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 facilities"
GAO-20-722, Sep 29, 2020
Phone: (206) 287-4804
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-20-619, Aug 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In FERC's comments on a draft of our report, the Chairman of the Commission agreed with our findings and recommendations and stated that he has directed FERC staff to develop appropriate steps to implement the recommendations.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In the Department of Transportation's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and said that PHMSA is currently developing a proposed rule that would incorporate updated standards, as described in our report.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In the Department of Transportation's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and said that PHMSA has established a timeline for conducting a standards-specific review of LNG facility regulations every 3 to 5 years. We plan to follow-up on the status of the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that it conducts such reviews as part of its ongoing public rulemaking process. We plan to follow-up on the status of the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that the Coast Guard is in the process of updating its policy, "Standards Program For Marine Safety, Security, and Environmental Protection Programs," with timeframes for completing standards-specific reviews. The department estimated this would be completed in September 2021.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: In the Department of Homeland Security's comments on a draft of our report, the department concurred with our recommendation and stated that it is in the process of updating its Manpower Requirements Plan to include timeframes and milestones for completing manpower requirements analyses and determinations for positions and units. The Coast Guard anticipates promulgating the updated plan in March 2022.
GAO-20-451, Jun 24, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA concurred with the recommendation. In comments on a draft of the report, DOE stated that NPO plans to work with CNS on a plan for the remaining reinvestment funds, with an estimated completion date of December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA concurred, in principle, with the recommendation. In its comments on a draft of the report, NNSA stated that potential benefits of the cost savings program should be considered for future contracts, as applicable. NNSA stated that it believes this recommendation is closed with actions to address other recommendations. We disagree and continue to believe that NNSA should document an analysis of the cost savings program, including its cost effectiveness, to determine the exportability of the program to other contracts.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA concurred with the recommendation. In its comments on a draft of the report, NNSA stated that it plans to upload lessons learned into DOE's Corporate Lessons Learned Database so they can be considered by other sites by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA concurred with the recommendation. In its comments on a draft of the report, NNSA stated that it plans to evaluate whether to expand use of Annual Controlled Baselines to other sites by December 31, 2020.
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.
Phone: (202)512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2019, GSA indicated it will address this recommendation by updating and enhancing the asbestos module in IRIS to address the issues identified in our report. GSA intends to allocate available funding and complete the changes to IRIS by the end of fiscal year 2019. We will continue to follow-up with GSA about the status of this recommendation.
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.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: Shortly after the issuance of the report, VA notified GAO that it was in the process of working with the lnteragency Security Committee (ISC) to update its vulnerability assessment program, with a target completion date of January 2019. Despite multiple attempts, as of June 2020, VA has not provided any information on its progress in updating its program.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: Shortly after the issuance of the report, VA notified GAO that it had identified OS&LE as the internal entity responsible for conducting a complete review of VA's current risk management policies and processes for VA facilities and that it was reviewing an ISC-certified risk assessment tool for possible implementation consideration. Despite multiple attempts, as of June 2020, VA had not provided an update on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
GAO-18-206, Nov 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020 DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Air Force had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Navy had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Army had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review and update the processes and criteria governing host-nation cost-sharing negotiations to strengthen or incorporate resilience measures. Since each bilateral agreement is unique, these must be completed on a case-by-case basis. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated host-nation cost-sharing agreements, we will assess the extent to which they (or the processes and criteria governing them) address the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review guidance for establishing agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations, we will assess the extent to which they (or the guidance governing them) address the recommendation.
GAO-18-72, Oct 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued an updated Physical Security Policy and Procedures Handbook in January 2020, which includes a series of internal controls and physical security performance measures. We have reviewed the handbook and requested additional information from CBP to determine whether it meets ISC's Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has developed, initially tested, and deployed a risk assessment methodology that aligns with the Interagency Security Committee Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities. In August and September of 2019, FAA trained some staff on the new methodology, which is being integrated into the facility security reporting system. After resolving any software compatibility issues, completing all necessary testing and training, and issuing the associated security policy, FAA expects to fully implement the methodology by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) drafted an updated facility security policy and distributed it for comment in October 2019. It received over 300 comments that are currently being addressed. Once completed, the policy is to incorporate a methodology that fully aligns with the Interagency Security Committee Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities for assessing all undesirable events, considering all three factors of risk, and documenting all deviations from the standard countermeasures. FAA plans to publish the new policy to coincide with the implementation of its risk-assessment methodology by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) update of its facility security policy and its associated databases should help to improve the monitoring and use of physical security information to better assist with risk assessment decision-making. In February 2020, FAA officials said that its facility security reporting system is to be improved with new metrics and executive level reporting. Such improvements are to result in increased program oversight, risk awareness, and mitigation planning. These improvements are to be completed by December 31, 2020 to coincide with full implementation of the components of the risk management framework, such as the risk assessment methodology, personnel training, and policy publication.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture is drafting a revised physical-security regulation and manual that is to align with risk management processes, including a tracking and monitoring component. It expects to implement a revised process by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recognizes the need to develop and implement a database to track and monitor physical security assessment schedules across all of its components. As a result, USDA plans to request funding in the President's Budget for fiscal year 2021 to design and build such a database. If sufficient funding is secured and development efforts go as planned, the agency anticipates having the database operational by the end of 2021.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: National Gallery of Art
Status: Open
Comments: The National Gallery concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. In February 2019, the National Gallery approved the Office of Protection Services' 5-year strategic plan, which included goals for security. However, as of June 2020, work to establish performance measures was not yet complete. We will continue to monitor the National Gallery's progress in implementing this recommendation
GAO-17-136, Dec 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to NPS officials, the agency is currently working to address this recommendation and expects to complete it in August 2020. GAO will update the status of the recommendation as soon as possible thereafter.
GAO-16-516, Jun 23, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Prisons
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2017, BOP reported that it developed a revised Statement of Work (SOW) for use with its RRC contractors that requires the contractors to track and report to BOP on, among other things, the number of placements into and releases from RRCs and home confinement; revocations from RRCs or home confinement; and RRC and home confinement residents that have secured full, part-time, or temporary employment. In a March 2019 update, BOP stated that it awarded nine contracts under the 2017 SOW and plans to use the data required under the SOW to conduct annual performance appraisals for RRCs after each performance period and intends to use this information in the future to track outcomes of the programs (e.g., employment, housing, individualized goals of offender). In a May 2020 update, BOP stated that that it had just received the first quarter of data from many of its RRC providers and that it continues to work with the providers to refine the data to determine if it can be utilized to develop performance measures. BOP stated that it anticipates being able to provide an update on this phase of their effort in September 2020. While the collection of this data is an important step, to fully implement this recommendation, BOP also needs to define and develop performance measures by which it can use such data to report and assess outcomes program-wide. We will continue to monitor BOP's ongoing efforts.
GAO-16-101, Mar 15, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's March 2016 recommendation to enforce DOD's Real Property Inventory (RPI) Reporting Guidance to break out the annual rent plus other costs for each asset on the same lease to avoid overstating the costs associated with such leases. In July 2019, DOD provided GAO a copy of its annual guidance for end of year submission of its real property inventory, including notes and timeline for submission. DOD stated in its Corrective Action Plan that this annual guidance provided the requirements for proper submission of data to meet the issues identified in this recommendation. However, the documentation provided is generic language and does not provide any detailed information to support closure of this recommendation. In August 2020, we requested documentation that shows that the DOD has reiterated its RPI Reporting Guidance and that military departments and WHS have made the needed adjustments in the reporting of their leased facilities to show a breakout of the annual rent plus other costs for each asset on the same lease. We will continue to monitor this area and update this if DOD provides information showing that DOD has reiterated its RPI Reporting Guidance and that military departments and WHS have adjusted the reporting of their leased facilities to show a breakout of the annual rent plus other costs for each asset on the same lease. .
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's March 2016 recommendation. In its July 2019 Corrective Action Plan, DOD stated that it had coordinated with the Federal Protective Service (FPS) to obtain data pertaining to the 677 DOD facilities across 539 total locations (i.e., some locations have multiple tenants, hence more facilities than locations) for which FPS provides physical security. DOD stated that the data provided to them by FPS shows that, as of July 2018, 98 percent of DOD leased facilities met the established time frame for completing assessments and remaining 2 percent (15 of the 677 facilities) had out-of-date assessments. In January 2020, DOD provided GAO with the raw data it received from the Federal Protective Service that DOD said supported these assertions. While this data included the last and next facility assessment dates for each facility, along with several other variables, it did not include sufficient information for us to replicate DOD's analysis that 98 percent of assessments were completed in the 3 to 5 year period. We will continue to monitor this area and will update if DOD provides information that more fully explains DOD's analysis.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD did not concur with GAO's March 2016 recommendation to capture the total square footage assigned to each individual lease when multiple leases exist for a single building and make a corresponding change to its guidance to avoid overstating the total square footage assigned to each lease in RPAD. In its comments, DOD stated that it agreed that the issue we identified existed regarding multiple leases that are assigned the same building (leases managed by WHS in the National Capital Region), but that DOD did not agree with GAO's recommended solution to this issue. DOD stated that it believed that the underlying cause for overstating the total square footage for these records in RPAD was a data aggregation issue. DOD stated that its Data Analytics and Integration Support (DAIS) platform that was in the process of being developed would include the capability to capture square footage for multiple leases in a single asset. GAO is not wedded to a particular solution, only that the issue be resolved to improve the accuracy and completeness of the data. As of August 2020, DAIS is fully operational. We will continue to monitor this area and will update if DOD provides information to support that DIAS includes the total square footage assigned to individual leases when multiple leases are assigned to the same building.
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-15-141, Oct 9, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In 2015 and 2016, the Department of Energy (DOE) solicited public comments as part of a policy to develop a consent-based siting process for high-level radioactive waste management facilities. However, DOE's solicitation of public comments does not reflect a coordinated outreach strategy to achieve and sustain public acceptance for the decades required to site, license, construct, and operate waste management facilities. As of March 2020, we are following up with DOE to determine the status of the agency's response to this recommendation.
GAO-14-446, May 30, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2014, DOD concurred with our recommendation. Since then, DOD has made some limited progress toward integrating considerations of climate change into the processes of certain military services' military construction programs. For example, in 2016 briefing slides presented to congressional staff, the Army noted that two military construction projects were sited in a manner specifically designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change. However, as of March 2020, DOD had not provided us with evidence that the department's components have clarified instructions associated with the processes used to compare potential military construction projects for approval and funding. Thus, the recommendation remains open.
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.