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: "Health services administration"
GAO-18-124, Oct 19, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of January 2020, VHA continues to disagree with the recommendation and has not taken any action. Although VA responded to our report by stating that the ability to count physicians does not affect its ability to assess workload, we maintain that an accurate count of all physicians providing care at each medical center is necessary for accurate workforce planning. To implement the first recommendation, VHA needs to develop a system-wide process to collect information on all physicians providing care at VAMCs, including physicians that are not employed by VHA. This information should be available at the local level for workforce planning purposes.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VHA concurred with this recommendation. In November 2017, VHA's Executive in Charge chartered the Specialty Care Provider Staffing and Network Model Workgroup to develop a methodology for determining the scope and complexity of specialty care services. The Workgroup also developed an analytical tool to support local decision-making around specialty staffing levels. According to VHA, the Specialty Care Services Staffing model has been validated across some VHA regions. The Workgroup was directed to develop an Executive Decision Memorandum for an official determination as to implementation of the model. As of January 2020, VHA was awaiting the results of the Governing Board's decision on the Executive Decision Memorandum, the guidance documents, and analytical template. VHA reported the target date for completion is March 2020.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VHA concurred with this recommendation. VHA is working to develop the necessary capacity to enable a system-wide method for sharing information about physician trainees to help fill vacancies. In April 2019, VHA anticipated having this system in place by the end of fiscal year 2019. However, VHA has not submitted any additional information since April 2019. VHA has also created a VHA-Trainee Recruitment and Hiring Workgroup (the Workgroup). The Workgroup serves as the advisory group on trainee recruitment and hiring, for the purpose of developing a permanent Trainee Recruitment and Hiring Function. The Workgroup is holding Virtual Trainee Recruitment Events for critical occupations. Until GAO sees evidence of a system-wide method for sharing information about physician trainees, this recommendation will remain open.
GAO-17-384, Jun 21, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation and provided meeting minutes for its Portfolio Investment Management Board and documentation describing the proposed alignment and interdependencies between information technology (IT) governance boards. According to VA officials, as of September 2019, the department had continued to further evolve its IT governance framework, reworked the committee structure and related working groups that oversee IT investments, and refined the process for prioritizing investments. A draft IT Governance Policy that describes an updated governance structure intended to implement IT solutions and an agile workforce was to be implemented by March 2020. The department has yet to report on the status and results of this implementation. We will continue to monitor VA's actions to ensure that the implementation is consistent with planned actions.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. In addition, the department outlined steps it intends to take to address our recommendation, including developing a set of metrics to provide continuous input into investment portfolio decisions and establishing a methodology for ensuring that IT investments are aligned to business needs and that expected outcomes are defined prior to making the investments. According to department officials, VA issues a Joint Business Plan that identifies annual milestones associated with initiatives agreed upon by both VHA and OIT. As of September 2020, we are reviewing additional documentation related to the underlying processes that support the compilation of the plan and any related metrics for the associated investments that are to support VHA's mission. We will continue to monitor progress in this area.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. The department described its intention to ensure that unmet IT needs for the pharmacy benefits management, scheduling, and community care program areas were addressed appropriately during fiscal year 2018 budget formulation. In March 2020, we met with officials from the Pharmacy Benefits Management program office, the Office of Veterans Access to Care, and the Community Care program to discuss the status of new service requests and the extent to which IT needs have been met since our report. While there was a slight decrease in the total number of new service requests that remained open for 5 years or more, officials from each office did not consistently report improvements in how IT needs were being addressed. For example, Pharmacy Benefits Management officials still waited for improvements that may come with the deployment of the new electronic health record system, but they continued to report that updates to industry standards should be addressed sooner and often IT needs did not make it through the prioritization process at the Veterans Health Administration to be considered by the Office of Information and Technology. Community Care officials reported a general improvement in the IT governance process and a more engaged relationship with the Office of Information Technology; however, the list of open new service requests still included long-term VistA-related enhancements, some of which had not yet been prioritized by the department. The Office of Veterans Care has not yet provided an updated list of open new service requests, but officials were satisfied with a new maintenance contract that allowed them to address a number of IT issues. We will continue to monitor the number of new service requests in each program area and the extent to which the IT needs are being met by the IT governance process.
GAO-16-594, Jul 1, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, no action has been taken on this Matter for Congressional Consideration.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, HHS officials reiterated that they believe the agency has addressed our recommendation because CMS works with HHS's Office of Inspector General (OIG) as appropriate to collect source documentation from drug manufacturers and takes action as warranted. HHS stated that CMS has continued to provide information regarding problematic ASP submissions to OIG for evaluation of misreporting and continues to use AMP and other benchmarks as comparisons for pricing determinations. They further stated that they do not believe that additional collection of detailed sales information about ASP, such as invoices, is authorized under Part B drug payment provisions in section 1847A or under section 1927(b). As of June 2020, CMS did not provide any additional updates. While we recognize that CMS conducts routine checks to assess the completeness of ASP data submitted by drug manufacturers, we do not believe these activities are enough to close the recommendation. Specifically, CMS only collects source documentation from manufacturers under very limited circumstances (e.g., when there are obvious inconsistencies in the data submitted by manufacturers). CMS does not periodically verify the accuracy of ASP data for a sample of manufacturers by tracing the data to and from drug manufacturers' source documents, such as sales invoices. Because CMS does not routinely verify the accuracy of the underlying data used to determine Medicare payment rates, the resulting payment rates may be inaccurate if drug manufacturers do not report accurate data. With regards to CMS's authority to collect additional information, such as invoices, we believe the agency could work through OIG to collect such information.
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-14-84, Nov 22, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS stated that it does not support the consolidation of Minority AIDS Initiative (MAI) funds into core funding. As of January 2020, HHS had not changed its position. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS stated that it does not support the consolidation of Minority AIDS Initiative (MAI) funds into core funding. As of January 2020, HHS had not changed its position. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-10-56, Nov 19, 2009
Phone: (206)287-4860
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.