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: "Interagency relations"
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-20-663, Sep 24, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
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-20-602, 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-20-619, 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-20-460, Apr 29, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation: Committee on the Marine Transportation System
Status: Open
Comments: CMTS partially concurred with our recommendation but also noted several areas of disagreement with our conclusions, which we addressed directly in our report. For example, we note in our report that CMTS itself has previously noted the importance of evaluating risks on a government-wide basis, and that it previously proposed a model for determining risk that considered the likelihood of adverse events actually occurring, vulnerability to damage, and potential consequences. Given its previous work in the U.S. Arctic and its coordinating role with its member agencies, CMTS is well suited to conduct a government-wide assessment of the risks posed by gaps in maritime infrastructure in the U.S. Arctic. As such, we stand by our recommendation and will continue to report on steps taken by CMTS to address it.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: OSTP neither agreed nor disagreed with the report's recommendations. OSTP acknowledged the Arctic is of critical national importance and noted interagency coordination can be implemented through the entities of the National Science and Technology Council, which is located within OSTP. As we note in our report, without a strategy for addressing U.S. Arctic maritime infrastructure that identifies goals and objectives, performance measures to monitor agencies' progress over time, and the appropriate responses to address risks, agencies lack assurance that their actions are effectively targeting priority areas and decision makers cannot gauge the extent of progress in addressing maritime infrastructure gaps. As such, we stand by our recommendation and will continue to evaluate OSTP's efforts to fully address it.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: OSTP neither agreed nor disagreed with the report's recommendations. OSTP acknowledged the Arctic is of critical national importance and noted interagency coordination can be implemented through the entities of the National Science and Technology Council, which is located within OSTP. OSTP noted the need for, and role of additional federal coordination, such as the Arctic Executive Steering Committee, is under consideration by OSTP. We continue to believe that the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President, including OSTP, should designate the interagency group responsible for leading and coordinating federal efforts to address maritime infrastructure in the U.S. Arctic that includes all relevant stakeholders. As we note in our report, without an interagency collaboration mechanism designated to lead these efforts, it is unclear who has responsibility for whole-of-government efforts to address U.S. Arctic maritime infrastructure. We will continue to monitor OSTP's efforts to fully address our recommendation.
GAO-20-325, Apr 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: FDA and USDA partially concurred with this recommendation. FDA stated that it concurred with the intent of incorporating the seven leading practices into the interagency agreement, and both agencies said that they are open to incorporating the practices into their development of the structure for joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. However, the agencies stated that they did not agree to revise the agreement at this time. FDA and USDA stated that the agreement is a general framework and that incorporating the leading practices would constitute an inappropriate level of detail. Instead, the agencies stated that they believe it would be most valuable to incorporate the leading practices into a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure they plan to issue. We appreciate the agencies' willingness to incorporate the leading practices for effective collaboration into their efforts. The March 2019 interagency agreement states that the agencies have the ability to modify it as needed and will review the agreement every 3 years to determine whether they should modify or terminate it. Therefore, the agencies are due to revisit the agreement in March 2022, if not sooner. Regarding the agencies' concern that incorporating the leading practices in the interagency agreement would add an inappropriate level of detail, we note that, as we state in our report, the existing agreement already partially incorporates each of the seven leading practices. We continue to believe that FDA and USDA should more fully incorporate the seven leading practices for effective collaboration into their interagency agreement for the joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. Developing a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure in accordance with the existing interagency agreement that incorporates those leading practices would meet the intent of our recommendation to improve the effectiveness of the agencies' collaboration.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: FDA and USDA partially concurred with this recommendation. FDA stated that it concurred with the intent of incorporating the seven leading practices into the interagency agreement, and both agencies said that they are open to incorporating the practices into their development of the structure for joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. However, the agencies stated that they did not agree to revise the agreement at this time. FDA and USDA stated that the agreement is a general framework and that incorporating the leading practices would constitute an inappropriate level of detail. Instead, the agencies stated that they believe it would be most valuable to incorporate the leading practices into a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure they plan to issue. We appreciate the agencies' willingness to incorporate the leading practices for effective collaboration into their efforts. The March 2019 interagency agreement states that the agencies have the ability to modify it as needed and will review the agreement every 3 years to determine whether they should modify or terminate it. Therefore, the agencies are due to revisit the agreement in March 2022, if not sooner. Regarding the agencies' concern that incorporating the leading practices in the interagency agreement would add an inappropriate level of detail, we note that, as we state in our report, the existing agreement already partially incorporates each of the seven leading practices. We continue to believe that FDA and USDA should more fully incorporate the seven leading practices for effective collaboration into their interagency agreement for the joint oversight of cell-cultured meat. Developing a more detailed joint framework or standard operating procedure in accordance with the existing interagency agreement that incorporates those leading practices would meet the intent of our recommendation to improve the effectiveness of the agencies' collaboration.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2020, FDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2020, USDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2020, FDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2020, USDA officials agreed with this recommendation. We will follow up to determine what steps they take to implement the recommendation.
GAO-20-205, Jan 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, FTA partially concurred with this recommendation. FTA noted that they will direct the National Rural Transit Assistance Program (NRTAP) to create a centralized, searchable library database cataloging all available resources that cover transportation coordination. This library database will include resources developed by FTA, other Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM) members, and their technical assistance centers and initiatives, such as the Rural Opportunities to Use Transportation for Economic Success (ROUTES). FTA will complete these actions by August 31, 2021. We will review the database and other resources when they become available.
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-20-19, 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-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-19-441, Jul 9, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Joint Interagency Task Force West
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, DOD officials reported that JIATF-W identified measures of performance in critical mission areas that have not previously been captured, including the Counter Narcotics Operations Center, Operational Intelligence, and Mission Support units. However, it is unclear whether the measures JIATF-W identified are higher-level and part of a "vital few" rather than just additional output-based performance measures. GAO will need to review the new measures to understand whether DOD/JIATF-W's actions are aligned with the intent of the recommendation. GAO will continue to follow-up with DOD/JIATF-W on the their progress toward implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Joint Interagency Task Force West
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, DOD stated JIATF-W updated its Assessment Instruction to codify baseline standards and processes for collecting metrics in its directorates and would send personnel to train to improve their ability to measure performance against DOD minimal standards. However, it is unclear whether JIATF-W has set targets. We will continue to follow up with DOD/JIATF-W on their progress toward implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS stated it concurred with the GAO recommendation. In December 2019, DHS officials stated it is overseeing the implementation of measures that contain outcome-based direction for assessing counter drug operations effects, which requires a phased approach, and added that DHS hopes to achieve two consecutive years of consistent reporting of performance measures. The estimated completion date for addressing this recommendation is June 2020. GAO will continue to follow-up with DHS on its progress towards implementing the recommendation.
GAO-19-495, Jun 7, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to create an internal procedure manual which will document the Office of Exemption Determinations' process for managing IRA prohibited transaction exemption applications. When we confirm what actions DOL has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to periodically discuss all IRA exemption cases with IRS and did not elaborate on the formal means for this information sharing. IRS said that it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation and said it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.
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-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-18-537, 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-18-290, Mar 23, 2018
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Committee agreed with this action, as recommended by GAO in its March 2018 report, and took some steps toward implementing it. In December 2018, the Committee issued a new 5-year STEM education strategic plan. The Committee's plan states that to enhance the effectiveness of the STEM education portfolio, federal agencies that comprise the Committee are to perform a systematic review of evidence from current programs (e.g., performance assessments). Committee agencies are to also identify promising, evidence-based STEM education programs, practices, and policies in order to learn from and implement them more broadly. The strategic plan commits federal agencies to develop an implementation plan. According to agency officials, the implementation plan will be finalized in the Fall of 2019. GAO will review future efforts of the Committee to determine if they address the recommendation and could lead to improved management of the federal STEM education portfolio.
Agency: Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Committee agreed with this action, as recommended by GAO in its March 2018 report, and took some steps toward implementing it. In December 2018, the Committee issued a new 5-year STEM education strategic plan. One of the plan's objectives focuses on making program performance and outcomes publically available. To achieve this objective, federal agencies that comprise the Committee are to document and share programs' performance assessment information for both internal strategic planning purposes and to inform public audiences. According to the strategic plan, Committee agencies are to provide content for the inventory of STEM education programs by the end of 2019. GAO will review the results of the Committee's future efforts, including its inventory of programs, to determine if they adequately address the recommendation. The plan acknowledges GAO's finding on the importance of collecting, organizing, and reporting federal performance data to increase public awareness of the impact of federal STEM education programs.
Agency: Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education
Status: Open
Comments: The Committee agreed with this action, as recommended by GAO in its March 2018 report, and took some steps toward implementing it. In December 2018, the Committee issued a new 5-year STEM education strategic plan. According to the strategic plan, the Committee will develop a common reporting framework that federal agencies with STEM education programs can use to provide the rates of program participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons in rural areas. Agencies will begin reporting this information by the end of 2019. According to an official from the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the agency anticipates reporting programs' participation rates in its 2020 annual report to Congress. The plan also states that agencies that conduct valid and reliable tracking of such data are to share their promising practices across agencies so that those strategies can be replicated where and when appropriate. GAO will follow the Committee's progress developing and implementing the reporting framework to determine if it addresses GAO's recommendation. As noted in the strategic plan, tracking and reporting on the participation of underrepresented groups in federal STEM education programs provides agencies with information to gauge their effectiveness at fostering diversity and inclusion.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Science and Technology Policy agreed with this action, as recommended by GAO in its March 2018 report, and took some steps toward implementing it. In December 2018, the Committee issued a new 5-year STEM education strategic plan. The strategic plan states that the Office of Science and Technology Policy will include in its annual reports descriptions of the outcomes of any program assessments conducted on federal STEM education programs in the previous year. According to an Office of Science and Technology Policy official, this information will be included in annual reports starting in 2020. GAO will review these annual reports to determine if they address the recommendation. As noted in the strategic plan, collecting and reporting federal performance data supports efficient and effective use of public funding, increases public awareness of federal program outcomes, and promotes the use of high-quality performance assessment and evaluation methods.
GAO-18-194, Feb 28, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In December 2019, the Secretary of Defense approved DOD's guidance on cross-functional teams. We found that this two-page guidance addresses most, but not all, of the 911 requirements and leading practices for cross-functional teams. Specifically, it addresses in whole or in part six of the seven section 911 requirements and six of the eight leading practices. The Secretary-approved guidance also directs the Chief Management Officer (CMO) to develop more detailed implementing guidance. According to an Office of the CMO (OCMO) official, OCMO plans to use previously drafted terms of reference as the basis for the CMO's more detailed implementing guidance. Based on our review, when the Secretary of Defense approved guidance is considered along with the draft terms of reference expected to serve as detailed implementing guidance, both documents will fully address all section 911 requirements and leading practices for effective cross-functional teams. To fully implement this recommendation, the CMO will need to develop and issue this detailed implementing guidance to fully address section 911 requirements and our leading practices for effective cross-functional teams. According to an OCMO official, as of April 2020, OCMO was still in the process of developing the detailed implementing guidance.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In October 2018, an official from the Office of the Chief Management Officer (OCMO) stated that OCMO had revised the draft training curriculum for individuals filling presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed positions in the Office of the Secretary of Defense to include all of the required elements in section 911. According to an OCMO official, as of April 2020, the curriculum had been approved and the training had been provided, but as of July 2020, the department had not provided documentation of the updated curriculum or of the training being provided. To fully implement this recommendation, we will need to review the revised training curriculum to determine if it contains all of the required elements in section 911 and obtain documentation that presidential appointees in the Office of the Secretary of Defense have received the training or were granted training waivers.
GAO-18-249, Feb 14, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8612
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In commenting on the report in February 2018, Treasury concurred with the recommendation. In December 2018, Treasury noted that the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 requires each CFIUS member agency to submit detailed spending plans annually for seven years to appropriate congressional committees, including estimated expenditures and staffing levels, and requires annual testimony for seven years from the CFIUS staff chairperson regarding anticipated resource needs. As of November 2019, GAO continues to monitor this recommendation.
GAO-17-546, Sep 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In a July 2018 update, DOE stated that it believes that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the appropriate entity to lead interagency collaboration and coordinate science and technology policy. According to DOE, OSTP intends to charter an interagency working group under the NSTC on a government-wide strategy related to research on the health effects of low-dose radiation. As of December 2019, OSTP had begun to address a related requirement under the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act to coordinate federal efforts related to radiation biology research and planned to release a report on this topic in early 2020. When we confirm what actions OSTP has taken to establish this working group, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-372, Apr 24, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, FAA issued a redesigned National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) for 2017/2018. In September 2019, FAA officials told GAO that the redesigned NARP helped the agency take a more strategic approach to identifying research priorities. FAA officials also said that the agency has taken actions to understand emerging aviation issues requiring FAA's research attention and those emerging issues will be incorporated into future plans. In June 2020, FAA officials told us that they are developing guidance--to be finalized by December 2020--to ensure that future NARPs continue to take a strategic approach. GAO will review FAA's actions to implement the recommendation once the guidance is completed.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, FAA issued a redesigned the National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) to include, among other things, information required by statue. In June 2020, FAA officials told us that they redesigned the R&D Annual Review in 2019 to also address the statutory requirements. The officials said that they are also in the process of revising guidance that the agency uses to develop the NARP and R&D Annual Review to ensure that future documents meet statutory requirements. FAA plans to finalize the guidance by December 2020. GAO will review FAA's actions to implement the recommendation once FAA provides GAO the redesigned R&D Annual Review and once guidance for both the NARP and R&D Annual Review are completed.
GAO-17-320, Apr 6, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reported that, working through the Manufacturing USA interagency team and the National Science and Technology Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing, it had revised the Manufacturing USA governance document to include a section defining roles related to facilitating information sharing for agencies who are not sponsoring Manufacturing USA institutes. We are seeking clarification from NIST on which non-sponsoring agencies are covered by the new section. We will revisit the status of this recommendation once we receive clarification.
GAO-17-74, Jan 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, the Executive Office of the President had not acted on our recommendation. In January 2020, OMB told GAO there were no plans to develop a national strategy on food safety. Instead, OMB said that the administration planned to work toward greater efficiency and interagency coordination within the framework provided by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.
GAO-17-26, Oct 20, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of August 2018, we are in the process of following up with the department to determine the current status.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of August 2018, we are in the process of following up with the department to determine the current status.
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-16-546, 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-16-57, 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-15-193, Feb 12, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislative action had been identified as of December 2019. Addressing this action, which GAO suggested in February 2015, could increase coordination between various levels of government and reduce duplication of effort, resources, and costs associated with collecting and maintaining accurate address data.
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-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-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-11-750, Sep 20, 2011
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury disagreed with this recommendation based on the fact that many outside studies already exist and IRS did not comment. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted in December 2017 did not include any requirements that Treasury study alternative approaches for the taxation of financial derivatives. However members of Congress have released proposals for a mark-to-market tax system, which would include financial derivatives. GAO continues to maintain that further study is needed in coordination with IRS and will continue to monitor the climate for such a study.
GAO-10-205, Jan 28, 2010
Phone: (202)512-6225
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, we have not identified actions by the Congress to establish in law requirements such as those in Executive Order 13045.
GAO-09-871, Sep 9, 2009
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open
Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.
GAO-09-133, Dec 12, 2008
Phone: (202)512-6408
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: Legislation has been enacted to provide funding for, among other things, the development of a nationwide, interoperable broadband network that is aimed at improving interoperable radio communications among public safety officials. However, the use of the broadband network by public safety users will be voluntary. In addition, officials from the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and the Treasury stated that, once mission-critical voice capabilities have been developed for the broadband network, their respective departments will determine whether they will use the network to support their mission-critical operations. Therefore, until the three departments have the information they need to make a decision to use the nationwide public safety broadband network to support mission critical voice capabilities, it is uncertain if the legislation will remedy these agencies' fragmented approaches to improving interoperable radio communications. As of March 2020, there has been no legislative action taken in the current Congress.
GAO-08-440, Mar 7, 2008
Phone: (202)512-6225
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of February 2020, EPA officials indicated that the IRIS Program had almost completed internal review of a "Handbook for Developing IRIS Assessments," intended to guide staff through the sequential stages of the IRIS assessment process and ensure consistency across assessments. The Handbook, when finalized and used by staff, codifies the agency's effort to reevaluate their assessment process, but doesn't address the resources that should be dedicated to the IRIS Program. A workforce plan that includes both staff and budget resources consistent with user needs is necessary. As we reported in March 2019, the program has made strides utilizing project management software and project management techniques that enable the IRIS Program to better plan assessment schedules and utilize staff. However, we also reported in March 2019 that the President's budget requests since fiscal year 2018 have repeatedly cut the budget by as much as 40 percent for the Health and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) area, of which IRIS is a part. While these cuts were not enacted by Congress, the President's fiscal year 2021 budget request again cuts the HERA program by 34 percent, or approximately $12.7 million dollars. These cuts could have an impact on the IRIS program's ability to meet EPA program and regional office needs, if enacted by Congress.
Phone: (202)512-9692
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The 2002 Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (2002 Farm Bill) established a national Food Safety Commission charged with making specific recommendations for drafting legislative language. Among other things, the Commission was to make recommendations on how to improve the food safety system, create a harmonized, central framework for managing federal food safety programs, and enhance the effectiveness of federal food safety resources. However, as of January 2017, as far as current staff can ascertain, the Commission was never formed, and no recommendations were ever produced. Thus, although Congress acted to create a food safety commission through legislation, the substance of our matter--recommendations for analyzing alternative food safety structures--was not implemented. GAO subsequently made the same matter for congressional consideration in several later products, and the matter also appeared in the annual GAO Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation Report. As of March 2020, it remained unaddressed.