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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recommendation: To enhance USAID's financial oversight of implementing partners' spending to implement and support Title II development and emergency projects, the USAID Administrator should take steps to ensure that it collects complete and consistent monitoring data from implementing partners for Title II development and emergency projects on the use of 202(e) funding for cash transfers, food vouchers, and local and regional procurement as well as data on the use of Title II funding for internal transportation, storage, and handling (ITSH) costs, in accordance with established requirements.

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In December 2017, USAID informed us that new Title II development awards would require partners to adhere to a requirement that it added in July 2017 to the Food for Peace development award template, which requires programs to provide quarterly performance reports on actual cash transfers, food vouchers, and local and regional procurement activities. USAID also noted that it had developed a new WFP emergency award template with reporting requirements for monitoring data on cash transfers, food vouchers, and local and regional procurement activities. In February 2018, USAID provided support that it has developed training and standardized oversight staff roles and responsibilities to help ensure that complete and consistent monitoring data is collected for Title II development and emergency projects. However, USAID still needs to provide evidence that it collects complete and consistent monitoring data from implementing partners for Title II projects, in accordance with established requirements. As of September 2020, we continue to monitor USAID's ongoing actions taken in response to this recommendation.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: To better ensure that the evaluation findings reach their intended audiences and are available to facilitate incorporating lessons learned into future program design or budget decisions, the Chief Executive Officer of MCC should adjust MCC evaluation practices to make evaluation reports available within the timeframe required by MCC guidance.

Agency: Millennium Challenge Corporation
Status: Open

Comments: MCC concurred with the recommendation but noted that its then-forthcoming revised policy on monitoring and evaluation would state that "MCC expects to make each interim and final evaluation report publicly available as soon as practical after receiving the draft report." This revised guidance did not set a specific time frame for the reviews. In a letter provided to GAO in May 2017, MCC stated that it had initiated a re-design of its evaluation monitoring information system to provide MCC with detailed timelines of each component of the evaluation review and publication process. MCC provided additional information regarding actions taken in follow-up to our recommendations in April 2018. In December 2018, MCC provided GAO with a list of evaluation reports that had been released in calendar years 2017 and 2018. Of the 18 reports that were released in 2017 and 2018, 9 were released in six or fewer months after the date of the report and 9 were released more than six months after the date of the report. These review times represented only a modest improvement over what we found at the time of our report. In our report, we found that 6 of the 16 reports we examined were released within six months of MCC receiving the report, and 10 were released more than six months after MCC received the report. We requested an updated list of evaluation reports from MCC in January 2020 and will continue to review the timelines for release of reports.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: While recognizing that cargo preference serves policy goals established by Congress with respect to the U.S. merchant marine, including maintenance of a fleet capable of serving as a naval and military auxiliary in time of war or national emergency, Congress should consider clarifying cargo preference legislation regarding the definition of "geographic area" to ensure that agencies can fully utilize the flexibility Congress granted to them when it lowered the CPFA requirement.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: GAO did not receive comments on the Matter for Congressional Consideration. As of July 2020, GAO found no evidence of legislation having been introduced to clarify the definition of "geographic area" with regard to cargo preference laws.