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: "Military manpower"
GAO-20-295, Apr 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-223, Feb 26, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would establish a policy requiring that requests to change organizational structure include a plan, and establish a mechanism to track implementation and measure progress in achieving organizational change goals. The Coast Guard stated that this will be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and agreed that mechanisms to periodically seek and monitor employee satisfaction with organizational change efforts are valuable. However, they stated that their current feedback mechanisms capture this information therefore they requested we close the recommendation. The Coast Guard also stated its preference to add questions to existing surveys rather than create new survey instruments. However, we found that the Coast Guard's current surveys do not capture employee's perspectives as organizational changes are implemented. This recommendation remains open pending Coast Guard providing evidence of its actions to modify existing surveys with added questions that monitor employee satisfaction with organizational changes.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would develop a Tactics, Techniques and Procedures document to provide guidance for executing the manpower requirements determination process. This would provide additional guidance on the overall manpower requirements determination process, including explicit directions for the collection and analysis of manpower data, and the establishment of enterprise standards for key factors and allowances used when conducting analysis. The Coast Guard stated that this will be completed by September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would initiate the process to document and track Manpower Requirements in the Coast Guard's human resources system. The Coast Guard stated that this would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would update its Manpower Requirements Plan during the next required periodic report submitted to Congress, in fiscal year 2022. The Coast Guard stated that this would be completed by March 31, 2022.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would review its 2010 manpower requirements analysis that determined the resources the Coast Guard required for its manpower requirements determination program. Its Office of Human Resources Strategy and Capability will then re-validate the inputs and update the findings for the manpower requirements analysis to reflect the currents needs of the manpower requirements determination program. The Coast Guard stated that this will be completed by September 30, 2020.
GAO-20-177, Dec 11, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Missile Defense Agency
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, stating that MDA will continue to follow established processes to identify threat assessment needs and to determine if additional resources are required. However, we have yet to see sufficient evidence that MDA is collectively prioritizing its threat assessment requests. We understand that MDA prioritizes its threat assessment requests within the distinct lanes of intelligence product types. We have yet to see evidence that shows MDA has taken steps to also prioritize amongst those lanes. For example, MDA could coordinate with the intelligence community to establish a formal process or venue through which such macro-level prioritization could be conveyed and discussed. In April 2020, MDA told us that it did not plan to transfer funds to the intelligence community in fiscal year 2021 for any unique MDA intelligence needs. By not taking actions to collectively prioritize its threat assessment needs or providing the intelligence community with resources, MDA continues to run the risk of not receiving the threat assessments it needs when it needs them.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Missile Defense Agency
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, stating that MDA will continue to fully engage the intelligence community on key threat-related Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) acquisition processes and decisions. We have observed improvements in MDA including the intelligence community in some of these key threat-related processes and decisions, some of which were discussed in our report. Also, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 included a provision requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense committees on the NGI and include in the report, among several items, updated threat assessments by the intelligence community informing system threshold and objective requirements. To this end, we are aware that MDA consulted with the intelligence community on the threat space and threat-related requirements that are being considered for the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI). The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering stated in a September 2019 memo to GAO that MDA also coordinates in weekly Technical Interchange Meetings with the intelligence community on the threat space bounds for parameters that have high uncertainty. We are also aware of ongoing efforts between MDA and the intelligence community to jointly model missile threats that could directly be used in MDA ground tests. These efforts address much of our recommendation; however, we have yet to see whether MDA will coordinate with the intelligence community on the threat parameters assigned to BMDS elements in the BMD System Specification. We intend to follow up with MDA to determine the extent to which MDA has implemented our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, stating that the department will re-examine the most cost-effective approach to meet the intent of DIA validation to support development and fielding of effective Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) elements. We have observed significant progress on this recommendation, primarily through the joint coordination occurring through the Defense Intelligence Ballistic Missile Analysis Committee (DIBMAC) Joint Modeling Tiger Team, where multiple pathways are being explored. Our recommendation calls for the intelligence community and MDA to coordinate on establishing a process for MDA to obtain validation of its threat models. We are also open to other pathways, such as intelligence community and MDA jointly producing threat models or MDA making direct use of threat models built by the intelligence community. Our objective is that MDA use threat models that are validated by the intelligence community when such models are necessary to inform formal BMDS processes, products, and decisions. Any pathway that MDA and the intelligence community agree upon that yields this result meets the intent of our recommendation. We believe that through the tiger team initiative, such coordination is occurring and therefore the closure of this recommendation as implemented in imminent. We are waiting to see: (1) whether MDA and intelligence community establish a formal process and/or jointly sign a memorandum of agreement to codify the process; and (2) the production and use of an intelligence community-validated threat model by MDA in a ground test or other Models and Simulation application.
GAO-19-698, Sep 30, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Army has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Air Force has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Navy has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of Defense has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
GAO-19-386, May 13, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with GAO's May 2019 recommendation that ASD-SO/LIC update existing guidance or develop new guidance to clarify the roles and responsibilities of ASD-SO/LIC and relationships with DOD components that have vested interests in the SOF enterprise-such as the military services and SOCOM to name a few. In September 2020, ASD-SO/LIC officials stated that DOD is in the process of revising guidance that would help clarify ASD- SO/LIC's roles and responsibilities. DOD estimated that this will not be completed until January 2025.
GAO-18-678, Sep 10, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, DOD told us that draft language reinforcing and clarifying the requirement that all weapon system programs - including legacy weapon systems - have a current Life Cycle Sustainment Plan that is updated every five years had been drafted and submitted as part of the internal DOD coordination process for an update to DOD Instruction 5000.02. DOD estimates that the DOD Instruction 5000.02 will be updated by December 2019.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy concurred with the recommendation. In August 2019, DOD told us that the Navy is working to update its policy to reinforce and clarify the requirement that all weapon system programs - including legacy weapon systems - have a current Life Cycle Sustainment Plan that is updated every five years. The Navy estimates that the policy will be updated by December 2019.
GAO-18-253, Apr 25, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3489
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department concurred with this recommendation. In July 2019, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD/P&R) issued a memo that, among other things, directed the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs to (1) direct the Military Departments to comply with reporting of the military personnel data and reporting requirements necessary to support the measurement and reporting of the perstempo of the military forces as laid out in DoDI 1336.07; and (2) develop threshold policies for perstempo events. In addition, it stated that the OUSD/P&R will chair a working group to refine optempo and perstempo policy proposals for inclusion into a formal policy document(s). In November 2019, the OUSD/P&R issued another memo that provided broad perstempo policy and emphasized adherence to modified guidance codified in DODI 1336.07, which as of July 2020 is undergoing DOD directives review for issuance. The OUSD/P&R memo further directed the military departments to provide service-level perstempo guidance, to include thresholds and compliance measures, for their components. We will continue to monitor these actions and update the status of our recommendation as appropriate.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Department concurred with this recommendation. In July 2019, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (OUSD/P&R) issued a memo that, among other things, directed the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Readiness) to develop policies for the accurate measurement and reporting of unit operational deployment data. In addition, the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) will (1) conduct department-wide coordination to develop the necessary technical capabilities for DOD to collect, monitor, and evaluate optempo and perstempo data; (2) develop procedures for perstempo and operational deployment data validation to ensure quality checks are conducted regularly and feedback mechanisms to the military departments for error detection and correction are in place, if necessary; and (3) ensure coordination efforts for optempo and perstempo data collection efforts do not duplicate or interfere with current systems collecting such information. In November 2019, the OUSD/P&R issued another memo that provided broad perstempo policy and emphasized adherence to modified guidance codified in DODI 1336.07, which as of July 2020 is undergoing DOD directives review for issuance. This memo and draft instruction provide direction on the reporting of perstempo events and emphasize the collection of complete and reliable perstempo data. Additionally, to enhance data processing and rectify data quality issues, DOD has drafted Uniformed Services Human Resources Information System Procedures, which is also undergoing DoD directives review for official issuance, and DMDC has worked with the services to make specific data improvements. We will continue to monitor for the issuance of the draft DODI and System Procedures and update the status of our recommendation as appropriate.
GAO-12-623, Jun 7, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and said that it would establish a process to review the mission and requirements for the Selective Service System. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 established the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service (i.e., the Commission) to, among other things, review the military selective service process. The Commission is to submit a report to the President and Congress no later than March 2020 with recommendations concerning the need for a military draft and means by which to foster a greater ethos of public service among American youth. Further, the Commission was directed to conduct hearings and meetings open to the public in various locations throughout the country to provide maximum opportunity for public comment and participation in order to help develop its recommendations. In January 2019, the Commission released an Interim Report. The Interim Report shared what the Commission learned throughout its first year, explored options the Commission is considering to increase service participation among all Americans, and outlined issues involved in the Commission's review of the military selective service process. In March 2020, the Commission issued its final report, and it recommended that (1) the Congress require the Secretary of Defense to update the personnel requirements and timeline for obtaining draft inductees in the event of an emergency requiring mass mobilization and (2) the President direct the Secretary of Defense to include in future Quadrennial Defense Reviews and National Defense Strategies a section on the state of the Selective Service System and the ability of the United States to rapidly mobilize personnel in the event of an emergency. The Commission's report reinforced our recommendation; however, until DOD takes action to respond to our recommendation to take actions to establish a process to periodically review the mission and requirements of the Selective Service System, this recommendation should be left open.