to a shared service. However, the interagency agreements were not signed. Regarding the action plan element to target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation, OPM stated did that it had targeted laptops and mobile phones for consolidation. In addition, OPM did not provide any evidence of reporting to OMB for either action plan element. In February 2020, OPM stated that, in addition to entering into an interagency agreement for its financial management system and consolidating the procurement of agency-wide laptops and cellphones using an enterprise wide contract, it was also working to close two of its five major data centers to consolidate to three. OPM said that it was gathering the documentation to support its claims.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, OPM stated that its IT help desk function had become a shared service starting in October 2019. However, OPM did not provide supporting documentation. In addition, OPM stated it did not have any updates on the IT asset inventory. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2014, the Department of the Treasury reported that it did not plan to consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO. Specifically, the department stated that commodity IT investment decisions were consolidated under the Treasury Technology Investment Review Board which is co-chaired by the agency CIO and Assistant Secretary for Management; and that it did not see the benefit of combining the budget authorities of the various bureau infrastructure investments. In regards to establishing criteria to identify wasteful, low-value, and duplicative investments, in September 2014, the department stated that the Treasury Technology Investment Review Board and Technology Advisory Working Group had established an approach that considers risk, value and cost in reviewing investment requests to identify wasteful, low-value, and duplicative investments. As of May 2019, we were reviewing documentation we received from the department in September 2018 to determine whether the recommendation has been fully addressed.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2014, the Department of the Treasury described several examples of processes it had established to identify opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value or wasteful investments, including annual reviews of each major IT investment and monthly portfolio reviews. As of May 2019, we were reviewing updated information we received in September 2018 to determine whether the recommendation has been fully addressed.
GAO-13-663, Sep 25, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, Congress has not taken action on this matter.
GAO-13-621, Jul 18, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-8678
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SEC management and the union agreed in November 2018 to implement a new performance management system and a new incentive bonus program in 2020. According to SEC officials, SEC plans to work with OPM to validate the new performance management system by conducting focus groups with staff at the midpoint of the 2020 appraisal period and surveying staff on the new system at the conclusion of the 2020 appraisal period. These plans are consistent with our 2013 recommendation that SEC should conduct periodic validations of its performance management system. In August 2020, SEC reported that it began implementation of the new 2-tier performance management program and will complete the annual rating cycle in December 2020, with feedback and appraisal closeout activities occurring in early calendar year 2021. According to SEC, OPM will assess the new program after calendar year 2020 performance cycle activities are completed. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress in validating the new performance management system.
GAO-13-174, Apr 18, 2013
Phone: (202)512-3236
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. According to information provided by OMB and PIC staff in June 2015, although OMB revised its guidance as we recommended, it did not work with the PIC to test implementation of these provisions. Instead, they told us that both PIC and OMB staff ensure agencies are implementing these provisions of their guidance when reviewing agency priority goal (APG) quarterly update submissions. However, our analyses of agencies' APG updates since that time has continued to find that implementation of these provisions is mixed. We will continue to monitor progress.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken limited actions to address this recommendation. In July 2017, OMB staff said that they planned on highlighting the requirement for congressional consultation as they updated the 2018-2019 APGs, which were first published in February 2018 and were updated quarterly. However, our periodic analyses of Performance.gov showed that neither the updated version of the site, nor the reporting templates for individual APGs, contained a space for providing a description of input from Congress. In its July 2020 guidance, OMB directed agencies to highlight congressional input, if such input was relevant to setting a specific goal, in the APG overview section of the template. We will continue to monitor progress.
Phone: (202) 512-7968
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS has made progress in improving its online services strategy, as we recommended, but as of February 2020, IRS has not yet completed its efforts. IRS's strategy has evolved from a singular focus on on-line services to a more comprehensive strategy of taxpayer interaction through all service channels. In February 2016, IRS announced an agency-wide Future State Initiative, which in part, aims to deliver service improvements across different taxpayer interactions such as individual online accounts assistance, exams, and collections. In July 2016, the official responsible for IRS's on-line office reported that the agency is working towards developing an overall customer service satisfaction goal as part of the IRS Future State Initiative. The official said that this goal is broadly meant to cover various ways the public interacts with IRS, including web, phone, correspondence and walk in. In November 2016, IRS provided documentation on the goals of the Future State Initiative. However, this documentation does not include specific numerical targets for the performance measures that IRS expects to achieve for each goal or a timeline to achieve those goals. IRS officials stated they will incorporate a customer service satisfaction goal in its upcoming strategic plan. IRS released the Fiscal Year 2018-2022 Strategic Plan, however a numerical or other measureable goal to improve taxpayer satisfaction with the website was not included in it. We are currently following up with IRS to determine their next steps.
GAO-13-228, Feb 26, 2013
Phone: (202)512-3236
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) have taken little action to address this recommendation. In August 2017, PIC staff told us that they were working to identify examples where agencies had included representatives from outside organizations in their performance reviews, and would then disseminate promising practices based on those experiences. However, according to information shared by OMB and PIC staff in March 2019, they had not taken any additional action, nor had they identified or shared any such practices. OMB staff emphasized that while some agencies found it is useful to engage external stakeholders in their reviews, agencies generally view them as internal management meetings. OMB's July 2020 guidance continues to direct agencies to include, as appropriate, relevant personnel from outside the agency that contribute to the accomplishment of Agency Priority Goals or other priorities. However, supplementing this guidance with insights into how to do this well could help ensure that agencies can effectively bring together key players to achieve common goals. We will continue to monitor the status of actions taken to address this recommendation.
GAO-13-209, Feb 13, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD took several actions in 2014 to communicate to DOD's nonmedical research organizations the importance of coordination with the Joint Program Committee for Combat Casualty Care. Specifically, DOD chartered the Armed Services Biomedical Research Evaluation and Management Community of Interest to include both medical and non-medical researchers and to improve coordination, collaboration, and cooperation. DOD also appointed senior leaders to work in both this community of interest and in other DOD research communities of interest, to improve coordination. Furthermore, DOD conducted joint research meetings to share research data across the medical and non-medical communities. However, DOD had not indicated a requirement for this coordination to occur early in the research process, as included in GAO's recommendation. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided additional information or documentation to address this recommendation.
GAO-13-217, Jan 29, 2013
Phone: (202)512-4347
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SBA concurred with our recommendations. In response to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (SBJA) requirement that a total of 30 export finance specialists be hired nationwide by September 2012, SBA noted resource constraints and filled only 19 positions at that time. In 2016, SBA reported progress toward the SBJA requirement despite agency staffing limitations and staffed a total of 21 or 70% of the 30 required export finance specialist (EFS) positions. SBA officials also reported that they had hired staff to replace retirements or other staff departures, but determined that because of finite funding resources it would not be feasible to hire additional OIT staff. They instead took steps to mitigate the shortfall by engaging other field office staff to more proactively market its international trade programs to small businesses. In particular, in 2017, as part a result of the new Administrations' Agency Reform plan, SBA undertook a Field Alignment Project. Specific to OIT, this project was intended to better leverage certain District office field staff such that they would increase outreach efforts to promote exports as required by the SBJA and in response to GAO's recommendations. This was done by assigning district staff new specific output goals intended to increase export promotion activities. In January 2020, OIT reported hiring four additional export finance specialists, bringing the total hired to 25. OIT also reported establishing a strategy for future hires to be assigned to existing Export Assistance Centers, and requesting fiscal year 2021 funding to hire individuals to fill the remaining five positions. While these steps partially mitigate the shortfall and are in the spirit of the SBJA requirement and GAO's recommendations, as of January 2020 SBA has not yet achieved the 30 export finance specialists required by the SBJA.
GAO-13-60, Dec 13, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of September 2019, DoD has addressed some but not all aspects of this recommendation. According to DoD officials, the Spouse Education and Career Opportunities (SECO) programs have mechanisms for operating across agency boundaries by fostering open lines of communication and other collaborative practices. Specifically, according to DoD officials, these mechanisms provide SECO program and military service officials, who operate employment assistance programs at military installations, full knowledge of the relevant resources and activities focused on military spouse employment. For example, SECO provides quarterly webinars to military service employment program officials; and, leaders at SECO and installations have bi-monthly calls to provide updates on their respective initiatives. However, SECO has not fully developed guidance describing its overall strategy and how its various programs should coordinate to help military spouses obtain employment, which could include clarifying the roles and responsibilities of SECO and the military service programs. Our prior work has found that such documentation can help improve coordination by clarifying who does what in a partnership. Although DoD had intended to develop a separate policy (or DoD Instruction) for spouse employment, agency officials said they abandoned this effort. DoD plans to issue new guidance, but as of September 2019, DoD has not provided an update on this guidance or other examples of documentation that outline roles and responsibilities. Until DoD develops guidance, these programs face increased risk for poor coordination and program overlap.
GAO-13-99, Nov 19, 2012
Phone: (202)512-6304
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: Congress had taken a number of actions that affect the NTIS fee-based model for disseminating technical information. Specifically, for the past 5 fiscal years and in the current Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, NTIS is prohibited from charging customers for reports generated by legislative branch offices unless the agency tells the customer how an electronic copy of the report can be accessed or downloaded for free online. The act further states that, if a customer still requires such a report from NTIS, the agency should not charge more than what is needed to recover the cost of processing, reproducing, and delivering the document requested. It remains to be seen whether these requirements will be continued under the yet to be introduced House and Senate bills making appropriations for the Department of Commerce (Commerce) for fiscal year 2021. Congress again has the opportunity to consider legislation that would ensure the assessment of the appropriateness or viability of NTIS functions.
GAO-12-791, Sep 26, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. Since we reported in 2012 that the department had established metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes but not a method for measuring the metrics, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan in April 2018. This plan included outcome metrics; however, the department had not documented a method for measuring the metrics. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy, by September 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided documentation demonstrating that it had established metrics and a method for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Army had taken steps to address this recommendation, but much more remains to be done. Specifically, in December 2013, the department developed its Army Business Management Strategy, which included metrics to measure the number of business systems retired over five years and cost savings and avoidance through use of the Army's business enterprise architecture. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it had documented the steps to measure the metrics. In January 2020, the department's chief architect stated that the department was in the process of establishing a baseline architecture. We will continue to monitor the Army's efforts to establish an architecture and an approach for measuring architecture outcomes in accordance with our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Energy demonstrated that it had taken steps to implement the recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the department developed a draft plan to measure business architecture performance. We will monitor the department's efforts to finalize and implement its plan.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was continuing to evaluate processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had established an approach for measuring the potential benefits in the plan. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not yet implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration had not implemented this recommendation. In August 2019, SBA developed an enterprise architecture program performance guide and value measurement plan. According to the plan, the agency plans to measure cost savings/avoidance and reduction of duplication. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has documented the steps to be followed to measure the outcomes. Specifically, it did not demonstrate that it had established a method to measure the cost savings/avoidance or the number of duplicate investments reduced.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has established a documented method and metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes.
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.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. In April 2018, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan; however, the department has not demonstrated that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting all strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish a documented approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy by September 2020, and report outcomes by December 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, it had not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2020, the Department of Energy had not implemented the recommendation. In May 2020, the department described steps it had taken to develop its enterprise architecture. For example, it said that the department had established a Technical Reference Model, which supports processes and criteria for selecting and reviewing software across the department's headquarters. The department said it used the reference model to identify software products that could be eliminated or consolidated to achieve cost savings. However, as of August 2020, the department had not provided documents demonstrating that it had measured and reported architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the status of the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was evaluating processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, the Department of Veterans Affairs stated that it plans to measure enterprise architecture performance by the end of March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had measured and reported outcomes attributed to its architecture. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration (SBA) had not implemented this recommendation. SBA's Office of the CIO stated that it achieved IT cost savings and avoidance as a result of IT infrastructure service and support reduction and data center optimization in fiscal years 2014 through the third quarter of fiscal year 2019. In a March 2020 memo to GAO, the Chief Information Officer explained that the agency's enterprise architecture team reviewed IT acquisition requests, which led to reducing duplicative IT investments and resulted in the cost savings and avoidance. However, the agency did not demonstrate that it had reliably measured the cost savings and avoidance. Specifically, it did not provide documentation demonstrating how it calculated most of the savings it reported.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services had not implemented this recommendation. Specifically, it had not demonstrated that it had measured architecture metrics that it had established in its April 2014 Enterprise Roadmap. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of December 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not fully addressed our recommendation. In March 2013, the office required agencies to submit annually an Enterprise Roadmap, which was to include an appendix on enterprise architecture outcomes. To prepare the appendix, the office provided agencies with a template to document architecture metrics and measurement methods. The template included examples of outcome metrics and a field where agencies were to document measurement methods. However, OMB did not provide details on the methods that agencies could use to measure architecture outcomes or require that agencies include the steps to be followed for measuring outcomes. In March 2019, OMB said that it was working with agencies to determine approaches for measuring and reporting outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture. However, as of December 2019, OMB had not demonstrated that it had fully addressed the recommendation. We will continue to follow up with OMB on its efforts to implement the recommendation.
GAO-12-878, Sep 16, 2012
Phone: (202)512-2717
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: On July 19, 2017, OPM officials provided a document that summarized efforts that are underway to address the recommendation. According to the document, proposed changes/recommendations to training elements and to the SF-182 were presented to the Chief Learning Officers Council at their monthly meeting on June 19, 2017. According to OPM, its ongoing connection with the CLO Council will include gathering information through focus groups in the Fall of 2017 on agencies' talent development processes, tools, and procedures. Questions on how an agency prioritizes training and tools used to do so will be included. OPM says it will use information gathered to develop criteria for ranking training. OPM provided a sample training summary it prepares for each agency. The summary contains a section on utilization of learning by source type and utilization of learning by delivery method. These sections also contain data that can be used when comparing the merits of different delivery mechanisms and determining future use. On June 11, 2020, OPM told us that program officials are gathering support for its implementation of the recommendation and would soon provide that information to GAO.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: On July 19, 2017 OPM provided a document that summarized efforts that are underway to address the recommendation. According to the document, OPM provided a refresher to the Chief Learning Officers Council on OPM's guidance on Reporting of Training Data. This included reviewing OPM's and agencies' responsibilities for the collection and reporting of data and reviewing the process of how agency data is transmitted to EHRI. Further, OPM says it highlighted the Guide to Human Resources Reporting as the source for the required format for reporting training data to EHRI and provided the Guide for Collection and Management of Training Information. Both guides are also located on OPM's website. OPM's training data report summaries encourage agencies to review their data, to check for submission errors and consistencies in reporting, and to validate that all training events are included. OPM reported that 3 CHCO agencies that did not submit any data for FY 14 submitted data for FY 15 and that EHRI is assisting agencies with data quality transmission and PII issues. On June 11, 2020, OPM told us that program officials are gathering support for its implementation of the recommendation and would soon provide that information to GAO.
GAO-12-886, Sep 11, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, Treasury staff said that steps continue to be taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. In June 2019, the Senate confirmed a new OFR Director. Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We will continue to monitor progress in implementing these steps.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council: Office of Financial Research
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019 Treasury staff said that steps are being taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway as staff from both entities meet on a weekly basis and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. The Senate confirmed a new OFR director in June 2019. In June 2017, Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We continue to monitor FSOC and OFR actions that would be responsive to clarifying responsibilities for monitoring threats to financial stability.
GAO-12-819, Aug 23, 2012
Phone: (202)512-4325
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: According to HUD, the department implemented improvements to its Integrated Disbursement and Information System in 2012, which were intended to upgrade HUD's ability to track Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) grantee progress in implementing activities and gather improved data with regard to performance. In addition, HUD completed an extensive CDBG data clean-up effort in response to a HUD Inspector General audit.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: According to HUD, the department implemented improvements to its Integrated Disbursement and Information System in 2012, which were intended to upgrade HUD's ability to track Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) grantee progress in implementing activities and gather improved data with regard to performance. In addition, HUD completed an extensive CDBG data clean-up effort in response to a HUD Inspector General audit.
GAO-12-296, Jun 28, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-8678
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.
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.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA has made progress on implementing this recommendation. In June 2019, VA deployed the first iteration of a redesigned VA loan electronic reporting interface (VALERI-R). According to VA, VALERI-R provides enhanced capability for VA lenders and servicers to report VA loan information electronically, including information on loan redefaults. VA said that while VALERI-R maintains data longitudinally (a feature critical to analyzing redefaults), the initial deployment of VALERI-R lacks the functionality to perform the analysis needed to satisfy GAO's recommendation. Since deploying VALERI-R, VA said it has exercised optional tasks on the VALERI-R contract to develop and enhance data and reports to provide the ability to conduct the analysis required. In December 2019, VA said it expects to deploy the enhanced functionality by June 30, 2020, and is targeting September 30, 2020, as the time frame for completing the analysis.
GAO-12-115, Dec 22, 2011
Phone: 202-512-3407
Agency: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: We requested an update from ONDCP on the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. As of August, 2018, we have not received a response. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: We requested an update from ONDCP on the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. As of August, 2018, we have not received a response. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: We requested an update from ONDCP on the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. As of August, 2018, we have not received a response. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-11-280, Apr 7, 2011
Phone: (202)512-7043
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. In November 2014, CMS officials reported that the agency's Survey and Certification Group was in the early stages of a planned multi-year review of all of its business processes, including those related to nursing home complaint investigations. Officials stated that, as part of that review, agency staff would seek to provide clarification on all aspects of the complaint process, including what it means to substantiate a complaint. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2014, CMS officials reported that the fiscal year 2014 protocol for assessment of state agency performance includes a new measure that tracks how soon after the completion of a complaint investigation a state agency uploads data from that investigation to CMS's complaint tracking system. However, the protocol does not call for assessment of the number of days by which state survey agencies miss the deadlines for some complaint investigations--a measure that we suggested could provide a more comprehensive picture of state agency performance. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed that CMS needed to take steps to strengthen and increase accountability of state survey agencies' management of nursing home complaints. In November 2014, CMS officials reported that while they believed the CMS State Operations Manual, which specifies procedures for addressing complaints, provides significant guidance regarding the information that state agencies should convey to complainants at the close of an investigation, they would review the guidance to identify any needed changes. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed that CMS needed to take steps to strengthen and increase accountability of state survey agencies' management of the nursing home complaints process and stated that CMS would provide clarification and guidance to states to ensure complaints were prioritized at the appropriate level. However, in CMS's fiscal year 2014 protocol for assessment of state agency performance, the prioritization standard still required only that complaints be assigned a priority level at or above the level assigned by CMS reviewers. We remain concerned that defining the standard this way may create an incentive for survey agencies to prioritize some complaints at a higher level than is warranted--which could increase workload and potentially jeopardize the timeliness of investigations that warrant the higher priority level. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-10-410, Apr 22, 2010
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2018, the CFTC and SEC Chairmen signed an updated version of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) originally signed in 2008. The new MOU created an updated framework for information sharing to make it easier for the two agencies to share information. A CFTC official noted that the MOU underscored two agencies' commitment to addressing harmonization efforts. In addition, CFTC officials identified examples of harmonization areas where CFTC and SEC have made some additional progress. This recommendation remains open until CFTC identifies steps taken to create a plan for assessing progress on working with SEC on remaining harmonization opportunities.
GAO-10-246, Feb 3, 2010
Phone: (202) 512-2649
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: On November 16, 2017, FDA published a notification of availability for the draft guidance "Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel: Guidance for Industry," with a request for comments on the draft guidance by May 15, 2018. FDA indicated that the draft guidance represents FDA's current thinking on strategies to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest in companies' GRAS determinations, including assessing potential GRAS panel members for conflicts of interest. As of July 2020, FDA had not yet finalized the guidance, so we are leaving the recommendation open.
GAO-06-347, Apr 14, 2006
Phone: 2025166906
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) concurred with this recommendation. Since the issuance of the GAO report, OMB has made several revisions to its OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix C "Requirements for Effective Measurement and Remediation of Improper Payments." The latest revision is dated June 26, 2018. The intent of OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix C, is to ensure that federal agencies focus on prevention and have the proper incentives to improve their improper payment rates. In August 2020, OMB provided us its improper payment guidance on sampling and estimation in place at the time of the GAO audit. Based on this documentation, we sent a follow-up request to OMB for additional information. We are currently waiting to hear back from OMB so we can continue with our review. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-04-45, Oct 30, 2003
Phone: (202)512-8815
including 5 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.