Recommendation: The Assistant General Counsel should provide additional information on the process OACP uses to investigate potential consumer protection violations, to assess risk, and to pursue enforcement actions and establish a timeframe for doing so. Such transparency could be provided through the handbook that OACP is currently drafting or through other public means such as providing additional information on its website. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Office of Aviation Consumer Protection
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant General Counsel should take steps to provide transparency and clarity into the results of OACP's enforcement of consume including investigations that do not result in a consent order. Such information could be aggregated data about cases, investigations, or warning letters. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Office of Aviation Consumer Protection
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, in coordination with relevant stakeholders from NSC and NEC, should ensure that the plan to implement the 5G national strategy fully addresses all elements of our six desirable characteristics of a national strategy.

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.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should include the known limitations and intended uses of its TAM performance data in its public reports such as its annual NTD summary and other reports for decision-makers. This action should include clarifying the context of state of good repair data in TAM reports in relation to similar data in DOT's Condition and Performance Report and how they differ. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should develop a plan for how FTA intends to analyze, implement, and communicate any identified TAM program improvements moving forward. The plan should describe how FTA intends to address:

• relying on a single performance measure per asset category,

• potential limited use of investment scenarios by transit agencies in making asset decisions, and

• shorter-term planning horizons than those used by other planning counterparts. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The OHS Director should require Head Start grantees to document that water provided to children has been tested for lead. OHS could determine various ways that are feasible and efficient for grantees to satisfy this requirement; for example, verification could be done through OHS' current grantee data collection or monitoring processes. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families should direct OCC and OHS to develop an agreement with EPA on their roles and responsibilities in implementing the Memorandum of Understanding on Reducing Lead Levels in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Facilities. For example, these agreements may include the ways in which guidance and information will be shared with states and Head Start grantees, such as through webinars or email, and how frequently. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator of the Office of Water should develop an agreement with HHS's Offices of Child Care and Head Start on their roles and responsibilities in implementing the Memorandum of Understanding on Reducing Lead Levels in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Facilities. For example, these agreements may include the ways in which guidance and information will be shared with states and Head Start grantees, such as through webinars or email, and how frequently. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator of the Office of Water should direct the Office of Water to specify how it will track progress toward the outcomes of the Memorandum of Understanding on Reducing Lead Levels in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Facilities and determine how it will regularly monitor and update the MOU. For example, the Office of Water could develop performance measures for each of the MOU's outcomes. In addition, the Office of Water could submit annual reports on progress toward achieving the MOU's outcomes or it could plan to update the agreement at specific intervals. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should identify agency-wide and division performance goals that align with IRS's strategic service goals and objectives for an improved taxpayer experience. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should identify performance measures with targets for improving the taxpayer experience that link with the related performance goals. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that the taxpayer experience measures cover all of the factors for customer service identified in OMB guidance as well as service channels across the tax process phases. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure that taxpayer experience measures reflect the highest-impact taxpayer journeys and key transactions, as consistent with OMB guidance. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should regularly analyze and use the results of the performance measures and surveys on the taxpayer experience to help improve performance. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop processes for using performance results on the taxpayer experience as part of resource allocation decisions intended to improve performance. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should publicly report available information on taxpayer experience performance, including the measures and related targets, for example by providing it on IRS.gov and in IRS publications. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that integrators' solutions provide unique identifiers for hardware on selected agencies' networks. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that FAA's system integrator records FISMA system information in the agency's CDM tools. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that IHS's system integrator records FISMA system information in the agency's CDM tools. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that FAA's system integrator establishes a process to integrate all vulnerability information in the agency's CDM tools, including the time a vulnerability was remediated. (Recommendation 4)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that IHS's system integrator establishes a process to integrate all vulnerability information in the agency's CDM tools, including the time a vulnerability was remediated. (Recommendation 5)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that SBA's system integrator establishes a process to integrate all vulnerability information in the agency's CDM tools, including the time a vulnerability was remediated. (Recommendation 6)

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.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should commit to a time frame to complete the agency's effort to associate hardware with its FISMA systems. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should document agency-specific variations from federal core configuration benchmarks for each operating system on its network. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should configure its CDM tools to compare configuration settings against federal core benchmarks and agency-specific variations applicable to its environment. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should document approved hardware inventory information by associating FISMA systems with the hardware on its network in a format that can be readily integrated into its CDM tools. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Indian Health Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should document agency-specific variations from federal core configuration benchmarks for each operating system on its network. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Indian Health Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of IHS should configure its CDM tools to compare configuration settings against federal core benchmarks applicable to its environment. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Indian Health Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator should commit to a time frame to complete the agency's effort to associate hardware with its FISMA systems. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator should document agency-specific variations from federal core configuration benchmarks for each operating system on its network. (Recommendation 14)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator should configure its CDM tools to compare configuration settings against agency-specific benchmarks applicable to its environment. (Recommendation 15)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Associate Commissioner of the Administration for Children and Families Children's Bureau within the Department of Health and Human Services should develop a process to assess the reliability of grantee performance information contained within annual performance reports for tribal recipients of its Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian Education should take steps to alert grantees of the Native Language Immersion Cooperative Agreement when they are late in submitting performance reports. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian Education should develop a process to assess the quality and reliability of a sample of grantee performance data for the Native Language Immersion Cooperative Agreement. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The TSA Administrator should establish quantifiable targets for the Surface Transportation Security Inspectors Program's activity-level performance measures. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, develops procedures to help ensure that it will incorporate depot stakeholder input into the new metrics framework for the Army's organic industrial base through iterative and ongoing processes. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Marine Corps should ensure that the Marine Corps Logistics Command establishes a complete baseline schedule, which includes all planned depot maintenance work for the fiscal year, against which to measure performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: United States Marine Corps
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, develops guidance that synchronizes the Army's timelines for required inputs from Army depot maintenance customers who use funds from the Procurement; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; and Operations and Maintenance budgets with the depots' timelines for development of their finalized budget estimate submissions to AMC. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Commander, Army Materiel Command, provides its non-Army customers with guidance that will help ensure that the depots have all updated maintenance needs in sufficient detail from non-Army customers prior to the depots' finalized budget estimate submissions to AMC. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Army Organic Industrial Base Corporate Board oversees a study that includes a recurring, comprehensive, and systematic analysis of Army depot data to identify trends and causes behind changes in depot maintenance schedules; and that it uses this analysis to recommend actions to reduce unplanned maintenance work, as appropriate and necessary. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should incorporate key elements of a performance assessment system, such as establishing performance goals and taking steps to assess outcomes, for the Educational and Vocational Counseling (or Chapter 36), Veterans Integration to Academic Leadership, and VetSuccess on Campus programs. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should develop performance goals for the Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grant program. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop formal performance goals and measures for its Spouse Employment Assistance Program. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should provide additional information, such as best practices, about how VA medical centers and service providers participating in Coordinated Entry can collaborate with local partners on key activities (for example, making referrals and sharing data) and ensure that this information and other resources are accessible to VA medical center staff and service providers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for DOL's Veterans' Employment and Training Service should document its data quality validation processes for performance data for the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program and disseminate these processes to service providers. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should clearly communicate with local VA staff and service providers about how it measures performance and how to obtain and provide feedback about performance measures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that State/INL establishes procedures that verify that monitoring officials for Mérida Initiative projects follow the key practices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The USAID Administrator should establish procedures to ensure that monitoring officials for Mérida Initiative projects develop monitoring plans that address risks. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management, in conjunction with the Centers of Standardization and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, establish and implement performance measures to assess the progress the Centers are making in ensuring that standard designs are used consistently. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this April 2020 recommendation. In June 2020, DOD provided information that it had developed a corrective action plan and identified an action officer to lead implementation of this recommendation. DOD stated that it is developing a sampling plan with criteria to consider for assessing the consistent use of standard designs. DOD stated that it would identify projects that were completed during the year that used standard designs and that it would then assess the progress that the Centers are making in ensuring that standard designs are used consistently by sampling from the completed projects. DOD stated that, based on the results of this analysis, it would adjust the metrics and frequency of future analyses, as appropriate. DOD stated that it expects this effort to be completed in Spring 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management, in conjunction with the Centers of Standardization and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, establish and implement performance measures to assess the effects of the use of standard designs, specifically the progress the Centers are making in reducing design costs and time, construction costs and time, and change orders. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this April 2020 recommendation. In June 2020, DOD provided information that it had developed a corrective action plan and stated that it planned to establish relevant performance measures to analyze efforts to reduce design costs and time, construction costs and time, and the number of change orders. DOD stated that it expects to develop standards containing the metrics, frequency of analysis, and means of reporting. DOD stated that it expects to present the results of its analysis at the FY2020 Military Programs After Action Review in January 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should ensure that the TRANSCOM Commander, in coordination with the military services and the Coast Guard, develop a process for tracking data during the first 3 years of the Global Household Goods Contract to inform its planned manpower study during the third year of the contract to more precisely determine DP3 manpower needs and associated costs. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should ensure that the TRANSCOM Commander develop performance metrics for those DP3 activities that will not be a part of the Global Household Goods Contract, such as servicemember counseling and claims resolution that will, at least in part, continue to be performed by the military services. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should ensure that the TRANSCOM Commander articulate the linkage, where appropriate, between DP3 performance metrics, including Global Household Goods Contract performance indicators, and overarching program goals. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: GSA should assess and address the reliability of the information used to calculate reported cost savings for the broker program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June 2020, GSA said the agency would validate system data through regional and broker outreach and fully utilize validated system data to manage the broker program. The agency also said it will develop a quality control plan and follow-up on outcomes. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: GSA should develop outcome-based metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of using brokers to supplement the GSA's leasing workforce. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: Although GSA initially did not concur with this recommendation, the agency stated in June 2020 that it agrees with the recommendation and will take steps to implement it. Specifically, GSA plans to revise the broker performance standards and document broker effectiveness through lease cost avoidance, timely lease replacement, and earned commission credits. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress with implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, provide updated guidance for the oversight of privatized military housing, to include oversight objectives for each service to monitor the physical condition of privatized homes over the remaining duration of the ground leases. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD (S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance requiring the military departments to monitor work order completion for housing privatized under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative based on a combination of resident input, timeliness of work order completion, and number of repeat work orders for the same repair. The guidance also required increased tracking of MHPI project work orders by installation staff. Moving forward, the ASD(S) plans to issue quarterly program review guidance that establishes oversight objectives for the military departments to monitor the physical condition of MHPI housing over the duration of their project ground leases, formalizing the requirement that the data be monitored by the Chief Housing Officer. DOD expects this to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should take steps, in collaboration with the Army's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 2

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Secretary of the Army has taken several steps toward addressing this recommendation. For example, the Army published the Portfolio and Asset Management Handbook creating a multi-tiered assessment approach of performance metrics to measure the health of each privatized home through inspection, assessment, satisfaction, and feedback. The Army and the private housing partners revised the Incentive Fee Performance Management Plan, placing increased emphasis on resident satisfaction and work order/maintenance management. The Army also put Commanders in charge, ensuring Army leadership at every Army installation is tracking housing quality and safety. In late 2020, the Army plans to review and evaluate these actions and make a determination by 31 Jan 2021 if any changes or revisions are needed to best implement the recommendation. As such, we will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should take steps, in collaboration with the Air Force's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Air Force is engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the Air Force tasked each of the Military Housing Offices to inspect all move-in, move-out, and change of occupancy maintenance events and all emergency, urgent, and life, health, and safety work orders, which is outlined in Air Force guidance. The Air Force is also engaging in several ongoing actions. In response to a memo to the military departments to provide consistency of performance incentive fees, the Air Force was negotiating with the privatized housing project owners to update performance incentive fee metrics in accordance with ASD directed categories and weightings. As of August 2020, agreements had been finalized with 2 partners and work was ongoing with the remaining partners. In addition, the Air Force was working with the project owners to deploy Satisfacts, a survey tool to independently measure resident satisfaction with projects' work order performance, across all Air Force projects with an expected completion by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these recommendations.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should take steps, in collaboration with the Navy and Marine Corps' private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy and Marine Corps are engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, the Navy and Marine Corps have developed a centralized electronic data warehouse, which receives data from privatized housing partner maintenance systems to display work order and survey performance dashboards. By February 2021, the Navy expects to complete the development of metrics displayed by the data warehouse to include key service call performance metrics and resident feedback data. The Navy and Marine Corps are also developing a web-based monitoring matrix tool housing officials can use to evaluate the performance of privatized housing partners. The tool is intended to provide improved tracking capabilities and improved accessibility to information, thus providing more consistent oversight and improved advocacy service members and their families. The Navy is also working to hire 247 additional Navy and Marine Corps housing staff to review and analyze private partner provided recurring maintenance and customer satisfaction reports in an effort to strengthen oversight and monitoring, with an estimated completion of September 2020. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor the status of these and other efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments and private housing partners, establish minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for work order data collection for comparability across installations and projects and to track trends over time. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: e Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD stated that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, plans to issue a policy directing the military departments to establish, to the maximum extent practical, minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for MHPI housing unit work order collection to aid in comparability across installations and projects, and for tracking trends over time. However, DOD noted that the department cannot mandate changes to existing MHPI project legal documents. DOD estimates that this effort will be completed by December 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment require the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by the private housing partners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance directing the military departments to exercise proper oversight to ensure Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) projects perform in accordance with legal agreements, to include due diligence in monitoring and auditing project maintenance records and other project performance data. The guidance also required military departments to review their entire portfolios of MHPI projects to ensure accurate and appropriate work order management processes. In response to the new guidance, DOD noted that the military departments put in place appropriate oversight measures and undertook the required reviews, though the investigations of project business practices were ongoing in some cases. As another step, the ASD(S) plans to issue guidance directing the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by their respective MHPI Project Owners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. DOD expects this to be completed by the end of September 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, develop a process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data from the military departments to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation based on the fact that the draft report listed the incorrect office as the source for addressing the deficiency, but subsequently changed its response to concur after the recommendation was directed to the appropriate office in the final report. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) plans to issue guidance establishing a department-wide process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way effective with the survey collection effort in Fiscal Year 2021. The department expects this effort to be completed by October 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment provides additional explanation of the data collected and reported in future reports to Congress, such as explaining the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data, among other things. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) would provide additional explanation of the MHPI resident satisfaction data collected and reported in future annual Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) reports to Congress, effective with the annual report covering fiscal year 2019. DOD noted that the additional information will include, among other things, an explanation of the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data. As of August 2020, the annual MHPI report covering fiscal year 2018 was in final coordination and the department noted that the report would addresses a vast majority, but not all, of the requirements identified in our recommendation. DOD noted that the additional information would be provided in the next annual MHPI report. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Army housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Army housing office officials. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its response, DOD noted that the Army developed a "Plain Language" briefing as required by the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that included the Army Housing Office's roles, responsibilities, location, and contact information at each privatized housing project site. DOD noted that the intent of the briefing was to ensure that all residents were aware of their ability to directly contact Army Housing Office and/or the Garrison Commanders. DOD stated that the briefing was disseminated to all of the Military Housing Offices, who are using it in newcomer briefings, and stated that the briefing would be provided to all current residents of privatized military housing, but that measure would not be tracked due to attrition. In addition, DOD noted that Headquarters, Department of the Army was tasking Army Materiel Command to develop a more detailed plan to communicate to residents the difference between the Army Housing Office and the private housing partner. The Army's intent is to not only capture residents upon their arrival at an installation, but making the services of the MHO known over the duration of a resident's time on at installation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Navy housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Navy housing office officials. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy has taken various steps to address this recommendation, with additional steps planned. For example, the Navy has ensured that each installation has a specific issue resolution process description marketing flyer available, both in hard copy and on the public housing websites, with a reminder that residents can contact both the privatized housing property manager and the Navy housing office with any issues. Moreover, every housing unit has been provided with a refrigerator magnet reminding residents that they can and should contact the Navy housing office if they have any issues with their home. In addition, the Navy and Marine Corps have established a requirement to contact each privatized housing resident not later than 15 days after move-in and again 60 days after move-in to provide an opportunity to request assistance and remind them of available support. Moving forward, the Navy has an ongoing effort to require private housing companies to market the same messaging as the service issue resolution processes for the MHOs that they support, for consistent advocacy messaging to the tenants. The information will be added to PPV partner websites, printed material and resident handbooks. The Navy also plans to use its annual survey to tracks resident satisfaction and awareness of the Navy's issue resolution process, with expected completion by October 2020. In addition, the Marine Corps has identified a near-term initiative to procure name tags for all MHO employees to wear, identifying themselves as distinct and separate from privatized housing property management company, which will be standardized across all USMC installations. The Marine Corps also plans to develop a standard welcome aboard package to include magnets and other items with key point of contact information. The Marine Corps expects these efforts to be completed by the end of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, assess the risks of proposed initiatives aimed at improving the privatized military housing program on the financial viability of the projects. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, as the Chief Housing Officer, planned to issue a policy establishing the assessment of Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) project financial viability as part of quarterly program reviews as a long-term requirement. The department noted that the program review data would be augmented by input from the MHPI companies, who are assessing the likely impact of proposed initiatives in conjunction with their third party lenders. The department expected this effort to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should define and document roles and responsibilities for identifying opportunities to promote more efficient shared service usage through business process analyses, including defining roles for monitoring and implementing actions recommended because of these analyses. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will more specifically define who is responsible for identifying and implementing opportunities for achieving efficiencies with service usage, including roles for the business process analyses the Working Capital Fund division conducts from time to time. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD, in conjunction with OCFO, should ensure that the results of the WCF Division's business process analyses are assessed to better understand how these analyses contribute to the WCF's established goal to support the efficient delivery of enterprise goods and services. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will add the results of the Working Capital Fund division's business process analyses as a performance metric to its Working Capital Fund performance scorecard. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should ensure that the WCF Committee conducts periodic reviews of WCF business lines, as authorized in the WCF Committee Charter, to ensure effective management, strong performance, and customer satisfaction. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and is in the process of implementing this recommendation. According to the letter, reviews of Working Capital Fund business lines are conducted as a part of regular Working Capital Fund Committee meeting discussions. However, the Committee plans to hold formal review sessions dedicated to reviewing the business lines. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops a program-wide process for measuring, collecting, and tracking information on how ALIS is affecting the performance of the F-35 fleet to include, but not be limited to, its effects on mission capability rates. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, in consultation with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops and implements a strategy for the re-design of ALIS. The strategy should be detailed enough to clearly identify and assess the goals, key risks or uncertainties, and costs of re-designing the system. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should establish outcome-oriented performance measures to assess the effectiveness of the reorganization. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should develop an implementation plan for the reorganization that includes milestones and deliverables to track and communicate implementation progress. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of BLM should complete a strategic workforce plan that addresses how it will recruit for and fill vacant positions resulting from the relocations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should ensure its bureau leadership incorporates key practices for effective agency reforms prior to implementing reorganization activities at other Interior bureaus. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The department neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management and Budget should (1) require that agencies explicitly document annual data center closure goals in their DCOI strategic plans and (2) track those goals on the IT Dashboard. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management and Budget should require agencies to report in their quarterly inventory submissions those facilities previously reported as data centers, even if those facilities are not subject to the closure and optimization requirements of DCOI. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management and Budget should document OMB's decisions on whether to approve individual data centers when designated by agencies as either a mission critical facility or as a facility not subject to DCOI. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management and Budget should take action to address the key performance measurement characteristics missing from the DCOI optimization metrics, as identified in this report. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should take action to achieve its data center-related cost savings target established under DCOI by OMB. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) agreed with our recommendation and stated that it planned to meet the cost savings target in 2020. We will continue to monitor Agriculture's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should take action to achieve its data center-related cost savings target established under DCOI by OMB. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) agreed with our recommendation and described actions that they planned to take in order to address the recommendation. We will continue to monitor Commerce's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should take action to meet its data center optimization metric targets established under DCOI by OMB. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) agreed with our recommendation and described actions that they planned to take in order to address the recommendation. We will continue to monitor Commerce's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should take action to achieve its data center-related cost savings target established under DCOI by OMB. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) agreed with our recommendation and described actions that the agency planned to take to address the recommendation. NASA stated that it expected to complete these actions by March 31, 2020. Once we have obtained and assessed evidence of the agency's actions taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of the Navy, determine whether it can assign the required number of Navy officers to the other military departments' JPME programs, consistent with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff guidance. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the military services, develop policy concerning actions, if any, the military services can take to mitigate JPME seminar student mix shortfalls and still meet the intent of the OPMEP's joint acculturation requirement. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff, develop and issue a department-wide mission statement for PME that will explain the program's purpose and goals, and serve as a basis for performance measures. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issue and implement performance measures—to include the tracking of costs—that align with the department-wide mission statement for PME. (Recommendation 4)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, require the military services to periodically report information to its office about the military services' PME and JPME programs—such as results of program reviews. (Recommendation 5)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense(Comptroller) updates the DOD Financial Management Regulation to require the Marine Corps to include a budget request data exhibit for the Marine Corps War College in support of DOD's annual budget request. (Recommendation 6)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military services and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issue guidance to standardize the cost data that the military services should include in their annual PME budget request data submissions. (Recommendation 7)

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.

Recommendation: The Director of the U.S. Marshals Service should take steps to ensure that supervisory review of division and district investigations is documented in accordance with USMS policy. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice: United States Marshals Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ATF should develop policy for verifying the accuracy and completeness of information in ATF employee misconduct systems. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the U.S. Marshals Service should develop policy for verifying the accuracy and completeness of information in USMS employee misconduct systems. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Justice: United States Marshals Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ATF should develop a performance measure to monitor the timeliness of misconduct investigations, according to policy requirements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the U.S. Marshals Service should develop a performance measure to monitor the timeliness of district and division misconduct investigations, according to policy requirements. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Justice: United States Marshals Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ATF should modify existing oversight mechanisms to include the monitoring of key internal controls related to employee misconduct investigations. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the U.S. Marshals Service should modify existing oversight mechanisms to fully monitor key internal controls related to employee misconduct investigations. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Justice: United States Marshals Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct Departmental Administration to work with the mission areas to develop department-level outcome-oriented performance goals and related measures for the business centers, and use them to assess the effectiveness and impact of the business center reforms. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2020, USDA officials agreed with our recommendation and stated that the department is evaluating options for the development of performance metrics and inclusion of these metrics and related information as part of the regular and recurring reviews by the department's Deputy Secretary who is identified as the Chief Operating Officer.

Recommendation: The Director of USCIS should ensure that, in addition to USCIS's basic asylum officer training, all asylum offices provide pre-departure training on the credible and reasonable fear processes before their officers begin screening cases at the family residential centers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that USCIS plans to develop a standardized pre-departure training and provide this training to all detailees prior to deployment to the family residential centers. DHS estimated that these actions would be completed by September 2020. As of August 2020, USCIS told GAO that the number of noncitizens processed under expedited removal has decreased dramatically as a result of Coronavirus Disease 2019. Therefore, details to the Family Residential Centers have largely been paused. USCIS noted that the Asylum Division is reviewing the credible fear and reasonable fear training requirements; working on an enhanced training module; and, developing a standardized pre-departure training by December 31, 2020. USCIS plans to provide the training to all detailees prior to deployment to the Family Residential Centers during calendar year 2021, should the details resume. Providing pre-departure training, in addition to USCIS's basic training for new asylum officers, would help USCIS ensure that officers from all asylum offices are conducting efficient and effective fear screenings of families.

Recommendation: The Director of USCIS should ensure asylum officers systematically record in USCIS's automated case management system if individuals receive credible fear determinations as principal applicants, dependents, or in the interest of family unity, pursuant to regulation or USCIS policy. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that USCIS planned to explore ways to modify its case management system so that asylum officers can record whether an individual received a positive credible fear determination as a principal applicant, dependent, or in the interest of family unity. USCIS plans to make any appropriate changes to its case management system and train asylum officers on these changes by December 2020. As of August 2020, USCIS reported that the agency remains on track to complete this work as planned, provided staffing is not affected by USCIS budget issues. Having complete data in its case management system on all outcomes of credible fear screenings at family residential centers would better position USCIS to report on the scope of either the agency's policy for family members who are treated as dependents, pursuant to regulation, or USCIS's use of discretion in the interest of family unity.

Recommendation: The Director of USCIS should collect and analyze additional information on case delays, including specific reasons for delays and how long they last, that asylum officers may face when screening credible and reasonable fear cases. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that USCIS will explore ways to collect additional information on credible and reasonable fear case delays in its case management system. USCIS plans to modify the system, as appropriate, to instruct users on the changes, and begin collecting and analyzing the information by December 31, 2020. As of August 2020, USCIS reported that the agency remains on track to accomplish this work by the end of calendar year 2020, provided staffing is not adversely affected by the on-going COVID-19 pandemic and USCIS budget issues. Collecting additional information in its automated case management system on case delays would provide USCIS with more readily available information and analyzing such data could help USCIS identify case delay reasons relevant in the current environment for officers conducting fear screenings and better position USCIS to mitigate the reasons for the delays and improve efficiency in case processing.

Recommendation: The Chairman of FCC should develop specific, measurable goals and performance measures for its efforts to monitor the performance of new WEA capabilities, such as enhanced geo-targeting and expanded alert message length. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the IPAWS program should document how it plans to address key actions needed to educate alerting authorities in their use of IPAWS and implement a mechanism that will allow FEMA to regularly and systematically obtain and analyze feedback on alerting authorities' educational needs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the IPAWS program should establish procedures to prioritize pending IPAWS applications and to follow up with applicants to address these applications. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The DEA Administrator should develop and implement additional ways to use algorithms in analyzing ARCOS and other data to more proactively identify problematic drug transaction patterns. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation and DEA stated it will continue to examine a variety of technologies to analyze ARCOS and other data and implement additional ways to use algorithms to more proactively identify problematic drug transaction patterns.

Recommendation: The DEA Administrator, in coordination with the department-wide efforts on data strategy, should establish and document a data governance structure to ensure DEA is maximizing its management of industry-reported drug transaction data. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation. As of September 2019, DEA officials stated that its Office of Information Systems' Chief Data Officer just recently started to work with DOJ and other components to develop a data strategy in response to the recently released department wide strategy, and has begun efforts to develop a governance structure. In November, 2019 DEA indicated it will continue to mature its data governance structure. The intent of this recommendation is for DEA to establish a formalized data governance structure to manage its collection and use of data used to support the Diversion Control Division's mission.

Recommendation: The DEA Administrator should establish outcome-oriented goals and associated measurable performance targets related to opioid diversion activities, using data it collects, to assess how the data it obtains and uses supports its diversion control activities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOJ neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation but DEA stated in November 2019, that it recognizes that measurable performance targets related to opioid diversion activities can serve as leading practices at different organizational levels including the program, project, or activity level. Our recommendation is intended to ensure that DEA can demonstrate the usefulness of the data it collects and uses to support its opioid diversion control activities.

Recommendation: The DEA Administrator, in consultation with industry stakeholders, should identify solutions to address the limitations of the ARCOS Enhanced Lookup Buyer Statistic Tool, to ensure registrants have the most useful information possible to assist them in identifying and reporting suspicious orders to DEA. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation and in November 2019, stated it has consulted with industry stakeholders and identified solutions to address the limitations of the tool.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR, in collaboration with relevant managers, should establish a policy that requires a schedule of tasks to be developed, documented, and updated throughout the lifetime of IT system projects. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they will be implementing a policy to ensure that project planning steps, including a schedule of tasks, will be included and documented for future IT projects.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should identify and assess risks in establishing and maintaining a permanent records retention program, and develop policies and procedures to ensure that risks are properly addressed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they have hired a contractor to assist with various risk management activities related to OCWR's permanent records retention program, including identifying and assessing risks and developing policies and procedures to address any risks.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should identify desired performance results, develop performance measures that demonstrate the degree to which the desired results were achieved, and report progress toward those results in OCWR's annual reports. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they are reassessing desired performance results, developing new performance measures to monitor progress towards those results, and will clearly report OCWR's progress in future annual reports.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should collect relevant data through a survey or other mechanisms, and use the information to evaluate the effectiveness of education and outreach efforts and the extent to which they are reaching all covered legislative branch populations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. According to OCWR officials, they are working with congressional oversight committees and covered legislative branch offices to obtain data through surveys or other methods that will enable them to evaluate the effectiveness and coverage of OCWR's education and outreach efforts.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should integrate IT planning and implementation into the agency's strategic planning process. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they intend to revise the agency's strategic plan, including integrating IT planning and implementation into the strategic planning process, after they gain more experience with the new procedures required by the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) Reform Act of 2018.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should incorporate key strategic human capital management practices, such as developing strategies to recruit and retain staff with mission-critical skills, into the strategic planning process. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials reported that they hired a contractor to better incorporate key management practices, such as developing strategies for recruiting and retaining staff with mission-critical skills, into OCWR's human capital plan and strategic planning process.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP should develop and document key planning elements to help the agency meet the SUPPORT Act requirements for the 2020 National Drug Control Strategy and future Strategy iterations. These planning elements should include descriptions of resource investments, time frames, and any processes, policies, roles, and responsibilities needed to address each requirement. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP should—after developing and documenting key planning elements to meet the SUPPORT Act requirements—routinely implement an approach, based on these planning elements, to meet the requirements for the 2020 National Drug Control Strategy and future Strategy iterations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP should develop and document key planning elements to help the agency meet the SUPPORT Act requirements to establish a Drug Control Data Dashboard that would include descriptions of resource investments, time frames, and any processes, policies, or roles, and responsibilities needed to address this requirement. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP should—after developing and documenting key planning elements—implement an approach, based on these planning elements, to meet the SUPPORT Act requirements to establish a Drug Control Data Dashboard. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should direct the Department's relevant bureaus to work with Embassy Beirut to establish, as appropriate, and consolidate targets for each of the security-related performance indicators. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should direct the Department's relevant bureaus to work with Embassy Beirut to collect and review performance data for key security-related performance indicators. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of State: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct DSCA to revise the inspection due dates it establishes for items requiring enhanced EUM for the Office of Defense Cooperation in Beirut to align with DOD's standards for EUM by considering the date of last inspection. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The OJJDP Administrator should set performance targets for individual grant programs. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, DOJ reported that OJJDP is engaged in a comprehensive effort to improve performance measures. The final step of this process will be the development of performance targets. According to DOJ, OJJDP anticipates setting initial targets for its discretionary grant programs by October 2021 and for the Title II Formula Grant program by March 2023. We believe these actions, when effectively completed, will address our recommendation. We plan to provide an update on OJP's progress in late 2021.

Recommendation: The Assistant Attorney General for Administration should ensure that future department-level fraud risk profiles (1) determine the department's fraud risk tolerance for DOJ grants—which include OJJDP grant programs, and (2) prioritize residual fraud risks based on an assessment against that tolerance, consistent with leading practices in GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Assistant Attorney General for Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, DOJ reported that it awarded a new contract in January 2020 that includes a requirement to continue conducting annual fraud risk assessments and update associated fraud risk profiles using the GAO Fraud Risk Framework. DOJ further reported that it will develop a fraud risk tolerance for DOJ grants and prioritize residual fraud risk against that tolerance when it conducts this assessment. We believe these actions, when effectively completed, will address our recommendation. We plan to follow-up with DOJ and provide an update in early 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA), in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, should ensure that the average cost per square foot performance measure for GSA-managed space is calculated using actual cost information. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: GSA concurred with this recommendation and has developed an action plan to implement it. In January 2020, GSA officials told us that GSA will change the method for calculating the average cost per square foot performance measure by now using the actual rent agencies paid to GSA in the calculation. GSA officials also stated that GSA will post this information annually to performance.gov. We will continue to monitor GSA's implementation of these efforts.

Recommendation: The Director of OCS, in developing the new performance management approach for the CSBG program, should ensure that its performance framework includes information on (1) details for how the national measure is linked to and used to assess the three national program goals, (2) descriptions of how the updated state and local performance outcome measures align with national program goals, and (3) a written plan for how OCS will assess the reliability of state performance outcome data. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of Community Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation and and stated that it plans to take actions to better align its performance measures with the three national performance goals outlined in the new CSBG Theory of Change. We commend HHS for its plans to address this recommendation, but encourage the agency to focus on aligning its performance outcomes with the three national goals of the CSBG program as established by the CBBG Act, which are similar but not identical to the three goals outlined in the new CSBG Theory of Change. HHS also stated that it would implement additional actions to assess the reliability of state performance outcome data.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Financial Assistance should review and enhance guidance for the Microloan Program to ensure definitions of data collected, such as income, are clear and instructions are comprehensive for data needed, such as for borrower business outcomes and technical assistance. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Directors of the Office of Financial Assistance and Office of Program Performance, Analysis, and Evaluation should develop a performance target to assess the Microloan Program's progress in achieving its statutory purpose of assisting women, low-income, veteran, and minority entrepreneurs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Directors of the Office of Financial Assistance and Office of Program Performance, Analysis, and Evaluation should ensure that appropriate advance planning occurs during the development of the new Microloan Program data reporting system by involving relevant offices within SBA in system design and considering data needed to assess program performance. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator should explore opportunities for additional interagency collaboration and information sharing with other federal agencies that engage in microlending activities, such as Treasury and USDA, and take steps to implement new collaborative efforts as warranted. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Financial Assistance should examine ways to incorporate public reporting of additional Microloan Program information into the design of the new data reporting system. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service provides customers with more complete information on the agency's rate-setting methodologies in rate documentation, briefings, and other forums where rates are discussed, including the costs included in rates, how those costs are calculated, and how changes in DFAS's workload affect customers' overall costs. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Finance and Accounting Service
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) provides detailed cost and rate information to customers each year in multiple venues and would reach out to customers to obtain additional details to understand how to fill the information gap regarding rate transparency. In April 2020, DOD provided to GAO DFAS's corrective action plan, which stated that DFAS Client Executives would ask the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps lead Financial Managers for feedback on additional details needed to better plan for the DFAS bill. DFAS would then incorporate this additional detail into the customer bill briefings for the President's Budget Request for fiscal year 2022. DFAS also stated that the Air Force had indicated that DFAS provides appropriate transparency, but had requested that DFAS provide its bill estimate earlier, which DFAS had agreed to do.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency provides customers with more complete information on the agency's rate-setting methodologies in rate documentation, briefings, and other forums where rates are discussed, including the costs included in rates, how those costs are calculated, and how changes in DISA's workload affect customers' overall costs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Information Systems Agency
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) will make every effort to improve dialogue with customers to ensure the correct people have a full understanding of DISA's methodologies used to develop their rates. In April 2020, DOD provided to GAO DISA's corrective action plan, which stated that DISA would continue to make every effort to improve dialogue with customers to ensure an increased understanding of methodologies used to develop the rates. In this plan, DISA reported that, in February and March 2020, its Chief Financial Officer (CFO) coordinated with the communications and financial management senior leadership for the military services to discuss Defense Working Capital Fund (DWCF) rate methodology and transparency. In May 2020, DOD provided an updated status on this recommendation, stating that a result of the DISA CFO outreach was that DISA would use the regular and recurring DISA Drumbeat engagements with the military departments to present and maintain an open and transparent dialogue on DISA DWCF rates. GAO requested documentation for the recent Navy and Air Force Drumbeat meetings and the pending Army meeting, as well as recent rate briefings that document that DISA is providing this more complete rate-setting information to its customers. GAO will update the status of this recommendation once this documentation is received.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of the Defense Logistics Agency provides customers with more complete information on the agency's rate-setting methodologies in rate documentation, briefings, and other forums where rates are discussed, including the costs included in its rates, how it calculates those costs, and how and when proposed changes to its rate-setting methodologies will affect customers' overall costs. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Logistics Agency
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) would include more detailed information in its annual rate briefing to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the services regarding what is in its costs, how it calculates costs, and how and when changes would impact customers' overall costs. In addition, DLA stated that it conducts semiannual Cost Summits and periodic DLA/Service Days with customers. DLA said it would include discussions, as appropriate, of topics such as potential pricing methodology changes and estimated cost impacts to customers, well in advance of implementation. In March 2020, DLA notified GAO that it had discussed cost rates with the military services during the January 2020 DLA Cost Summit and the Service Days with each of the military services that it held in June and November 2019. GAO requested documentation for these five meetings that includes the more complete information on DLA's rate-setting methodologies that GAO identified in the recommendation. GAO will update the status of this recommendation once this documentation is received.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of the Permitting Council should incorporate selected best practices we have identified (maintaining the baseline schedule and conducting a risk analysis) into the Permitting Council's process for developing performance schedules for the infrastructure sectors covered under FAST-41. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The NHTSA Administrator should provide direction and clarification to states to ensure compliance with requirements to assess and report progress made in achieving fatality targets. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, NHTSA told GAO that they had emailed all State Highway Safety Offices in November 2019 to clarify the requirements for states to assess their progress made in achieving fatality targets. NHTSA also told GAO that they plan to conduct a national webinar for State Highway Safety Offices to provide direction on performance management requirements by July 2020. GAO will continue to monitor NHTSA's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The NHTSA Administrator should develop and implement a mechanism that communicates to Congress and other stakeholders whether states achieve their fatality and serious injury targets. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2020, GAO confirmed that NHTSA published each state's required safety targets from calendar year 2020 on it website. NHTSA told GAO that it plans to provide performance data on state's achievement of their 2020 targets on its website when data becomes available in the fall of 2021, and complete implementation of this recommendation in 2022. GAO will continue to monitor NHTSA's implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should, to the extent feasible, maintain more complete information on both the total amount of funding allocated for quality measurement activities and the extent to which this funding supports each of its quality measurement strategic objectives. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should develop and implement procedures to systematically assess the measures it is considering developing, using, or removing in terms of their impact on achieving CMS's strategic objectives and document its compliance with those procedures. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should develop and use a set of performance indicators to evaluate the agency's progress towards achieving its quality measurement strategic objectives. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 4)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 5)

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.

Recommendation: The Attorney General of the United States should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 6)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 7)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Small Business Administration should complete the agency's assessment of whether to participate in the 1994 Executive Order and the 2011 Memorandum of Understanding, and, if appropriate, develop an environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 8)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should update the department's environmental justice strategic plan. (Recommendation 9)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 10)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 11)

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.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 12)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 13)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 14)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 15)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should issue a progress report on its environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 16)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 17)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 18)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 19)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should issue a progress report on the department's environmental justice efforts each year. (Recommendation 20)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA, as chair of the working group, should develop guidance for agencies on what they should include in their environmental justice strategic plans. (Recommendation 21)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA, as chair of the working group, should develop guidance or create a committee of the working group to develop guidance on methods the agencies could use to assess progress toward their environmental justice goals. (Recommendation 22)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA, as chair of the working group, and in consultation with the working group, should clearly establish, in its organizational documents, strategic goals for the federal government's efforts to carry out the 1994 Executive Order. (Recommendation 23)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA, as chair of the working group, and in consultation with the other working group members, should update the 2011 Memorandum of Understanding and renew the agencies' commitments to participate in the interagency collaborative effort and the working group. (Recommendation 24)

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.

Recommendation: The Administrator of USAID should establish outcome-oriented performance measures to assess the effectiveness of USAID's reform projects. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: USAID concurs with this recommendation, and indicates it will establish a performance-monitoring plan.

Recommendation: The Administrator of USAID should ensure that the agency completes a strategic workforce plan necessary to support its reform efforts. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open

Comments: USAID concurs with this recommendation. It affirmed is in the process of finalizing the strategic workforce plan that it will complete by September 30, 2019 and will submit the plan to Congress as directed. USAID stated it will also provide a framework to meet Congressionally-directed staffing levels across the Foreign Service and Civil Service.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of EM to develop cost estimates for the IWTU reengineering project and the SBW treatment operations that meet best practices for being comprehensive (e.g., account for all costs). (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In an update provided in April 2020, DOE said that it had taken steps to ensure the cost estimates will meet best practices for being comprehensive (e.g., account for all costs) as part of contract negotiations for the cleanup project. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of EM to develop schedule estimates for the IWTU reengineering project and the SBW treatment operations that meet best practices for being well-constructed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that in negotiating the Idaho Cleanup Project contract it had taken steps to ensure the schedule estimates for the IWTU reengineering project and the SBW treatment operations will meet best practices for being well constructed. Further, DOE stated that the remaining baseline scope and schedule estimate received an external review by its contractor's parent corporation and DOE's Office of Environmental Management to ensure that the schedule meets best practices for being well-constructed. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of EM to follow best practices for ensuring the reliability for the IWTU reengineering project's earned value management system. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that cost and performance data for the IWTU is being tracked against the cost and schedule baselines incorporated in the core contract for the Idaho Cleanup Project, and that the data meets best practices for reliability. GAO has requested additional information from DOE and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of EM to develop a strategy, including a timeline, for implementing the actions required to achieve its preferred disposal pathway, or an alternative, for the SBW. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that EM will assess the range of potential strategies and pathways for disposal of the treated SBW. Once this effort is completed, GAO will review EM's strategy and timeline for achieving its preferred disposal pathway, or an alternative, and update the status of this recommendation accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of EM to develop a strategy, including a timeline, to identify and develop a treatment approach for the disposal of the calcine waste to ensure that EM meets the milestone for completing the treatment of this waste by the target date of December 31, 2035. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In an update provided by DOE in April 2020, DOE said that DOE's Idaho Operations Office is in the process of chartering a team of subject matter experts to update an analysis of alternatives for calcine treatment and disposal. DOE said that this evaluation will be completed by September 30, 2020. GAO will request additional information from DOE on this analysis once completed and will update the status of this recommendation after it has received and analyzed this information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence requires that DOD components (including the military departments and the Defense Logistics Agency) monitor the use of PACS at their installations. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Office of Provost Marshal General monitors the use of PACS at Army installations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commander, Navy Installations Command, monitors the use of PACS at Navy installations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with the Commandant of the Marine Corps, should ensure that the Commander, Marine Corps Installations Command, monitors the use of PACS at Marine Corps installations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness develops appropriate performance measures and associated goals for the timely resolution of the Defense Biometric Identification System technical issues to facilitate improved PACS performance. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should work with states and relevant federal agencies to collect accurate and complete data on blood lead screening for Medicaid beneficiaries in order to ensure that CMS is able to monitor state compliance with its blood lead screening policy, and assist states with planning improvements to address states' compliance as needed. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June 2020, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) officials said that obtaining complete data on blood lead screenings for children enrolled in Medicaid will not be possible, but that the agency is committed to improving the accuracy and completeness of the data. For example, in February 2020, CMS reported that the agency is planning to use a new data system-as states meet certain data quality and completeness benchmarks for the system-to generate the report that includes states' blood lead screening data. CMS stated that this will improve the agency's and states' ability to assess gaps in blood lead screening data. This is a positive step, yet any new data system will also need to consider how to help address known limitations in the current blood lead screening data, such as the under-counting of blood lead screening tests not paid for by Medicaid. To implement this recommendation, CMS should address limitations in blood lead screening data to better monitor compliance with the agency's blood lead screening policy.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should regularly assess the appropriateness of performance measures and targets for the EPSDT benefit, and take any necessary actions to ensure their relevance and use, including adding, changing, or removing measures, or targets, and regularly communicating performance measures and targets to states. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, CMS officials reiterated that they do not concur with this recommendation, in part because the agency does not have the authority to set binding targets for every EPSDT measure. As we stated in our report, our recommendation does not assume that targets should be set for every measure--rather, that CMS needs to regularly assess the appropriateness of performance measures and targets for the EPSDT benefit and communicate them to states. This includes assessments of the CMS-416 performance measures, such as the participant and screening ratios. which CMS officials acknowledge have limitations.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should conduct regular evaluations of state performance by comparing states' performance measurement data with CMS's EPSDT targets to identify gaps in states' performance and areas for improvement. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, CMS officials reiterated that they do not concur with this recommendation, in part because the agency provides states with information about their performance on ESPDT measures reported on the Child Core Set, including a state's performance relative to other states' performance. We noted the limitations of this approach in our report; descriptions of a state's performance relative to other states is subject to change over time. For example, because the median is the midpoint of all states' performance, it ensures that half of states will not meet it, regardless of their individual performance. A fixed target--or targeted improvement goal, such as the one developed as part of the Oral Health Initiative--would provide states with the opportunity to measure performance over prior years' results, which is a more meaningful measure that all states can strive to achieve.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should assist states with planning needed improvements, including providing focused assistance, to resolve gaps in states' performance in meeting CMS's EPSDT targets. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, CMS officials reiterated that they do not concur with this recommendation, in part because the agency does not believe that it is productive or appropriate to set targets for every EPSDT measure. As we stated in our report, our recommendation does not assume that targets should be set for every measure. However, developing additional targets on performance measures critical to beneficiaries' health and well-being could help improve oversight of EPSDT. Targeted technical assistance could be valuable for CMS to provide to states after identifying gaps in states' performance relative to EPSDT targets. Doing so would allow CMS to share additional strategies to help states plan and implement needed improvements.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should develop a plan with time frames and interim milestones for using T-MSIS data to generate the necessary data from the Child Core Set to improve EPSDT oversight and streamline state reporting. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, CMS officials said that they are currently exploring the feasibility of using T-MSIS data to generate certain Child Core Set measures. Specifically, the agency is conducting a pilot with five Child Core Set measures. CMS officials said that they will use the pilot's results to determine the timeline for generating the additional Child Core Set measures through T-MSIS. GAO will continue to follow the agency's progress on this activity.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of ETA should develop, document, and implement a comprehensive strategy that (1) accounts for Job Corps' projected workload requirements and (2) considers its acquisition workforce needs—including the number of staff, skills, and other supports necessary to plan, award, and monitor Job Corps center contracts—to enable it to effectively plan for and competitively award future Job Corps center contracts. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor: Employment and Training Administration
Status: Open

Comments: DOL stated that it will develop, document, and implement a comprehensive strategy that accounts for Job Corps' projected workload requirements and considers its acquisition workforce needs. DOL noted that it has released a new procurement plan which reflects its decision to re-procure 28 Job Corps centers prior to the final option year of their contract. DOL said that this action would result in each region having no more than five procurements each year, which it considers a manageable procurement workload for its current staffing level. We will consider closing the recommendation when such a comprehensive strategy is implemented.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should document same-day services objectives and develop performance goals and related performance measures to facilitate the periodic assessment of the impact of same-day services on veterans' access to care. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should establish and document results-oriented goals that include specific targets or milestones for the IC CAE program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that in preparation for the transition of the Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) program from the Defense Intelligence Agency to ODNI, the ODNI commissioned an independent study in 2019 to assess program performance and barriers to success. ODNI noted that this study, in conjunction with the GAO report, are informing the development of a program strategy and sound business practices that will prescribe goals and measurable objectives. These efforts are expected to be completed in late 2020, at which time ODNI plans to develop a companion Strategic Implementation Plan that will set the foundation for behavior and reporting criteria across all IC CAE grant-receiving institutions, legacy schools, and stakeholders. ODNI noted that the plan which is expected to be completed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021, will include an annual evaluation process linked to survey results and documented lessons learned. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should establish and document strategies to achieve the results-oriented goals that are established for the IC CAE program. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that in preparation for the transition of the Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) program from the Defense Intelligence Agency to ODNI, the ODNI commissioned an independent study in 2019 to assess program performance and barriers to success. ODNI noted that this study, in conjunction with the GAO report, are informing the development of a program strategy and sound business practices that will prescribe goals and measurable objectives. These efforts are expected to be completed in late 2020, at which time ODNI plans to develop a companion Strategic Implementation Plan that will set the foundation for behavior and reporting criteria across all IC CAE grant-receiving institutions, legacy schools, and stakeholders. ODNI noted that the plan which is expected to be completed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021, will include an annual evaluation process linked to survey results and documented lessons learned. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should develop and document a process to identify and continuously evaluate external factors that could affect the program's ability to achieve identified goals. This should include, but not be limited to, a consideration of program branding and post-grant sustainment. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that in preparation for the transition of the Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) program from the Defense Intelligence Agency to ODNI, the ODNI commissioned an independent study in 2019 to assess program performance and barriers to success. ODNI noted that this study, in conjunction with the GAO report, are informing the development of a program strategy and sound business practices that will prescribe goals and measurable objectives. These efforts are expected to be completed in late 2020, at which time ODNI plans to develop a companion Strategic Implementation Plan that will set the foundation for behavior and reporting criteria across all IC CAE grant-receiving institutions, legacy schools, and stakeholders. ODNI noted that the plan which is expected to be completed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021, will include an annual evaluation process linked to survey results and documented lessons learned. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should define and document comprehensive performance measures for the IC CAE program, collect and evaluate the completeness and reliability of information it receives from grant recipients and IC elements, and report this information on a regular basis. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that it held virtual listening session in early fiscal year 2020 with Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) program managers and principal investigators to inform the development of meaningful performance measures and reporting criteria. ODNI noted that the criteria was collected using standardized, repeatable processes to ensure both accuracy and completeness during site visits and performance reviews for active grant recipients. ODNI further noted that it plans to integrate the criteria from the listening sessions into the Strategic Implementation Plan, which it expects to complete in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should establish a requirement for and develop a plan to periodically evaluate the IC CAE program's performance through objective measurement and systematic analysis. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that it held virtual listening session in early fiscal year 2020 with Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) program managers and principal investigators to inform the development of meaningful performance measures and reporting criteria. ODNI noted that the criteria was collected using standardized, repeatable processes to ensure both accuracy and completeness during site visits and performance reviews for active grant recipients. ODNI further noted that it plans to integrate the criteria from the listening sessions into the Strategic Implementation Plan, which it expects to complete in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should develop a process for assessing why some IC elements are not participating in the IC CAE program and address these reasons in order to ensure the program is structured to meet the needs of IC elements. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, ODNI noted that was in the process of developing an engagement strategy for the reintegration of Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence (IC CAE) legacy schools to ensure prior investments are capitalized on and to maximize outreach efforts. ODNI also noted that it is routinely leveraging multiple interagency IC-wide working groups to engage with IC elements and stakeholders to increase its understanding of barriers to engaging with IC CAE, as well as to develop a community-wide understanding of the benefits associated with engagement. ODNI plans to include the results in the Strategic Implementation Plan, which it expects to complete in the third quarter of fiscal year 2021, and noted that it will routinely update these efforts to ensure best practices are being implemented. The ODNI stated that it will use this ongoing process and dialogue to assess and seek to address such barriers and to improve ongoing IC element participation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence should clearly define IC elements' roles and responsibilities for participation in the IC CAE program to better facilitate interagency collaboration in support of the program. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) concurred with this recommendation. In its March 2020 response, ODNI noted that it was leveraging multiple interagency forums in an effort to improve IC element participation in the IC CAE program. ODNI also noted that it would and encourage the standardization and use of common practices by leveraging IC CAE schools for recruitment and hiring within diverse communities. Together, ODNI noted that it will use input from these efforts to shape a collaborative way ahead for increased and improved IC engagement based on community roles and responsibilities. These efforts will also be integrated into the program's Strategic Implementation Plan, which is expected to be completed in late 2021 and will set the foundation for behavior and reporting criteria across all IC CAE institutions and stakeholders. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management of Budget should update the Guidelines to include GAO's leading practices of developing monitoring plans that are based on risks, ensuring that monitoring staff have appropriate qualifications, establishing procedures to close-out programs, developing staff skills regarding evaluations, and establishing mechanisms for following up on evaluation recommendations. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OMB disagreed with the recommendation and suggested it would be more effective to remind agencies that, in addition to the guidelines, they should follow all other relevant OMB guidance affecting monitoring and evaluation. OMB asserted that this guidance contains provisions relevant to our leading practices not included in the Foreign Assistance Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines. However, we believe it is important for OMB to incorporate this other guidance into the Foreign Assistance Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines, if only by reference, to emphasize the importance of these practices in the context of monitoring and evaluation of foreign assistance. As of April 28, 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not implemented this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor this issue.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should update the Department's monitoring and evaluation policies to require the agency to conduct impact evaluations on all pilot programs before replicating or expanding, or conduct performance evaluations for those programs and provide a justification for not conducting an impact evaluation. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation and noted that impact evaluations require a significant resource investment beyond what would be appropriate for more programs. However, DOD is in the process of updating its evaluation guidelines to allow for, but not require, impact evaluations in appropriate cases at all levels of evaluation activities.

Recommendation: The Department of State's U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator, in collaboration with HHS and other implementing agencies, should update the PEPFAR monitoring and evaluation policies to require these agencies to conduct impact evaluations on all pilot programs before replicating or expanding, or conduct performance evaluations for those programs and provide a justification for not conducting an impact evaluation. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the intent of the recommendation (see appendix V for written comments). State explained that impact evaluations are often not feasible in the context of assistance provided under PEPFAR and described its alternative approach to evaluating new initiatives. State indicated it would update appropriate PEPFAR policies to clarify when agencies should conduct impact and/or performance evaluations. These clarifications will reflect how State evaluates PEPFAR programs in practice in accordance with OMB guidance and legislation, according to State.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with IAEA and its member states through the Board of Governors to develop detailed guidelines for prioritizing nuclear security activities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation and it has identified several actions it has taken to implement this recommendation. State also has identified some progress resulting from its actions. Among other actions, State reported in its January 2020 letter to GAO that it is: working with the IAEA to identify ways to better develop and implement strategic planning across the Division of Nuclear Security, potentially including through dedicated staff; conveying to IAEA that it should do more to synthesize information from donor areas of emphasis, member state requests, and the contents of Integrated Nuclear Security Support Plans into a set of inputed priorities; and doing more to coordinate among the larger donors to the Nuclear Security Fund (NSF) to optimize and enhance the way the Division of Nuclear Security prioritizes and carries out its nuclear security activities funded via the NSF. State noted several positive results stemming from these actions, including: (1) an increased emphasis in IAEA's most recent Nuclear Security Report on internal coordination and a more collaborative approach within the IAEA in the implementation of its nuclear security activities, which State believes will help reduce duplication, streamline Agency activities, increase efficiency and effectiveness, and maximize the benefits to IAEA member states; and (2) participation by number of donors to the NSF in a series of informal coordination meetings with the IAEA that included discussing how the Agency views its priorities for its nuclear security activities, which State believes are more likely to result in positive outcomes than priorities negotiated at Board of Governors meetings. GAO will follow up with State in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to determine the extent to which these efforts lead to more concrete prioritization guidelines for IAEA's nuclear security program.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with IAEA and its member states through the Board of Governors to improve the nuclear security program's performance measures by developing baselines and measurable targets. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation and agreed that more could be done by IAEA to define nuclear security program baselines and targets, especially on activities that are mostly or fully within the IAEA's remit. In its January 2020 letter to GAO, State noted that it has advocated for improved program management within the Division of Nuclear Security. State believed the advocacy is having an impact, as is evident in the most recent Nuclear Security Report, which included reference to the continued application of a results-based approach to nuclear security activities which help drive positive outcomes from Agency assistance. State also noted in its letter that it continues to pursue better performance measures during negotiations of the next IAEA Programme and Budget (for 2022-2023) and in the development of the next IAEA Nuclear Security Plan (for 2022-2025). State said that it will continue to encourage IAEA to apply program management best practices, including comprehensively establishing performance measures, documenting baselines, setting clear goals, and measuring outcomes. GAO will follow up with State officials in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 and review the next IAEA Programme and Budget and the 2022-2025 Nuclear Security Plan (which should be issued in September 2021) to assess whether IAEA has improved nuclear security program performance measures, including by incorporating baselines and measurable targets.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with IAEA and its member states through the Board of Governors to improve how the Division of Nuclear Security (DNS) reports to member states by consistently including the results of performance measures in at least one of the reports. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation and its January 2020 letter to GAO it indicated that it is working with the IAEA to improve its reporting. Specifically, State reported that in conjunction with its efforts to address recommendation 2, to improve nuclear security program performance measures, it has seen IAEA's Division of Nuclear Security make improvements in an effort to be more consistent and diligent about providing performance measures and reporting results to IAEA member states. In fiscal years 2020 and 2021, GAO will review available IAEA nuclear security reports and will follow up with State to clarify improvements it has observed in IAEA's nuclear security program reporting.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with IAEA and its member states through the Board of Governors to analyze options to stabilize DNS's funding within current fiscal and political constraints to enhance the sustainability of IAEA's nuclear security program. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation, and in its January 2020 letter to GAO, State noted that the sustainability of the Division of Nuclear Security's budget remains a major area of focus. State noted that many IAEA member states maintain a position of zero real growth in IAEA's budget and are reluctant to reapportion funding to nuclear security activities from other IAEA programs. State reported that it will advocate for priority areas in IAEA budget negotiations, such as nuclear security, to gain a greater share of any agreed budget increases as an alternative to shifting funds from other programs. State noted that this remains a challenge, but that it will continue to identify options to enhance the sustainability of the IAEA's nuclear security program, including how best to also strengthen governance of the Nuclear Security Fund. GAO will follow up with State in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 regarding the options it has identified and pursued to improve the sustainability of the nuclear security program and its funding.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with IAEA and its member states through the Board of Governors to strengthen the agency's central coordinating role by following key practices for collaboration. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The State Department (State) agreed with this recommendation, and in its January 2020 letter to GAO it generally stated that it is working with IAEA and its member states to improve collaboration among nuclear security stakeholders and strengthen the Agency's central coordinating role. However, State's letter did not specify actions that State is undertaking in this regard. Instead, State's letter reiterated coordinating actions that IAEA had already been undertaking at the time of our report. GAO will follow up with State in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 to better understand the actions, if any, it is taking or has planned to strengthen IAEA's central coordinating role, as well as any actions IAEA is taking independently to improve its coordinating role consistent with key practices for effective collaboration.

Recommendation: The Director of JIATF-West should establish a vital few performance measures that are consistently measured over time. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The Director of JIATF-West should establish specific targets that set a minimal level of performance. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should develop outcome-based performance measures for the DHS JTFs that are consistent. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The Chief of Border Patrol should develop and implement performance measures to assess its effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry (Recommendation 1).

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Office of the Commissioner: U.S. Border Patrol
Status: Open

Comments: Border Patrol concurred with this recommendation and in an April 2020 update and stated that it is developing new northern border security metrics. Border Patrol is in the process of evaluating them and coordinating with subject matter experts to ensure they are valid. We will continue to monitor Border Patrol's ongoing efforts.

Recommendation: The Executive Assistant Commissioner of AMO should develop and implement performance measures to assess its effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry in the air and maritime environments (Recommendation 2).

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Air and Marine Operations
Status: Open

Comments: AMO concurred with this recommendation and in a July 2020 update, stated that it has developed preliminary performance measures and established a working group to assess their effectiveness. According to AMO, they remain on track to implement the performance measures and report on them beginning in fiscal year 2022. We will continue to monitor AMO's efforts.

Recommendation: The Attorney General should develop and document goals that explain the common outcomes DOJ seeks to achieve through its elder justice efforts. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on a draft of our report in May 2019, DOJ did not explicitly state whether or not it concurred with the two recommendations we directed to the department, but stated that it is taking our recommendations under serious review. Specifically, DOJ stated that it planned to form a subcommittee within its Elder Justice Working Group to consider the development or clarification of goals and the development of outcome measures. In a follow-up response dated December 17, 2019, DOJ noted that the subcommittee had been formed, and had met to explore the development of additional---or clarification of present---goals, including those referenced in our report. We will continue to monitor DOJ's efforts towards implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Attorney General should develop and document outcome measures to track the progress the agency is making toward achieving its elder justice goals. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on a draft of our report in May 2019, DOJ did not explicitly state whether or not it concurred with the two recommendations we directed to the department, but stated that it is taking our recommendations under serious review. Specifically, DOJ stated that it planned to form a subcommittee within its Elder Justice Working Group to consider the development or clarification of goals and the development of outcome measures. In a follow-up response dated December 17, 2019, DOJ noted that the subcommittee had been formed, and had met to begin developing and documenting appropriate outcome measures that can better track the Department's progress on its overall elder justice efforts. This will include consideration of the specific suggestions cited in our report, as well exploring opportunities for additional data collection to enhance the Department's efforts and better measure outcomes. We will continue to monitor DOJ's efforts towards implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should take steps to reconcile G-REX and the Federal Real Property Profile to the extent practical. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA is taking steps to implement this recommendation. GSA staff summarized the agency's approach to addressing the recommendation in a January 2020 meeting. GAO agreed to check progress with GSA in the summer of 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should develop a process for assessing at regular intervals, such as annually, agencies' policies and procedures for managing their delegated leasing activities. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA is taking steps to implement this recommendation. GSA staff summarized the agency's approach to addressing the recommendation in a January 2020 meeting. GAO agreed to check progress with GSA in the summer of 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should develop a process that would allow GSA to track agencies' progress in meeting GSA management goals, such as cost effective lease rates, and avoiding holdovers. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA is taking steps to implement this recommendation. GSA staff summarized the agency's approach to addressing the recommendation in a January 2020 meeting. GAO agreed to check progress with GSA in the summer of 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should develop a systematic, risk-based process for monitoring a selection of submitted post award documents. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: GSA is taking steps to implement this recommendation. GSA staff summarized the agency's approach to addressing the recommendation in a January 2020 meeting. GAO agreed to check progress with GSA in the summer of 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Director to work with other sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals for the Manufacturing USA program with measurable targets and time frames. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. Commerce stated that it lacks the legal authority to compel action by other federal agencies, and that legal constraints aside, it believes it is bad management practice to ask institutes to respond to performance goals issued by different bodies. As of March 2020, Commerce stated that it plans to report on performance goals for Commerce-sponsored institutes effective with the 2019 annual report, which it expects to issue by September 2020. Commerce also agreed to continue working closely with other sponsoring federal agencies on program and network goals for the Manufacturing USA institutes, but did not commit to working with sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the development of network-wide performance goals, targets, and time frames as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's network-wide coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Moreover, our recommendation specifically pertained to developing performance goals for the Manufacturing USA program, not individual institutes. As we stated in our report, this would not necessarily entail new performance measures but, rather, could consist of measurable near-term performance goals corresponding to program performance measures already in place. Further, as stated in our report, GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with targets and time frames, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress toward long-term Manufacturing USA program goals and objectives.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NIST Director to work with other sponsoring federal agencies to ensure that the Manufacturing USA network-wide performance measures are directly aligned with the network-wide performance goals, the Manufacturing USA strategic objectives and program goals, and the statutory purposes of the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation (RAMI) Act. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it supports the alignment of performance measures with performance goals only for Commerce-sponsored institutes. Commerce stated that it is unable to commit to this recommendation as 13 of the 14 existing institutes were authorized under authorities other than the RAMI Act and are sponsored by agencies other than Commerce. Commerce also stated that, until additional institutes authorized by the RAMI Act are in place, it does not support additional performance measures for the single Commerce-sponsored institute beyond the RAMI Act requirements, as doing so would impose an unfair level of scrutiny. Commerce agreed to report on performance metrics for department-sponsored institutes effective with the current annual report, which is expected by September 2020. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the effort to align the network-wide performance measures with network-wide performance goals and Manufacturing USA program goals as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Our recommendation does not ask Commerce to compel actions by other agencies, nor to develop any additional performance measures. As noted in our report, the Manufacturing USA program's performance measurement structure aligns near-term performance measures directly to the program's long-term goals. This structure bypasses connecting the performance measures with the program's objectives that have been developed to break down the long-term goals more specifically. GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to ensure that the Manufacturing USA network-wide performance measures are directly aligned with the Manufacturing USA strategic program goals and objectives and the statutory purposes of the RAMI Act, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress made toward achieving the statutory purposes of the Manufacturing USA program.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NIST Director to develop criteria to evaluate whether the Commerce-sponsored institute can sustain its operations without additional federal financial assistance after its initial agreement. If an analysis based on such criteria indicates that additional federal financial assistance is needed to help the institute sustain its operations, then the Secretary of Commerce should consider a legislative proposal to amend relevant provisions of the RAMI Act. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it will develop criteria to evaluate the sufficiency of the Commerce-sponsored institute's sustainability plan based on the anticipated operating costs of the institute at fully operational steady state, and the likelihood of sustaining those operations through the specific efforts outlined in the sustainability plan. Commerce stated that it plans to develop the evaluation criteria by April 2020. We will update this recommendation after we learn more about these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Director of DOD's Manufacturing USA institutes to develop criteria to evaluate whether DOD-sponsored institutes can sustain their operations without additional federal financial assistance after their initial agreements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to information DOD provided in March 2020, DOD developed criteria to evaluate whether each DOD-sponsored institute is effectively executing its mission, providing value to the department, and transitioning advanced manufacturing to U.S. manufacturers, while demonstrating progress toward business viability (diversified revenue, controlled costs, etc.). As of March 2020, DOD plans to incorporate these criteria into a strategic management plan, under which the department will review institutes' progress at the end of their agreements to determine the type and level of DOD's continued participation. DOD expects to complete work on the strategic management plan by the end of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Director of DOE's Manufacturing USA institutes to develop criteria to evaluate whether DOE-sponsored institutes can sustain their operations without additional federal financial assistance after their initial agreements. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In September 2019, DOE stated that it will direct the Directors of DOE-sponsored institutes to collectively work toward updating institute sustainability plans and activities and collaboratively develop criteria and metrics to assess the institutes' progress toward financial sustainability. After development of the metrics, DOE will track as appropriate. As of March 2020, DOE reported agreement with its institutes on an initial set of criteria and metrics to assess progress toward financial sustainability. We will update this recommendation as we collect more information about these efforts.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services, working in coordination with the Chief Information Officer, should develop, document, and implement a Retirement Services IT modernization plan for initial project phases that is consistent with key aspects of IT project management, such as determining objectives, costs, and time frames for each initial phase. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that it has established initial high-level funding estimates for each of its five key IT initiatives. OPM cited that its ability to implement the modernization plan depends on the availability of funding and coordination with the agency's top leadership. In December 2019, OPM stated that it was evaluating what corrective actions it plans to take. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should adopt management practices to enhance the use of performance information on processing timeliness to inform how OPM manages operations, identifies problem areas, and allocates resources. For example, OPM could enhance use of performance measures at the operational level or establish a timeliness performance goal for reviewing disability retirement eligibility. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation and responded that it measures overtime spending, reviews daily work level in each work unit, and assesses employee productivity in these units. Collecting and reviewing such operational-level data contributes to monitoring efforts; however the recommendation emphasizes the importance of using performance information to better manage operations to align with organizational goals. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should provide explanatory information, such as the range of processing times and the exclusion of disability retirement eligibility determinations, as part of the performance measure on processing timeliness. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM agreed to add an explanation about disability retirement eligibility determinations to its public reports. OPM disagreed that reporting data on the range of processing times would be beneficial because, according to OPM, it provides processing information through other means, such as through applicants' online accounts and agency benefit officers. OPM also acknowledged that it already collects and shares such data. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should develop and implement policies and procedures for assessing strategies intended to improve processing times, including collecting and improving data needed to support those strategies, such as collecting better productivity data or staffing data and linking them to processing outcomes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that a new case management system could provide better productivity and staffing data with which to assess effectiveness, but is dependent on funding and IT support. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should examine its process for assessing its assistance to agencies on retirement applications. For example, OPM could incorporate into its assessment process more agency feedback or documentation of assessment results, which could improve its partnership with agencies to strengthen the assistance provided. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM concurred with the recommendation. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should work with agencies to determine if there are cost-effective ways to make the retirement application error report that it sends to agencies more user-friendly. For example, explore whether there are cost-effective ways to provide the error report in a format that could be manipulated (e.g., Excel spreadsheet), or to include additional information, such as incorporating disability retirement applications or providing clearer descriptions of errors or trend data, some of which OPM already collects. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that it will explore using MS Excel spreadsheets and incorporating clearer descriptions of errors and data trends. OPM also stated that collecting disability application error information is not an inexpensive or simple process change. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: As VA and IHS revise the MOU and related performance measures, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure these measures are consistent with the key attributes of successful performance measures, including having measurable targets. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should, in consultation with IHS and tribes, establish and distribute a written policy or guidance on how referrals from IHS and Tribal Health Program (THP) facilities to VA facilities for specialty care can be managed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As VA and IHS revise the MOU and related performance measures, the Director of IHS should ensure these measures are consistent with the key attributes of successful performance measures, including having measurable targets. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Indian Health Service
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP should consistently document CEBR program-wide goals to clarify intended program results. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, OJP reported that it is building a logic model for the CEBR program that will provide the basis for addressing this recommendation. According to OJP, this logic model will more clearly align CEBR program goals and objectives with permitted program activities and associated performance measures. OJP had originally planned to finalize this logic model by March 2020 and share it--including any resulting changes in how program goals are articulated--with the CEBR stakeholder community in advance of the fiscal year 2021 grant cycle, beginning October 1, 2020. In June 2020, OJP reported that the CEBR program was transferred from OJP's National Institute of Justice to OJP's Bureau of Justice Assistance. As a result, OJP reported that plans to finalize and communicate the CEBR logic model have been postponed. GAO will follow-up with OJP in the winter of 2020-2021 to obtain documentation on the logic model and how they are communicating it. This will enable GAO to determine if the model--and OJP's efforts to communicate it to stakeholders--meets the intent of the recommendation by consistently documenting CEBR program-wide goals and clarifying intended results.

Recommendation: The Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP should ensure that performance measures for each CEBR program-wide goal fully reflect appropriate attributes of successful performance measures. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, OJP reported that it is reviewing each CEBR program performance measure as part of its process for creating a CEBR program logic model. According to OJP, the purpose of this review is to ensure the measures are meaningful and have the right attributes. In June 2020, OJP reported that, as appropriate, updated performance measures will be included in the fiscal year 2021 CEBR grant program solicitation--which they anticipate releasing in early 2021. GAO will follow-up with OJP in the spring of 2021 to obtain documentation of changes to performance measures, and to determine whether updated performance measures meet the intent of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP should document which employee positions have been delegated certification (final signature) authority for confidential financial disclosure reports and specify required levels of review and approval. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2020, OJP provided a memo sent by the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP to OJP components, dated March 2020. This memo states that supervisors are to review and sign reports, and notes that secondary supervisors may review and sign reports as Final Reviewing Officials, but it is not mandatory. This is a positive step, but does not fully meet the intent of the recommendation because it is not clear if immediate supervisors have been delegated final signature authority. Specifically, there are two places for signature on the reports (1) "Signature and Title of Supervisor/Other Intermediate Reviewer," and (2) "Signature and Title of Agency's Final Reviewing Official" (certification). According to Office of Government Ethics' regulation and guidance, review and signature of a supervisor or other intermediate reviewer is optional, but review and signature of a Final Reviewing Official-who has been delegated authority to certify reports-is required. OJP's memo states that secondary supervisors may sign as Final Reviewing Officials (i.e. have been delegated this authority), but OJP's memo is not clear if immediate supervisors have also been delegated authority to certify reports as Final Reviewing Officials. To address this discrepancy and enable GAO to close this recommendation as "implemented," OJP needs to clarify who has been delegated authority to certify reports as Final Reviewing Officials.

Recommendation: The Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP should (1) clarify its guidance to grantees to specify what their requirements are under 28 C.F.R. pt. 69 with regard to obtaining lobbying certification documents, and obtaining and forwarding to OJP lobbying disclosure forms, from tiers beneath them; and (2) design a control to follow-up with grantees to help ensure they are meeting these requirements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2020, OJP reported that it plans to (1) issue guidance to all OJP funding recipients to remind them of lobbying disclosure requirements and provide instructions for how to submit the disclosures, and (2) implement an updated in-depth monitoring checklist whereby OJP can ensure applicable lobbying disclosure forms are collected and submitted to OJP. OJP stated that it plans to take these steps by October 1, 2020. GAO will follow-up in late 2020 to obtain and review all relevant documentation and ensure that these steps meet the intent of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should develop a mechanism that aligns processes and information sources for collecting R&D project data from DHS components to ensure that the information can be collected, integrated and result in a comprehensive accounting of R&D projects DHS-wide. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, DHS reported that S&T was revising the related DHS Directive to improve R&D project data collection and that detailed procedures for the data collection would be described in an associated guidance document. DHS further reported that S&T would be coordinating with the Undersecretary for Management, and meeting with DHS components regarding the data collection efforts. We will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should direct Office of the Chief Financial Officer program officials to ensure that S&T take steps to more fully incorporate leading practices, such as those included in DHS's budget preparation guidance, into R&D milestones. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, S&T reported preparing Budget Justification documents, which will include key milestones for R&D projects, and indicated that the documents will be reviewed by the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer. We will continue to monitor DHS's efforts related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should develop standard processes and procedures for collecting and analyzing customer feedback, applicable to components conducting R&D, for improving the usefulness of existing customer feedback mechanisms to assess R&D efforts and for implementing such mechanisms where absent. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, DHS stated that a new DHS Directive and Instruction is being developed related to R&D customer and program feedback. This recommendation remains open, and we will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to address it.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should continue to work with the Permanent Representative to the United Nations to ensure that UN peacekeeping operations fully meet principles of effective peacekeeping. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation and stated that, as the report details, the United States has achieved significant successes increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of UN peacekeeping operations. According to State officials, the five peacekeeping principles provide a framework for honest, strategic reviews of peacekeeping operations in order to continue working to ensure that the UN is performing at its highest level in-country, and that the United States and United States taxpayers are receiving the best value for our financial contributions. U.S. leadership and effective collaboration within the UN Security Council has led to smart reductions of over $800 million in the UN peacekeeping budget since July 2016. In response to analysis of conditions on the ground, State has worked with the UN to reconfigure missions in Haiti and Darfur, bolstered the mission in the Central African Republic, made the mission in Lebanon more relevant to the challenges to peace presented by Hizballah, closed the mission in Cote d'Ivoire, and more. The United States will continue to engage in close interagency cooperation, as well as strong advocacy within the UN Security Council to continue improving UN peacekeeping. GAO will continue to monitor State's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should work with the Permanent Representative to the United Nations to ensure that the United Nations provides information to member states on the estimated costs of mandated peacekeeping tasks to provide better cost information when the Security Council adjusts peacekeeping mandates. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation, noting that the report correctly states that there is a need for better financial information related to UN peacekeeping operations. While the UN Secretariat provides a large volume of financial information to the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly, that information does not correlate well with changes that the Security Council makes to specific peacekeeping mandates. Instead, the financial information represents the totality of resources that the UN Secretariat estimates needing to accomplish a given peacekeeping mission's overall mandate. Achieving the desired level of detail will require changes to UN financial management practices and reporting to the Fifth Committee. The United States will work to advance these changes, which may require adoption through a resolution by the UN General Assembly. In the meantime and in the absence of that structural change, the United States will continue to closely scrutinize all proposed UN peacekeeping budgets to ensure to the extent possible that approved resource levels are realistic and afford missions the ability to implement their mandates, based in part on historical forecasting and expenditure patterns. With the implementation of the UN reform agenda and the expected and related UN cultural shift to one that is results based in 2019 and beyond, the United States will continue to advocate for greater transparency and accountability in the use of peacekeeping resources. GAO will continue to monitor State's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should continue to work with the Permanent Representative to the United Nations to ensure that the United Nations takes additional steps to address member states' concerns about complete and timely information on the performance of United Nations peacekeeping operations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State (State) agreed with this recommendation, noting that the United States has been a leader on the UN Security Council in order to create a "culture of performance" in UN peacekeeping. The United States drafted and achieved Security Council approval of resolution 2436 in September 2018, the first-ever resolution focused on improving the performance of UN peacekeeping, and implementing a system of accountability. This resolution calls for a timely and transparent reporting process for performance failures, real accountability measures for when these failures occur, and the application of objective criteria - data, not politics - to match the right police and troops with the right peacekeeping roles. The United States will continue to work with the UN Secretary-General, the Security Council, General Assembly, UN Secretariat, as well as troop- and police-contributing countries in order to ensure effective implementation of resolution 2436 going forward. GAO will continue to monitor State's actions related to this recommendation and update information accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Deputy Secretary of Defense makes a determination as to how the CMO is to direct the business-related activities of the military departments. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 mandated that DOD assess the CMO's position, and the accompanying conference report indicated that the conferees intend to disestablish the position, pending the outcome of DOD's assessments. We continue to believe that DOD needs a CMO, codified in statute as a separate position, at the right level, and with the adequate amount of resources and appropriate authority to be responsible and accountable for its business transformation efforts. In light of pending requirements to assess the CMO position, GAO will continue to monitor the department's response to these recommendations as those assessments and any related actions are completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Deputy Secretary of Defense makes a determination regarding the CMO's relationship with the DAFAs, including whether additional DAFAs should be identified as providing shared business services and which DAFAs will be required to submit their proposed budgets for enterprise business operations to the CMO for review. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 mandated that DOD assess the CMO's position, and the accompanying conference report indicated that the conferees intend to disestablish the position, pending the outcome of DOD's assessments. We continue to believe that DOD needs a CMO, codified in statute as a separate position, at the right level, and with the adequate amount of resources and appropriate authority to be responsible and accountable for its business transformation efforts. In light of pending requirements to assess the CMO position, GAO will continue to monitor the department's response to these recommendations as those assessments and any related actions are completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the CMO and Chief Information Officer (CIO) conduct an analysis to determine which responsibilities should transfer from the CIO to the CMO, including identifying any associated resource impacts, and share the results of that analysis with the Congress. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 mandated that DOD assess the CMO's position, and the accompanying conference report indicated that the conferees intend to disestablish the position, pending the outcome of DOD's assessments. We continue to believe that DOD needs a CMO, codified in statute as a separate position, at the right level, and with the adequate amount of resources and appropriate authority to be responsible and accountable for its business transformation efforts. In light of pending requirements to assess the CMO position, GAO will continue to monitor the department's response to these recommendations as those assessments and any related actions are completed.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Deputy Secretary of Defense, on the basis of the determinations regarding the CMO's statutory and discretionary authorities, codify those authorities and how they are to be operationalized in formal department-wide guidance. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 mandated that DOD assess the CMO's position, and the accompanying conference report indicated that the conferees intend to disestablish the position, pending the outcome of DOD's assessments. We continue to believe that DOD needs a CMO, codified in statute as a separate position, at the right level, and with the adequate amount of resources and appropriate authority to be responsible and accountable for its business transformation efforts. In light of pending requirements to assess the CMO position, GAO will continue to monitor the department's response to these recommendations as those assessments and any related actions are completed.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should determine, in collaboration with transit stakeholders, whether additional transit workforce data are needed to identify potential future occupational shortages in the transit industry and whether the benefits of this collection would outweigh the cost of gathering it. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: On February 11, 2020 FTA stated that they anticipate issuing a notice of funding opportunity to establish a technical assistance center devoted to addressing the workforce development needs of the transit industry. They anticipate implementing this recommendation by January 31, 2021.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should develop and document a strategy that outlines how FTA will help address future transit workforce needs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: On February 11, 2020 FTA stated that they anticipate issuing a notice of funding opportunity to establish a technical assistance center devoted to addressing the workforce development needs of the transit industry. They anticipate implementing this recommendation by January 31, 2021.

Recommendation: The FTA Administrator should develop and document clearly defined performance goals and measures for its transit workforce development efforts. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and stated that FTA will enter into a cooperative agreement with a non-profit partner to develop and implement performance measures for FTA's workforce development efforts. FTA will coordinate with the Department of Labor on these measures. FTA plans to complete these actions by October 1, 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should, in consultation with USAID and other stakeholders as appropriate, create an initiative-wide planning and reporting mechanism for CBSI that includes the ability to monitor, evaluate, and report the results of their collaborative efforts (Recommendation 1).

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In their formal response to the report, State agreed with the recommendation and noted that they plan to develop an updated Results Framework for CBSI that will provide the basis for initiative-wide planning and reporting. As of November 2019, State indicated that they are developing this updated CBSI Results Framework.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that INLs Office of Western Hemisphere Programs develops and implements a data management system for centrally collecting reliable program monitoring data for all INL-funded CBSI activities through its current program monitoring contract or by some other means (Recommendation 2).

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the recommendation, noting that INL's Office of Western Hemisphere Programs is working through its existing monitoring and evaluation contract to improve centralized data collection and is developing plans for an enhanced data management system that will facilitate the collection and management of both strategic and implementer-reported data. In addition, State reported that INL is developing complementary bureau-wide monitoring and evaluation guidance and procedures to ensure the consistency and reliability of collected data across INL programs, which include CBSI activities. As of November 2019, State has not yet completed these efforts.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should direct program managers to establish shore infrastructure performance goals, measures, and baselines to track the effectiveness of maintenance and repair investments and provide feedback on progress made. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard continues to develop and refine its shore infrastructure measures with associated goals and estimates that it will complete these efforts in December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should work with Congress to develop and implement a process to routinely align Coast Guard's shore infrastructure portfolio with mission needs, including by disposing of all unneeded assets. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard continues work to establish a formalized process to assess current and projected operational and mission support needs to identify and recommend disposal of unneeded land, buildings, and structures. The Coast Guard anticipates completing these efforts by December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should establish guidance for planning boards to document inputs, deliberations, and project prioritization decisions for infrastructure maintenance projects. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Coast Guard concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. As of April 2020, the Coast Guard is reviewing its existing guidance for planning boards and expects to complete these efforts in December 2020. When we confirm actions the Coast Guard has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should employ models for its asset lines for predicting the outcome of investments, analyzing trade-offs, and optimizing decisions among competing investments. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In 2019, GAO reported that the Coast Guard generally has not employed models for predicting the outcome of maintenance investments and optimizing among competing investments, as called for in leading practices. GAO found that, in one instance, the Coast Guard used a model to optimize maintenance for its aviation pavement and, according to Coast Guard officials, found that it could save nearly $14 million by accelerating investment in this area (e.g., paving runways) sooner rather than deferring such maintenance. Coast Guard officials told GAO that such modeling could be applied within and across all of its shore infrastructure asset types, but the Coast Guard did not implement the results of this model and does not require their use. Employing models to predict the future condition and performance of facilities could potentially identify and achieve cost savings, according to leading practices. The Coast Guard concurred with GAO's recommendation that it employ models for its asset lines for predicting the outcome of investments, analyzing trade-offs, and optimizing decisions among competing investments. As of January 2020, the Coast Guard has not employed models to evaluate its asset lines. Instead, the Coast Guard reported that it is evaluating alternative models for its asset lines, and estimated that the Coast Guard will complete this analysis by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should include supporting details about competing project alternatives and report trade-offs in Congressional budget requests and related reports. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, GAO reported that Coast Guard budget requests did not provide Congress with accurate information about its funding needs. Specifically, we found that the Coast Guard did not meet this leading practice as its budget requests (1) have not clearly identified funding allotted for routine shore infrastructure maintenance needs, and (2) have not generally addressed deferred maintenance and repair deficiencies, resulting in increases to its backlogs. Specifically, GAO found that budget requests related to shore infrastructure for fiscal years 2012 through 2019 did not provide Congress with required and complete information, as previously noted, necessary to inform decision-makers of the risks posed by untimely investments in maintenance and repair backlogs. GAO also reported that the Coast Guard annual Unfunded Priorities List does not clearly articulate prioritization decisions, including information about trade-offs among competing project alternatives, as well as the impacts on missions conducted from shore facilities in disrepair that had not been prioritized in previous years, or is it aligned with its requirements-based budget targets for shore infrastructure. DHS concurred with GAO's recommendation that the Coast Guard include supporting details about competing project alternatives and report trade-offs in Congressional budget requests and related reports. In its August 2019 180-day letter response, DHS stated that the Coast Guard Office of Budget and Programs will include additional information in the future Unfunded Priorities Lists. However, when the Coast Guard released its 2020 Unfunded Priorities List to Congress it did not contain additional details on competing priorities. GAO will continue to monitor Coast Guard budget requests and related reports, including the Unfunded Priorities Lists, for additional supporting details about competing project alternatives and trade-offs

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Director of the Office of Project Management and the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to work together to establish requirements for classifying cleanup work as capital asset projects or operations activities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE partially concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that DOE developed a draft Cleanup Project Management Policy to clarify the expectations for EM's management of discrete work, such as operations activities that could be considered projects. In February 2020, EM officials stated that they are addressing this recommendation in two steps. First, EM is working with DOE's Office of Project Management to draft a Cleanup Project Management Policy (expected to be completed in spring 2020) to address the Decommissioning and Deactivation (D&D) phase of cleanup. This policy will become an appendix in DOE's Order 413.3B. EM officials further stated that EM plans to develop an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy that would classify the remaining types of activities not covered by the Cleanup Project Management Policy, including what EM currently classifies as operations activities. EM plans to implement this policy by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Director of the Office of Project Management and the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to work together to asses EM's ongoing operations activities to determine if they should be reclassified as capital asset projects based on the newly established requirements. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE partially concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that DOE developed a draft Cleanup Project Management Policy to clarify the expectations for EM's management of discrete work, such as operations activities that could be considered projects. In February 2020, EM officials stated that they are addressing this recommendation in two steps. First, EM is working with DOE's Office of Project Management to draft a Cleanup Project Management Policy (expected to be completed in spring 2020) to address the Decommissioning and Deactivation (D&D) phase of cleanup. This policy will become an appendix in DOE's Order 413.3B. EM officials further stated that EM plans to develop an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy that would classify the remaining types of activities not covered by the Cleanup Project Management Policy, including what EM currently classifies as operations activities. EM plans to implement this policy by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to review and revise EM's 2017 cleanup policy to include program management leading practices related to scope, cost, schedule performance, and independent reviews. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that EM intends to replace its current EM Cleanup Policy with two separate project and program management policies that will incorporate leading practices related to scope, cost, and schedule, and independent reviews, as appropriate. In February 2020, EM officials stated that EM is working on a Cleanup Project Management Policy (expected to be completed in spring 2020) that will cover the Decommissioning and Deactivation (D&D) phase of cleanup. EM plans to develop an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy (expected to be completed by the end of fiscal year 2020), which will supersede EM's current cleanup policy and include leading program management practices-and possibly also project management practices-related to scope, cost, schedule performance, and independent reviews.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to review and revise EM's 2017 cleanup policy to include project management leading practices related to scope, cost, schedule performance, and independent reviews. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that EM intends to replace its current EM Cleanup Policy with two separate project and program management policies that will incorporate leading practices related to scope, cost, and schedule, and independent reviews, as appropriate. In February 2020, EM officials stated that EM is working on a Cleanup Project Management Policy (expected to be completed in spring 2020) that will cover the Decommissioning and Deactivation (D&D) phase of cleanup. EM plans to develop an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy (expected to be completed by the end of fiscal year 2020), which will supersede EM's current cleanup policy and include leading program management practices-and possibly also project management practices-related to scope, cost, schedule performance, and independent reviews.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to update its cleanup policy to require that earned value management (EVM) systems be maintained and used in a way that follows EVM best practices. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that EM intends to replace its current EM Cleanup Policy with two separate project and program management policies that will incorporate earned value management best practices, as appropriate. In February 2020, EM officials stated that EM's forthcoming Cleanup Project Management Policy (expected to be completed in spring 2020) will require capital asset projects covered under the policy to use earned value management (EVM) systems that have been independently certified, which is an EVM best practice. However, EM officials told us that this policy will not require operations activities to follow EVM best practices. EM officials stated that EM is also considering including this requirement in its forthcoming Cleanup Program Management Policy (expected to be completed by the end of fiscal year 2020). In addition, EM officials told is that EM plans to require future end-state contracts to use EVM systems that have either been certified by the DOE Office of Project Management or been subject to a "compliance review" conducted by EM itself, depending on the dollar value of the contract.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to develop a policy to ensure that work is categorized as level of effort only in appropriate, specified circumstances, such as when work is not measurable or when measurement is impractical. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that EM intends to include requirements related to the categorization of level of effort work in the project and program management policies EM is developing.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Environmental Management to integrate EVM data into EM's performance metrics for operations activities. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE partially concurred with this recommendation. In August 2019, in a letter to GAO on how EM will address our recommendation, the Senior Advisor for Environmental Management to the Under Secretary for Science stated that DOE is in the process of developing a Cleanup Program Management Policy that will, among other things, incorporate changes relative to the integration of EVM data into performance metrics as appropriate. As of February 2020, EM officials told us that the new policy is expected to be completed by the end of fiscal year 2020. In February 2020, EM officials stated that EM plans to begin a new performance review process for operations activities that will include EVM-based performance metrics as part of annual reporting to the Assistant Secretary. The new process is expected to begin in October 2020, but EM officials have not determined whether this will be a requirement included in EM's forthcoming Cleanup Program Management Policy.

Recommendation: The Secretary of DHS should direct the appropriate staff to work with OMB to follow up with agencies to identify obstacles and impediments affecting their abilities to implement intrusion detection and prevention capabilities. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS provided evidence in December 2019 but it was insufficient to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with DHS.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should submit the intrusion assessment plan to the appropriate congressional committees. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should report on implementation of the defense-in-depth strategy described in the intrusion assessment plan, including all elements described in the plan. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should update the analysis of agencies' intrusion detection and prevention capabilities to include the degree to which agencies are using NCPS. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to update her report to Congress to include required information, such as detecting advanced persistent threats, a comparison of the costs and benefits of the capabilities versus commercial technologies and tools, and the capability of agencies to protect sensitive cyber threat indicators and defense measures. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to work with DHS to follow-up with agencies to identify obstacles and impediments affecting their abilities to implement intrusion detection and prevention capabilities. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Office of Management and Budget has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation. We will continue to follow-up with OMB.

Recommendation: The Administrator of USAID should establish additional controls to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information that USAID uses to monitor counter-trafficking in persons projects. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: USAID concurred with GAO's recommendation and has begun to take corrective action in response. In a March 11, 2019 letter to congressional committees, USAID noted its commitment to address GAO's recommendation through implementing additional controls for the agency's counter-trafficking in persons projects. Specifically, USAID commented that it was implementing data systems and taking additional steps intended to strengthen data management, improve record-keeping, increase data quality, and build capacity of local partners, with a target completion date of April 2020. As of January 2020, USAID officials noted that the agency has piloted its information management system, the Development Information Solution (DIS), in 7 USAID missions and is considering a strategy to deploy the DIS agency-wide by the end of 2021. According to USAID officials and documents, work has been completed to build DIS features that will help to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information, such as the ability to create and centrally manage customized indicators within DIS as well as centrally track and manage project activities, targets, and results. USAID has also updated its performance monitoring policy to require the completion of Performance Management Plans, within 3 months of completion of the mission's Country Development Cooperation Strategy, instead of the previously required 6 months. In addition, according to USAID officials and documents GAO reviewed, USAID and the Department of State's (State) Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources have developed additional administrative reports and processes that encourage increased ownership and review of data in the FACTSinfo NextGen system, the system of record for performance information related to the expenditure of foreign assistance funds. According to USAID officials and documents GAO reviewed, in order to improve quality control for this data, USAID and State will conduct a high level administrative review of the performance reporting process, including of the participation of key stakeholders in this process, beginning in March 2020. Once USAID provides additional information to GAO, including information on steps to more fully deploy the DIS and implement changes resulting from its review of the PPR process under its new grants management data system, GAO will determine whether USAID has established additional controls to improve the consistency and completeness of performance information.

Recommendation: The Office of the Secretary should assess the feasibility and cost of updating its airline case management system to address data and reporting limitations, and to undertake those updates that are cost effective and feasible. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to update its case management tracking system. As of June, 2020, DOT has not provided an update regarding the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. DOT indicated the agency would provide a response in the coming months, citing delays with workloads due to COVID-19. Once DOT provides a response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Office of the Secretary should establish performance measures for each of its objectives for its five key airline-compliance activities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to establish appropriate performance measures. As of June, 2020, DOT has not provided an update regarding the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. DOT indicated the agency would provide a response in the coming months, citing delays with workloads due to COVID-19. Once DOT provides a response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Office of the Secretary should capture feedback directly from airline passengers or identify other mechanisms to capture passengers' perspectives to inform DOT's education efforts. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to capture feedback directly from consumers. As of June, 2020, DOT has not provided an update regarding the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. DOT indicated the agency would provide a response in the coming months, citing delays with workloads due to COVID-19. Once DOT provides a response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Office of the Secretary should develop performance measures for DOT's efforts to educate airline passengers. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to develop appropriate performance measures for DOT's efforts to educate airline passengers. As of June, 2020, DOT has not provided an update regarding the status of its efforts to implement this recommendation. DOT indicated the agency would provide a response in the coming months, citing delays with workloads due to COVID-19. Once DOT provides a response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director should update the enterprise governance policy to specify (1) the CIO's current role and responsibilities on the Executive Resources Board, to include developing and reviewing the IT budget formulation and execution; and (2) the Deputy CIO's role and responsibilities on the Enterprise Governance Council. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. In March 2020, Secret Service officials stated that the component had drafted a revised enterprise governance policy that outlines the CIO's and Deputy CIO's roles and responsibilities. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to finalize this policy.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the Secret Service develops a charter for its Executive Resources Board that specifies the roles and responsibilities of all board members, including the CIO. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. In March 2020, Secret Service officials stated that the component had drafted a charter for its Executive Resources Board that specifies the roles and responsibilities of Board members, including the CIO. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to finalize this charter.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO includes product quality and post-deployment user satisfaction metrics in the modular outcomes and target measures that the CIO sets for monitoring agile projects. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: Secret Service officials stated that Secret Service acquisition directives require the component to conduct a Post Implementation Review of IT programs after such a program achieves Initial Operating Capability. However, it is unclear whether and how this requirement applies to agile projects, and if the Secret Service has included post-deployment user satisfaction metrics in the modular outcomes and target measures that the CIO sets for monitoring such projects. DHS's draft agile guidance strongly recommends that user satisfaction be assessed at the end of each production deployment, not just one time after Initial Operating Capability. Moreover, the Secret Service has not yet demonstrated that the CIO has included product quality in the modular outcomes and target measures that the CIO sets for monitoring agile projects. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO identifies all of the required knowledge and skills for the IT workforce. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: In 2018 and 2019, the Secret Service participated in the Department of Homeland Security's Strategic Workforce Planning initiative, during which the department identified critical competencies and target proficiency levels for various IT workforce roles across the department (e.g., systems analysis, network management). However, it is unclear whether the Secret Service's participation in this initiative included the identification of the required knowledge and skills for all of the roles within the component's IT workforce, or just certain roles. In addition, while the Secret Service also established a standard operating procedure document in December 2019 that, among other things, identified recommended training and certifications for each OCIO division (e.g., network management, cyber security), this procedure document did not identify the required knowledge and skills for the workforce roles within each of those OCIO divisions. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO regularly analyzes the IT workforce to identify its competency needs and any gaps it may have. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: According to Secret Service officials, the component analyzed its IT workforce to identify its competency needs, as well as determined the projected staffing and competency gaps that it would have in fiscal year 2019. However, it has not yet provided supporting documentation of the analyses that the CIO conducted to determine these competency needs and projected competency gaps. We will continue to follow-up with the Secret Service for documentation of its efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that, after OCIO completes an analysis of the IT workforce to identify any competency and staffing gaps it may have, the Secret Service updates its recruiting and hiring strategies and plans to address those gaps, as necessary. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: According to Secret Service officials, the component determined that it had a projected staffing gap for fiscal year 2019 of 35 staff within the 2210 occupational job series (i.e., IT management staff). The officials also said that they had identified projected competency gaps related to positions such as Cyber Intelligence Analyst and Intelligence Research Specialist. While the Secret Service has not yet provided documentation of the analyses it conducted to determine these gaps, the component provided documentation to demonstrate that it targeted its fiscal year 2019 recruiting events to focus on addressing IT staffing and competency gaps. For example, among other things, in fiscal year 2019 the component conducted outreach and recruiting events focused on defense, cyber, IT, and intelligence hiring, as well as conducted a targeted cyber security hiring campaign with a large online job search service. We will continue to follow-up with the Secret Service for documentation of the analyses the OCIO conducted to determine its IT staffing and competency gaps, in order to verify whether the 2019 recruiting events conducted were focused on addressing such gaps.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the Office of Human Resources (1) develops and tracks metrics to monitor the effectiveness of the Secret Service's recruitment activities for the IT workforce, including their effectiveness at addressing skill and staffing gaps; and (2) reports to component leadership on those metrics. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: Secret Service officials stated that the component has conducted recruitment and outreach efforts focused on IT, cyber, and engineering careers, and monitors the effectiveness of these efforts. However, the Secret Service has not yet provided supporting documentation demonstrating that it has (1) developed and tracked metrics to monitor the effectiveness of these recruitment activities, including their effectiveness at addressing skill and staffing gaps within the IT workforce; and (2) reported to component leadership on those metrics. We will continue to monitor the Secret Service's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the Office of Human Resources and OCIO adjust their recruitment and hiring plans and activities, as necessary, after establishing and tracking metrics for assessing the effectiveness of these activities for the IT workforce. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: The Secret Service has not yet demonstrated that it has established and tracked metrics for assessing the effectiveness of its recruitment and hiring plans and activities for the IT workforce. As such, the component is not yet able to demonstrate that its Office of Human Resources and OCIO have adjusted their recruitment and hiring plans and activities based on these metrics. We will continue to monitor the Secret Service's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO (1) defines the required training for each IT workforce group, (2) determines the activities that OCIO will include in its IT workforce training and development program based on its available training budget, and (3) implements those activities. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2019, the Secret Service established a standard operating procedure document that identifies, among other things, recommended training and certifications for each OCIO division (e.g., network management, cyber security). However, this procedure document does not identify required training for each of these divisions. In March 2020, Secret Service officials stated that OCIO supervisors issued individual development plans to their team members that identified training requirements for continued professional development. However, the Secret Service has not yet provided documentation of these training requirements, nor evidence to support that the planned professional development activities are based on the required training for each IT workforce group. Moreover, the officials stated that, in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), training is suspended. As such, the component is not implementing IT workforce training activities at this time. The officials plan to continue staff training once it is reinstated. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO ensures that the IT workforce completes training specific to their positions (after defining the training required for each workforce group). (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: While Secret Service officials stated that the component's Office of Training establishes the required curriculum for Secret Service personnel, the component has not yet demonstrated that the CIO has defined the training required for each IT workforce group, as we previously recommended. As such, the component is also not able to demonstrate that it is ensuring that each IT workforce group completes the training specific to their positions, as we also recommended. We will continue to monitor the Secret Service's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO collects and assesses performance data (including qualitative or quantitative measures, as appropriate) to determine how the IT training program contributes to improved performance and results (once the training program is implemented). (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: Secret Service officials stated that they are assessing how IT training has contributed to improved performance and results by comparing IT course completion results to the results of related training exercises that the component conducts (for example, the Secret Service may compare the completion rates for an IT security awareness training course to the results of a related IT security awareness exercise that the component conducts). However, the Secret Service has not yet provided supporting documentation of these assessments. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director should ensure that the CIO updates the performance plans for each occupational series within the IT workforce to include the relevant technical competencies, once identified, against which IT staff performance should be assessed. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Secret Service
Status: Open

Comments: According to Secret Service officials, the component has implemented a performance management system that enables OCIO supervisors to update the individual performance plans of each IT workforce staff member to include the relevant technical competencies against which each staff member's performance is to be assessed. However, the Secret Service has not yet provided supporting documentation demonstrating that OCIO has updated the performance plans for each IT workforce staff member to include the relevant technical competencies. We will continue to monitor the component's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center and the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development should develop written guidance for CPD's field offices to use when determining whether to make a referral to the Departmental Enforcement Center. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center and the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing should develop written guidance for PIH's field offices to use when determining whether to make a referral to the Departmental Enforcement Center. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center and the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development should develop targets for the number of referrals that CPD should make to DEC that are based on program risk. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center and the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing should develop targets for the number of referrals that PIH should make to DEC that are based on program risk. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center should develop and implement performance measures that assess the outcomes, or desired results, of its enforcement activities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center should develop and implement performance measures of its timeliness in completing oversight reviews. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center should track the implementation of the recommendations that it makes to program offices as a result of its oversight reviews. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Departmental Enforcement Center should develop controls to ensure that analysts consistently and reliably record dates related to referral activity, corrective action taken, and other key information used to determine DEC's impact. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Benefits should develop and implement a new regional office performance measure that allows it to better measure the accuracy of each regional office's work. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Benefits Administration
Status: Open

Comments: VBA is working to develop and implement a new measure to assess the accuracy of each regional office. We will close this recommendation once VA has finalized and implemented the new measure.

Recommendation: As MHS governing bodies conduct their recurring reviews of quality measures selected for MHS's Core Dashboard and Purchased Care Dashboards, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should direct those bodies to prioritize, as appropriate, the selection of measures that apply to both direct and purchased care at the provider level and that expand the range of quality measure types and medical conditions that are assessed. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, DOD officials described proposed actions to address key elements of our recommendation. Specifically, DOD officials described compiling a comprehensive library of existing inpatient and outpatient quality measures for both direct and purchased care; categorizing those measures by type and medical condition; and identifying 8 measures that are common across direct and purchased care. DOD stated it is considering expanding those 8 common measures to 12 measures. The new measures would cover three cancer screening measures and an additional inpatient satisfaction measure. However, DOD officials noted these 12 measures are not reported at the provider level for purchased care given current contract reporting requirements and would require contract modifications. DOD officials also said they are participating in an interagency partnership to use a common set of quality measures across federal programs, including under the Department of Veterans Affairs. Once those quality measures are determined, DOD may expand the range of quality measures common across direct and purchased care to be consistent with other federal programs. We will keep this recommendation open until DOD provides additional information on actions taken to select and expand quality measures across direct and purchased care.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should establish, as appropriate, performance standards related to the Purchased Care Dashboard measures that are consistent with the MHS's performance standards for direct care; ensure they are applied to individual purchased care providers; and take steps, such as amending its managed care support contracts, if necessary, to require corrective actions to be taken when providers do not meet those standards. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, DOD officials said that once a common set of quality measures is adopted to the extent possible across direct and purchased care (as discussed in Recommendation 1), DOD plans to establish consistent performance standards applied to individual providers and plans to develop processes to issue corrective actions for individual direct and purchased care providers who do not consistently meet established standards. We will update this recommendation as DOD provides progress updates on the implementation of these plans.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the U.S. Seaway Corporation should establish a process to identify, analyze, and monitor risks to the system's use to inform future actions to address those risks. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2020, DOT reported that the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC) is in the process of completing development of its new risk management program and anticipates having a final product that will be implemented by the end of 2020. GAO will continue to monitor the SLSDC's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should direct the leaders of the Leveraging Data as a Strategic Asset CAP Goal to ensure future updates to the action plan, and the resulting federal data strategy, provide additional details on improving the use of data, including performance information, more extensively within federal agencies. The action plan should identify performance goals; contributing agencies, organizations, programs, and other activities; those responsible for leading implementation within these contributors; planned actions; time frames; and means to assess progress. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and contributors to the Leveraging Data as a Strategic Asset cross-agency priority (CAP) goal, have taken some actions to address this recommendation. For example, in May 2019 they released a set of recommended practices designed to support agency implementation of the federal data strategy. In particular, several of these practices relate to data-driven decision making, encouraging agencies to "champion data use," "use data to guide decision making," and "use data to increase accountability." However, as of September 2020, the action plans for the implementation of the federal data strategy, and the overall CAP goal, did not include all of the required information. For example, they did not include a means to assess progress related to efforts to improve data-driven decision making in the federal government. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions related to implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB, in coordination with the PIC, should prioritize efforts to identify and share among agencies proven practices for increasing, and challenges that hamper, the use of performance information in decision making more extensively within agencies. At a minimum, this effort should involve the agencies that our survey suggests may offer such insights. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) have taken some actions towards addressing this recommendation. For example, in 2018 and 2019, the PIC hosted a series of workshops focused on relevant topics, such as how agency staff can develop performance measures and analyze data, and how data-driven reviews are used across the federal government. However, as of October 2020, they had not yet undertaken efforts to directly address the recommendation. They have not engaged the agencies highlighted by our survey results to identify proven practices that would increase, or challenges that are hampering, data-driven decision making within agencies. We will continue to monitor actions related to implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate's Infrastructure Security Compliance Division (ISCD) should incorporate vulnerability into the CFATS site security scoring methodology to help measure the reduction in the vulnerability of high-risk facilities to a terrorist attack, and use that data in assessing the CFATS program's performance in lowering risk and enhancing national security. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and has taken steps to implement and monitor two new performance metrics intended to better demonstrate the CFATS program's effectiveness in enhancing national security and reducing national risk. Specifically, according to DHS, these new performance metrics allow for the (1) evaluation of the progress individual facilities have made in enhancing their security while part of the CFATS program, and (2) comparison of the security measures employed by CFATS-covered chemical facilities upon first entering the program against the improved and enhanced security measures contained in their approved CFATS security plans. DHS began reporting the two measures, "Average score of approved Site Security Plans" and "Average score of initial Site Security Plans", for the first quarter of fiscal year 2019. DHS stated that these measures will be used to demonstrate the percent increase in security score of facilities' security plans, resulting in a representation of the increase in the security posture across the facility population, which will be used internally to assess progress. GAO continues to monitor the results of these two new performance metrics.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)), in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments, comprehensively evaluate the funding targets for Category A and B MWR programs and document any changes made to the targets and the methodology used. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of September 2020, OSD officials stated that the Department is conducting a comprehensive review of the entire DOD MWR program that will encompass a review of the MWR funding targets. OSD officials stated that OSD, in conjunction with the Military Departments have been engaged over the last two years to complete this review. OSD officials said that once this review is complete, DOD Instruction 1015.10 and DOD Instruction 1015.15 will be updated with the new policy. OSD officials estimate completing this by 9/30/2022.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the USD(P&R), in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments, develop measurable goals for its MWR programs' performance measures to determine the programs' cost-effectiveness. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. OSD officials stated that the Department is conducting a comprehensive review of the entire DOD MWR program that will encompass a review of the MWR funding targets. OSD officials said that OSD, in conjunction with the Military Departments have been engaged over the last two years to complete this review. OSD officials said that once this review is complete, DOD Instruction 1015.10 and DOD Instruction 1015.15 will be updated with the new policy. OSD officials said that after agreement on the new funding targets is reached, work will begin to develop measurable performance goals. OSD officials estimate that this work will be completed by 9/30/2022.

Recommendation: The Deputy Commissioner for Hearings Operations should evaluate the costs versus the benefits of changing system limitations that hinder users' ability to correctly and efficiently identify and transfer batches of cases. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed and in May 2019 stated that it is in the early stages of developing and rolling out a new case processing system to replace its Case Processing and Management System called the Hearings and Appeals Case Processing System (HACPS). HACPS will provide end-to-end disability claims processing infrastructure to support the full life-cycle of a disability claim and give users greater flexibility in correctly and accurately transferring cases to and from hearing sites process. It will include hearings and appeals case processing functionality. In early 2020, SSA reported that there were six releases of HACPS from November 2018 through September 2019 and they expect full implementation by early FY 2021.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office should ensure that the office more fully documents its processes for scoring and awarding lead grants and its rationale for award decisions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD's Lead Office had taken steps to implement this recommendation. For example, they updated the 2018 Application Review Guide with some criteria that could be used to score grant applications. However, the 2019 Application Review Guide did not contain similar criteria. To fully implement this recommendation, the agency will need to follow through and adopt criteria to score grant applications on a consistent basis.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office should ensure that the office periodically evaluates its processes for scoring and awarding lead grants. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD's Lead Office began to take steps to implement this recommendation. For example, in the upcoming weeks and months, the Lead Office staff plan to meet to review the most recent round of grant applications and determine whether any changes need to be made to the scoring criteria for future years. To fully implement this recommendation, HUD's Lead Office staff will need to provide evidence the office is periodically evaluating and changing processes to score and award grants, as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office and the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) should collaborate to establish a plan to mitigate and address risks within HUD's lead paint compliance monitoring processes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us the agency had taken steps to implement the recommendation, including requiring PHAs to submit appropriate documentation regarding public housing units' compliance with lead paint regulations and updating an internal checklist for on-site compliance reviews that HUD staff conduct. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in response to our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office and the Assistant Secretary for PIH should collaborate to develop and document procedures to ensure that HUD staff take consistent and timely steps to address issues of public housing agency noncompliance with lead paint regulations. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us procedures were in draft form and under internal review and were not expected to be finalized until spring 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should request authority from Congress to amend the inspection standard to identify lead paint hazards in the Housing Choice Voucher program as indicated by analysis of health effects for children, the impact on landlord participation in the program, and other relevant factors. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In response to this recommendation, HUD's fiscal year 2021 budget justification requested funds to test an alternative lead paint testing method in HUD's Housing Choice Voucher program. To fully implement our recommendation, HUD needs to continue to take steps to analyze potential effects of alternative lead paint testing methods, and use the results to inform its decisions about requesting new authority from Congress.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office should develop performance goals and measures to cover the full range of HUD's lead efforts, including its efforts to ensure that housing units in its rental assistance programs are lead-safe. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us they still were exploring whether current data systems could be used to count the number of lead-safe housing units in HUD's rental assistance programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's effort to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office, in conjunction with PD&R, should finalize plans and develop a time frame for evaluating the effectiveness of the Lead Safe Housing and Lead Disclosure Rules, including an evaluation of the long-term cost effectiveness of the lead remediation methods required by the Lead Safe Housing Rule. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, HUD officials told us they planned to use data from the forthcoming update to the American Healthy Homes Survey to better estimate the prevalence of lead paint hazards in federally assisted housing which would provide an indication of the effectiveness of the lead paint rules. However, officials told us the findings from the updated survey likely would not be available until summer 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office should complete statutory reporting requirements, including but not limited to its efforts to make housing lead-safe through its lead grant programs and rental-assistance programs, and make the report publicly available. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, HUD officials told us they planned to issue a report to Congress on the agency's lead efforts in early 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of NSF should revise the agency's policies for developing schedules for large facilities projects, and for reviewing those schedules, to better incorporate the best practices in GAO's schedule guide. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: NSF agreed with this recommendation and, as of November 2019, had updated its internal guidance to include a new section related to schedule reviews. The updated guidance states that the NSF Large Facilities Office will lead analysis of the schedule for each proposed major facilities project, which will include a technical evaluation by the sponsoring office. As further steps to implement this recommendation, NSF planned to develop (1) a new section of the Major Facilities Guide on schedule development, estimating, and analysis and (2) new internal guidance on including project schedules as part of external panels' oversight reviews. NSF anticipated completing these actions by mid-fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor and provide updates on NSF's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use should establish procedures to better ensure that mid-performance changes to program priority goals, objectives, and targets are examined across multiple years. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2019, HHS reported that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) would add new additional features to its web-based system for overseeing the mental health protection and advocacy programs, with an implementation target date of October 2020. The agency described one new feature as a tracking tool to monitor program requests to revise priority goals, objectives, and targets over multiple years. In the meantime, SAMHSA has developed a manual tracking tool for its project officers to use until the electronic tool is in place. Another new feature is a workflow that will allow project officers, team leaders, and branch chiefs to review and approve changes made by the programs. However, SAMHSA has not yet provided documentation of the latter feature to demonstrate that it has developed procedures for project officers to review the changes over multiple years. Therefore, the agency lacks assurances that its project officers will consistently examine whether a particular program is regularly making changes to benchmarks that may be indicative of a potential performance problem. We will review the web-based tracking tool when available and continue to monitor SAMHSA's efforts to develop procedures for examining changes to benchmarks over multiple years.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to update the policy or guidance for MAIS business programs. Specifically, the update should include the following elements: (1) establishment of initial and current baseline cost and schedule estimates, (2) predetermined threshold cost and schedule estimates to identify the point when programs may be at high risk, and (3) quarterly and annual reports on the performance of programs to stakeholders. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2020, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment issued an updated instruction on defense business systems requirements and acquisition, which included guidance on establishing baseline cost and schedule estimates and considering progress against the baselines at key decision points. However, the instruction does not make a distinction between initial and current baselines. Further, it did not include thresholds for cost and schedule variances or specify periodic reporting of program performance information to stakeholders. According to an official in the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the office does not intend to add the elements of the recommendation related to thresholds and reporting. Specifically, according to the official, the office considers specifying predetermined threshold cost and schedule estimates and frequency for status reporting to be matters for implementation guidance issued by department components or determined by a program decision authority. However, until the department demonstrates that it has fully addressed the recommendation, it is limited in its ability to ensure that effective system acquisition management controls are implemented for each major business system investment and that stakeholders have the information needed to make informed decisions for managing and overseeing these investments. We will continue to monitor the department's implementation of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Director of the Defense Health Agency to direct the program manager for the Defense Healthcare Management System Modernization program to: (1) finalize and approve its requirements management plan, (2) identify and document changes that should be made to plans and work products resulting from changes to the requirements baseline, and (3) quantify costs and benefits of risk mitigation within its program-level risk mitigation plans. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, the Department of Defense had made progress addressing the intent of the recommendation related to requirements management; however, it needs to do more to improve DHMSM program risk management. Specifically, in March 2019, the DHMSM program manager approved a requirements management plan, which includes identifying and documenting changes that should be made to plans and work products resulting from changes to the baseline requirements. Specifically, it includes forward and backward configuration and change management of the baselined requirements and managing traceability of requirements to design artifacts, test cases, defects, and change requests. However, the program has not demonstrated that it quantifies costs and benefits of risk mitigation in its risk mitigation plans. Specifically, it did not demonstrate that it had updated its guidance to require that costs and benefits of risk mitigation plans be included in these plans. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that all eligible Coast Guard servicemembers are provided the opportunity to complete the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), the Commandant of the Coast Guard should issue an updated Commandant Instruction that establishes policies and procedures to improve the reliability and completeness of TAP data by including when and by whom data should be recorded and updated. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security agreed with our recommendation and reported that a Commandant Instruction had been drafted, which will include a policy on the duties and requirements for recording TAP data. The Commandant Instruction is anticipated to be issued by October 31, 2018. We will consider this recommendation closed when the Commandant Instruction is officially issued.

Recommendation: To ensure that all eligible Coast Guard servicemembers are provided the opportunity to complete the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), the Commandant of the Coast Guard should establish a formal performance goal with a measurable target for participation rates in VOW Act-mandated portions of TAP. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agreed with our recommendation and reported that the Coast Guard, Department of Defense (DOD), and other partners collaborated to identify measurable and specific performance goals that are compliant with VOW requirements. In addition, the these goals will be measured using the DOD's TAP-IT Enterprise tracking system once it becomes fully functional to the Coast Guard by October 31, 2018. We will close this recommendation when DHS provides documentation of its measures and goals.

Recommendation: To ensure that all eligible Coast Guard servicemembers are provided the opportunity to complete the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), the Commandant of the Coast Guard should issue an updated Commandant Instruction that defines the roles and responsibilities of the personnel who administer the program and ensure servicemembers' participation. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security agreed with our recommendation and reported that a Commandant Instruction has been drafted, which will identify the duties of personnel who administer TAP. The Commandant Instruction is anticipated to be issued by October 31, 2018. We will consider this recommendation closed when the Commandant Instruction is officially issued.

Recommendation: To ensure that all eligible Coast Guard servicemembers are provided the opportunity to complete the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), the Commandant of the Coast Guard should, once reliable data are available by installation or unit, enable unit commanders and the higher-level commanders to whom they report to access TAP performance information specifically for the units they oversee so that they can monitor compliance with all TAP requirements. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security agreed with our recommendation and reported the Coast Guard expects to fully transition to DOD's TAP-IT Enterprise System by October 31, 2018, which is expected to facilitate tracking of servicemember attendance within all TAP components. The agency also stated that following the transition and release of the new Commandant Instruction, Commanding Officers will be able to monitor their compliance with TAP performance and requirements. Both these efforts are expected to be completed by October 31, 2018. We will consider this recommendation closed when the Commandant Instruction has been issued and documentation is provided of the ability to track performance information by unit.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP, in collaboration with law enforcement and public health counterparts, should lead a review on ways to improve the timeliness, accuracy, and accessibility of fatal and non-fatal overdose data from law enforcement and public health sources that provide critical information to understand and respond to the opioid epidemic. Such a review should expand on and leverage the findings from previous federal studies. It should also assess the benefits and scalability of ongoing efforts to leverage data systems, such as the Washington-Baltimore High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas' (HIDTA) OD MAP program, and examine ways in which laws that restrict access to public health data to protect patient privacy have exemptions for law enforcement entities that could be more widely leveraged while protecting patient privacy. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials noted a number of federal initiatives underway to evaluate the timeliness, accuracy, and accessibility of overdose data. For example, ONDCP discussed its participation in a new Interagency Working Group led by the National Security Council to consider the implementation of overdose tracking and analytic capability, such as the expansion of ODMAP, as well as evaluating the appropriate federal role to engage in this initiative. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that it had suspended its ODMAP working group in the summer of 2018, after determining that this effort would be more effective for the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to work together through the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program Initiative. Nevertheless, as of April 2019, ONDCP officials reported that they continue to provide grant funding and training and technical assistance towards the expansion and use of ODMAP by state and local jurisdictions. Further, ONDCP reported supporting other federal data initiatives, such as providing funding to develop software for the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Data that could better read narrative fields in death certificates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of the data. While ONDCP's efforts are directed towards supporting and improving existing data sources, the recommendation asks ONDCP to lead a review which it has not done. Further, ONDCP's initiatives to date have not addressed issues raised in our report related to balancing law enforcement's access to restricted health data while protecting patient privacy. We will continue to monitor ONDCP's efforts towards implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of ONDCP should work with the HIDTAs participating in the Heroin Response Strategy to establish outcome-oriented performance measures for the four main goals set out in the strategy. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open

Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials stated that they had engaged with leaders from HIDTA participating in the Heroin Response Strategy to develop performance measures. According to ONDCP, as of early May 2018, eleven performance measures had been established--nine mandatory measures and two optional measures--and four of these measures constitute outcome-oriented measures. The June letter also noted that the HIDTA Performance Management Process database was being updated to reflect the new measures and ONDCP expected the system to be fully operational by the end of September 2018. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that, throughout the summer of 2018, it had revisited the performance measures it had developed and settled on ten revised performance measures (eight mandatory measures and two optional measures) for the newly branded Opioid Response Strategy (formerly known as the Heroin Response Strategy). According to ONDCP, these measures were implemented in HIDTA's Performance Management Process as of February 1, 2019. We will continue to coordinate with ONDCP to obtain documentation of these new measures. Once we obtain them, we will review and work toward closing the recommendation, as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces should work with the National Heroin Initiative Coordinator to establish outcome-oriented performance measures for the goals set out for National Heroin Initiative. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice: Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, officials from the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) noted the output metrics and statistics that OCDETF is tracking as part of its National Heroin Initiative. For example, the letter states that OCDETF will track statistics on opioid overdose deaths, however it is unclear how this tracking effort is being incorporated into the National Heroin Initiative. While our report noted that statistics on overdose deaths have been used as outcome-oriented measures by agencies like the Office of National Drug Control Policy to assess its efforts, it is unclear how OCDETF is using these statistics to assess its performance and inform its efforts under the National Heroin Initiative. In October 2018, OCDETFs National Heroin Initiative Coordinator told us that the OCDETF Regional Directors were in the process of establishing and tracking region-specific metrics, such as local data on drug overdoses. In January 2020, we reached out to OCEDTF officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. In August 2020, OCDETF officials told us that the National Heroin Initiative had evolved and they are no longer positioned to collect and report on drug overdoses as a performance measure for the initiative. However, officials stated that the initiative is measuring the number of OCDETF cases that are produced that result in the disruption or dismantlement of criminal networks involved in heroin and opioid trafficking. We asked OCDETF to provide documentation of the current state of the initiative and its related goals and performance measures. Once received, we will review and follow-up with OCDETF, if needed, to work towards the closure of the recommendation as implemented.

Recommendation: The Attorney General should, in consultation with its relevant components such as the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), establish goals and outcome oriented performance measures for its Strategy to Combat the Opioid Epidemic. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, DOJ officials reported a number of output measures, such as conviction rates, that they will use to assess the effectiveness of the department's efforts to respond to the opioid epidemic. However, it is unclear how, if all, these measures have been incorporated into the department-wide strategy or if additional outcome-oriented metrics are being developed. In October 2018, DOJ officials reported that while they have not updated the strategy, then-Attorney General Sessions had issued a memo to the U.S. Attorneys that communicated some goals for their efforts, such as reductions in overdose deaths, and called for the U.S. Attorneys Office's Regional Opioid Coordinators to develop metrics specific to their regions. In October 2019, DOJ officials reported that the department is currently working on finalizing its Annual Priority Goals and related performance measures with respect to opioids, however they could not provide additional details nor a timeline for when these efforts are to be completed. We reached out in January 2020 to receive additional details and the Department did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to coordinate with DOJ to learn more about these efforts and when officials expect them to be implemented.

Recommendation: The DEA Administrator should establish goals and outcome-oriented performance measures for the enforcement and diversion control activities within the 360 Strategy and establish outcome-oriented performance measures for the community engagement activities within the 360 Strategy. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In its 60-Day Letter, dated June 26, 2018, DEA officials noted the steps they had taken to develop performance metrics for its enforcement and diversion control activities under the 360 Strategy and reported that DEA had implemented outcome-oriented performance metrics for the 360 Strategy's community engagement activities for fiscal year 2019. Further, DEA officials noted applying DEA's Threat Enforcement Planning Process (TEPP) specifically to the 360 Strategy to develop outcome-oriented metrics. Further, according to DEA officials, the TEPP includes an impact report that assesses the outcomes of the activities undertaken under 360. In October 2018, DEA told us that TEPP was still in development and they did not give a date for projected completion. In January 2020, we reached out to DEA officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to follow up with DEA officials on their progress.

Recommendation: The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should review performance assessments of federal STEM education programs and then take appropriate steps to enhance effectiveness of the portfolio, such as by sharing promising practices that agencies could use in designing or revising their programs. (Recommendation 1)

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.

Recommendation: The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should improve public awareness of information on programs' performance assessments by documenting program-level information on performance assessments in its federal STEM education inventory. (Recommendation 2)

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.

Recommendation: The leadership of the Committee on STEM Education should report required information on the participation rates of women, underrepresented minorities, and persons from rural areas in federal STEM education programs that collect this information. (Recommendation 3)

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.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy should report the outcomes of programs' performance assessments completed in the previous year in its annual report. (Recommendation 4)

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.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should clearly articulate in VA's appeals plan how VA will monitor and assess the new appeals process compared to the legacy process, including specifying a balanced set of goals and measures--such as timeliness goals for all VBA appeals options and Board dockets, and measures of accuracy, veteran satisfaction, and cost--and related baseline data. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation and, as of March 2020, addressed some but not all aspects of it. Regarding monitoring, VA has made progress in monitoring and addressing workload changes in its new and legacy appeals processes. For example, VA has developed sensitivity models and other analyses to monitor and forecast future VBA and Board workloads, production, and staffing requirements to help VA manage the new and legacy appeals processes. Further, the Board is aiming to complete non-remanded legacy appeals by December 2022 by first addressing hearing-requested appeals. However, VBA and the Board have yet to specify a complete set of balanced goals for monitoring the new and legacy appeals processes (e.g., timely and accurate processing of appeals while ensuring veteran satisfaction). For example, the Board will not establish timeliness goals for all new Board options until after collecting additional data during implementation of the new appeals process, thus delaying VA's vision for what successful implementation should look like and hindering awareness of resources required to achieve that vision. Regarding comparing the performance of the new and legacy appeals processes, VA officials have previously reported that they intend to use timeliness and productivity metrics from section 5 of the Appeals Modernization Act. Further, VBA and Board officials have articulated steps they are taking to collect, through surveys, comparable information on veterans' satisfaction with the new and legacy appeals processes. However, VA has not fully articulated detailed steps and timeframes for assessing the relative performance of the new and legacy appeals processes. For example, VA has not indicated how it will assess whether or the extent to which the new process, which also allows for multiple appeal opportunities, will achieve final resolution of veterans' appeals sooner, on average, than the legacy process, as we recommended in GAO-17-234. We will consider closing this recommendation when VA provides documentation indicating how it will assess the new appeals process against the legacy process vis a vis balanced measures.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should augment the master schedule for VA's appeals plan to reflect all activities--such as modifications to information technology (IT) systems--as well as assigned responsibilities, interdependencies, start and end dates for key activities for each workgroup, and resources, to establish accountability and reduce overall risk of implementation failures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. Since our report was issued, VA took significant action on its project plan and in February 2019, implemented the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017. VA provided increasingly more details in updates to its plan about sub-activities related to processing legacy appeals, monitoring implementation, drafting Board policies, training, and testing of the new process. For example, VA added activities related to the Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP) test of the VBA-only options as well as the test of the new Board options. In spring and summer 2018, according to VA officials, VA set a baseline schedule for implementing appeals reform in response to the potential February 2019 implementation date established in the Act. In October 2018, VA provided us with lower-level schedules and other related information that allowed us to conduct a more detailed assessment of VA's IMS against applicable best practices criteria. However, as of December 2018, VA's schedule did not fully align with best practices. For example, VA's schedule did not contain a work breakdown structure that defines the work, activities, and resources necessary to accomplish implementation-details that would inform resources and time needed for the project. (For details on this assessment, see GAO-19-272T.) While VA fully implemented appeals reform in February 2019, incorporating such lessons learned into future project planning could help VA improve its project scheduling capabilities. Specifically, in February 2020 VA reported that Caseflow-VA's replacement system intended to support appeals reform-had "minimal functionality," with many functionalities yet to be implemented. We will consider closing this recommendation when VA has produced a more complete plan for-and that establishes accountability and reduces risk of failure related to-developing, implementing, and integrating remaining key functionality envisioned under Caseflow. We will also continue tracking whether the Board addresses long-term Caseflow planning under recommendation 2 in GAO-17-234.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure that the appeals plan more fully addresses risk associated with appeals reform--for example, by assessing risks against a balanced set of goals and measures, articulating success criteria and an assessment plan for RAMP, and testing or conducting sensitivity analyses of all appeals options--prior to fully implementing the new appeals process. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation to more fully address risks associated with implementing a new appeals process. As of March 2020, VA has taken many steps to address our recommendation, although key steps are remaining for VA to better assess risks associated with implementing appeals reform and managing appeals workloads in the legacy process. Specifically, since May 2018, VBA and Board officials reported developing and using new sensitivity analyses that would allow the agency to project potential budget needs and staffing requirements. Further, VBA is using these analyses to more accurately predict resolution of legacy appeals given certain assumptions. Furthermore, in addition to testing two appeal options available within VBA through its Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP), VA conducted small-scale testing of the three new Board appeals options through the Board's Early Applicability of Appeals Modernization (BEAAM) pilot, testing that was missing from VA's original November 2017 plan. VA also reported using lessons learned from testing all appeals options to update the implementation process. However, as designed, RAMP and BEAAM lacked well-defined, measurable criteria for assessing lessons learned from its testing, and the agency did not fully test all aspects of the appeals options before moving to full implementation in February 2019. Even though VA has fully implemented the new disability appeals process without addressing these aspects of our recommendation, many of the other principles of sound planning practices that informed our recommendation remain relevant, even after implementation, to ensure the new process meets veterans' needs. Specifically, VA has not developed mitigation strategies for all identified risks, such as veterans appealing to the Board at higher rates than expected or choosing more resource-intensive Board options, such as those involving new evidence or a hearing. As of January 2020, the more resource-intensive hearing option accounted for over 50 percent of new appeals inventory. At the same time, the Board reported it plans to prioritize resources on reducing the legacy appeals inventory and on the least resource intensive appeal option for which it established a timeliness goal. Although the Board has increased productivity, addressing legacy hearings will take several years as veterans may continue choosing the new hearing option at high rates and the Board prioritizes other workloads. This circumstance could subject veterans to longer wait times and increasing backlogs under the hearing option. As of March 2020, VA also has not established a complete and balanced set of goals and measures for the new appeals options, which are a necessary pre-condition to effectively assessing risk. Lacking a complete set of goals and measures, VA may not have comprehensively identified key risks.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Investment and Innovation within SBA should work with participating agencies to implement the Commercialization Benchmark or, if that is not feasible, revise the benchmark so that it can be implemented (Recommendation 2).

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SBA agreed with the recommendation. As of January 2020, SBA officials said they plan to continue working with participating agencies to determine a feasible way to implement the Commercialization Benchmark. According to SBA officials, SBA is leading an interagency Commercialization Working Group with participating agency officials and has implemented a commercialization reporting tool on the SBIR.gov site. Agency officials participating in the interagency working group have identified challenges with a single model for the benchmark and are working to resolve the issues.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should ensure that the FVM Program develops performance measures with associated targets and time frames for all eight of FDA's food safety- and nutrition-related objectives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2020, FDA had not fully implemented our recommendation, although the agency reported taking several steps. For example, FDA stated that implementation of Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) based preventive controls standards is a top priority for the agency and a key component of the Foods and Veterinary Medicine Program's strategic plan, and for this reason, FSMA-related performance metrics have been prioritized. In addition, FDA reported that in September 2019, the agency published an online Food Safety Dashboard, whose purpose is to measure the progress of each of the FSMA rules, and FDA provides regular updates to the dashboard to promote transparency to the public. FDA also stated that as of June 2020, the dashboard contains measures related to Preventive Controls and Current Good Manufacturing Practice Rules and Imported Food Safety Program, and it includes data for human and animal food and, in some cases, data starting in FY 2017. FDA added that since the FSMA rules have staggered compliance dates, the measures associated with the rules are developed in phases, and over time, the Food Safety Dashboard will be populated with additional data to show more FSMA-related outcomes. However, the recommendation is not fully implemented since our recommendation included the related objectives within the Foods and Veterinary Medicine Program's strategic plan. In August 2020, FDA told us that given the agency's 2018 reorganization, FDA has aligned the performance measures and dashboard with the FSMA rules, and the current alignment covers most of the food safety objectives within the strategic plan. FDA also reported that it is reviewing the strategic plan to ensure alignment with FDA's current priorities and structure, including the recently released New Era of Smarter Food Safety Blueprint. We will follow up with FDA and provide an update in FY 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator of NNSA should require an independent entity to validate that contractor EVM systems used for LEPs meet the EVM national standard. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, NNSA stated that the integrated baseline reviews, internal reviews of earned value management (EVM) systems used by life extension programs (LEP), and other controls over data integration provide a practical and cost-beneficial approach to the validation of contractor EVM systems. However, in early 2019, NNSA conducted a lessons learned study to more fully assess the cost, benefit, mission impacts, and feasibility of implementing our recommendation for possible application to future LEPs. According to NNSA documentation, based on the results of the lessons learned study, NNSA concluded that the effort and expense needed to validate contractor EVM systems against the EVM national standard could be better used providing resources to improve the agency's ability to establish work breakdown structures, schedules, and integration of scope, cost, and schedule. As a result, as of September 2019, NNSA stated that its actions meet the intent of our recommendation. We disagree. As we stated in our report, without requiring an independent entity to validate that contractor EVM systems meet the EVM national standard, NNSA may not have assurance that its LEPs are obtaining reliable EVM data for managing their programs and reporting their status. We will continue to monitor NNSA's activities to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of NNSA should require an independent entity to conduct surveillance reviews of contractor EVM systems used for LEPs to ensure that they maintain compliance with the EVM national standard through program completion. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, NNSA stated that it conducts ongoing surveillance through integrated baseline reviews, internal reviews of EVM systems used by LEPs, and other assessments, which consider national standards. However, in early 2019, NNSA conducted a lessons learned study to more fully assess the cost, benefit, mission impacts, and feasibility of implementing our recommendation for possible application to future LEPs. According to NNSA documentation, based on the results of the lessons learned study, NNSA concluded that the effort and expense needed to conduct surveillance reviews of contractor EVM systems to ensure compliance with the EVM national standard could be better used providing resources to improve the agency's ability to establish work breakdown structures, schedules, and integration of scope, cost, and schedule. As a result, as of September 2019, NNSA stated that its actions meet the intent of our recommendation. We disagree. As we stated in our report, without requiring an independent entity to conduct surveillance reviews of contractor EVM systems through program completion, NNSA may not have assurance that its LEPs are obtaining reliable EVM data for managing their programs and reporting their status. We will continue to monitor NNSA's activities to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of NNSA should require its programs to ensure that LEP critical technologies meet specific technology readiness level benchmarks at decision points, or otherwise document with program executive approval their rationale for not meeting these benchmarks. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2018, NNSA stated that it has already incorporated specific benchmarks for technology readiness levels at decision points. As an example, it stated that it recommends a technology readiness level of 5 at the beginning of phase 6.3 for an LEP. As a result, NNSA stated that its actions meet the intent of our recommendation. We disagree. As we stated in our report, it is important for NNSA to establish a requirement, not just a recommendation, that LEP critical technologies meet specific technology readiness level benchmarks at decision points. We will continue to monitor NNSA's activities to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should issue written criteria for when CMS will allow limited evaluation of a demonstration or a portion of a demonstration, including defining conditions, such as what it means for a demonstration to be longstanding or noncomplex, as applicable. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation. In November 2019, HHS reported that it was applying limited evaluation requirements to certain demonstration types, including routine family planning demonstrations. In July 2020, CMS stated that it continues to work with states as they apply for new or extensions of approved demonstrations to determine whether the demonstrations as a whole or certain components would qualify for limited evaluation. The agency, however, reiterated that it needs more experience before developing generalized guidance and that was not a priority for 2020. We will continue to monitor CMS's progress and will review whether to close the recommendation when these criteria are issued.

Recommendation: The Secretary of VA should, in collaboration with ISC, review and revise VA's risk management policies for VHA facilities to ensure VA incorporates ISC standards, as appropriate. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: Shortly after the issuance of the report, VA notified GAO that it was in the process of working with the lnteragency Security Committee (ISC) to update its vulnerability assessment program, with a target completion date of January 2019. Despite multiple attempts, as of June 2020, VA has not provided any information on its progress in updating its program.

Recommendation: The Secretary of VA should develop an oversight strategy that allows VA to assess the effectiveness of risk management programs at VHA facilities system-wide. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: Shortly after the issuance of the report, VA notified GAO that it had identified OS&LE as the internal entity responsible for conducting a complete review of VA's current risk management policies and processes for VA facilities and that it was reviewing an ISC-certified risk assessment tool for possible implementation consideration. Despite multiple attempts, as of June 2020, VA had not provided an update on its efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should establish a milestone for the completion of government-wide performance measures for the quality of investigations. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. In August 2019, ODNI officials pointed to the Quality Assessment Reporting Tool as the mechanism to measure the quality of background investigations. However, officials also stated that they had not finalized collection of all required data to establish performance measures and, while QART contains a significant data sample size, the data call issued in January 2019 will provide additional information for comparative analysis to develop performance measures for the entire Executive Branch. Officials agreed that since DOD does not use QART, there needed to be ongoing discussions with them to ensure quality standards are met. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of OMB in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should conduct an evidence-based review of the investigation and adjudication timeliness objectives for completing the fastest 90 percent of initial secret and initial top secret security clearances.(Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. ODNI officials stated in August 2019 that Trusted Workforce 2.0 is specifically developing timeliness goals which are achievable and based on empirical evidence. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of National Intelligence, in his capacity as Security Executive Agent, and in coordination with the other Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council Principals--the Deputy Director for Management of OMB in his capacity as Chair of the PAC, the Director of OPM, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence--should develop a government-wide plan, including goals and interim milestones, to meet those timeliness objectives for initial personnel security clearance investigations and adjudications. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open

Comments: ODNI stated that it non-concurred with many of the report's recommendations, but did not state with which recommendations it did not concur. In its August 2019 response on the status of this recommendation, ODNI officials stated that the transfer of background investigations from NBIB to DOD will provide an opportunity for the Executive Agents to reassess and address investigative timeliness issues and strengthen management of sensitive information. Moreover, they stated that Trusted Workforce 2.0 will give them the ability to significantly reduce the timelines required to deliver a Secret and Top Secret clearance. We will continue to follow-up on the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should either develop new performance goals to address mission activity gaps, or explain in the Coast Guard's Annual Performance Report (APR) why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, the Coast Guard concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would add new measures in future Annual Performance Reports (APRs) and explain what is measured and what is not, as appropriate. In May 2020, the Coast Guard provided GAO with its updated fiscal year 2019 APR. After reviewing the fiscal year 2019 APR, we found that the Coast Guard made revisions to the goals for the Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security (PWCS) and Marine Environmental Protection-prevention activities (MEP) missions and added a goal for the Search and Rescue mission. However, the APR did not include additional goals or an explanation why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not for the other performance goals we previously identified as not fully addressing all related mission activities. In its July 2020 update to this recommendation, the Coast Guard reported that the metrics published in the APR are measures of Coast Guard performance and not performance goals. The Coast Guard also noted that it continually evaluates the utility of its performance measures, and makes changes to individual measures, as well as its suite of measures, when doing so provides meaningful improvement. In its July 2020 update, the Coast Guard added that targets established for performance measures are intended to be realistic expectations of future performance and targets are continually evaluated and changed when current performance modify expectations. However, we continue to believe that in the absence of documentation explaining how existing performance goals address each mission, the extent to which the Coast Guard's performance goals encompass all of its mission activities is unclear. Either developing new goals to address mission activity gaps, or describing in the APR how existing goals sufficiently assess the performance of each mission could provide more meaningful information on progress in achieving Coast Guard's missions to executive branch decision makers, Congress, and the public. In order to fully implement the recommendation as intended, in instances in which performance goals do not fully address all of the respective mission activities, the Coast Guard's APR should include an explanation of the Coast Guard's rationale for why certain aspects of mission performance are measured while others are not. We will continue to follow-up on the Coast Guard's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should revise and publicly issue OMB guidance--through an update to its Circular No. A-11, a memorandum, or other means--to provide time frames and associated milestones for implementing the federal program inventory. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for implementing some of the federal program inventory requirements. In that guidance, OMB states that beginning with the 2021 budget cycle, agencies' program activities will be used for the inventory's program-level reporting requirements. This will allow OMB and agencies to leverage federal spending data reported on USASpending.gov as required by the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. Those data can be presented at the program activity level, and therefore could meet the inventory requirements to present program-level spending data. However, OMB's guidance does not yet present any time frames or milestones for meeting other inventory requirements, such as describing the purpose of each program or how it contributes to the agency's mission and goals. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should consider--as OMB determines its strategy for resumed implementation of the federal program inventory--using a systematic approach, such as the information architecture framework, to help ensure that GPRAMA requirements and our past recommendations for the inventory are addressed. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB states that it and agencies will meet some of the federal inventory requirements by leveraging the spending data reported on USASpending.gov. The guidance notes that this information is provided in a structured information architecture format on USASpending.gov. In July 2019, OMB staff told us that they considered an information architecture approach in response to our past reports on the topic. However, OMB has not yet clarified in guidance or elsewhere how the information architecture format of USASpending.gov-which is currently focused on spending data-could be used to meet additional information reporting requirements and our past recommendations related to the inventory. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should work with the Performance Improvement Council to identify and share among agencies practices for expanding the use of data-driven performance reviews beyond agency priority goals, such as for other performance goals and at lower levels within agencies, that have led to performance improvements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. OMB and the PIC, in guidance provided through Circular No. A-11 and the Goal Playbook respectively, have encouraged agencies to expand their use of data-driven reviews beyond agency priority goals. In March 2019, OMB staff told us that they would work with the PIC to provide agencies with case studies and other resources that could help expand their use of data-driven reviews, should agencies choose to do so. However, as of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have not yet identified and shared practices related to expanding the use of those reviews as we recommended. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance management attention to closing out contracts, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should develop a means for department-wide oversight into components' progress in meeting their goals on closing contracts and the status of contracts eligible for closeout. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services agreed with the recommendation and has developed a template and instructions for quarterly reporting from its divisions. The Department identified some performance measures that it will monitor on a quarterly basis, such as contracts closed on time and total backlog. Due to competing priorities and focus on the COVID-19 response, the Department plans to provide additional steps toward progress at the next reporting cycle.

Recommendation: To enhance management attention to closing out contracts, the Attorney General should direct the Senior Procurement Executive to ensure the development of a means to track data on the number and type of contracts eligible for closeout and where the contracts are in the closeout process, as well as a means to assess--at the agency or component level--progress by establishing goals and performance measures for closing contracts. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Justice agreed with the recommendation and in early fiscal year 2020 enhanced its financial management system to allow the Bureaus to assess whether a contract needs to be closed out. The Department anticipates that the associated guidance, which includes performance measures, will be issued in late summer 2020.

Recommendation: To enhance management attention to closing out contracts, the Secretary of State should develop a means at the agency level to track data on the entirety of the number and type of contracts eligible for closeout, where the contracts are in the closeout process, and establish goals and performance measures for closing contracts. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State agreed with the recommendation and is upgrading its system to improve data quality and enable the tracking and sharing of contract closeout information. The enhancements to the contracting system would allow the Department to establish a baseline and develop metrics to measure progress on closing contracts. The Department anticipates that the upgrades and data utilization will continue into fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to ensure that state-based marketplace annual sustainability plans, to the extent possible, have complete 5-year budget forecasts. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS did not concur with our recommendation and stated that it had updated its requirement to request 2-year budget forecasts instead of 5-year budget forecasts. In its December 2017 statement of actions, HHS stated that it was working to streamline and simplify its data collection effort as part of the annual sustainability plan. In April 2018, HHS provided a revised 2-year budget forecast template as well as related state marketplace training documentation. As of April 2020, HHS had not provided further documented evidence of its streamlined process using the 2-year budget forecast template or justification that a 5-year budget is not necessary for assessing long-term financial sustainability and state marketplace sustainability risks.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to ensure that all state-based marketplaces provide required annual financial audit reports which are in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with our recommendation and stated in its December 2017 update that it continued to provide technical assistance such as webinars and other trainings on independent financial and programmatic audit submission requirements. In April 2018, HHS provided evidence that it had taken some steps to ensure that state-based marketplaces provide required annual financial audit reports, including draft financial audit procedures, documentation of related training provided to states, and a revised HHS state officer annual review checklist emphasizing financial audit reporting. However as of April 2020, the department had not provided evidence of finalized procedures, examples of checklist usage, or of states providing annual financial audit reports. Further, HHS training documentation stated that state-based marketplaces could provide alternate financial audit reports, such as a state-wide financial audit report, in lieu of a marketplace specific report. It is not clear from the provided evidence that the department has ensured that state-based marketplaces are in compliance with financial audit reporting requirements. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing the recommendation and provide updates when the agency takes further action.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to ensure that marketplace IT self-sustainability risk assessments are based on fully defined measurable terms, a clear categorization process, and a defined response to high risks. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with our recommendation and stated in its December 2017 update that it would refine its marketplace self-sustainability risk assessment process to provide greater insight into the state marketplace sustainability efforts and to identify areas where states may need assistance. In April 2018, HHS provided evidence that it had taken some steps to base its risk assessments on fully defined processes. CMS provided documentation of clearly defined and measurable terms used for state marketplace budget analysis. However, HHS did not provide evidence that these defined terms were incorporated into analyses or risk assessments. As of April 2020, CMS has not provided evidence that it took steps to develop a clear categorization process or a defined response to high risks. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing the recommendation and provide updates when the agency takes action.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to ensure that states develop, update, and follow performance measurement plans that allow the states to continuously identify and assess the most important IT metrics for their state marketplaces. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS partially concurred with our recommendation and stated in its December 2017 update that though each marketplace was accountable for managing and reporting its own IT metrics in accordance with federal and state law, HHS would work with states on the improvement of their management and operations through technical assistance and oversight and accountability measures. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing the recommendation and provide updates when the agency takes action.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to conduct operational analysis reviews and systematically monitor the performance of states' marketplace IT systems using key performance indicators. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS did not concur with our recommendation and stated that it conducted Open Enrollment Readiness Reviews to assess marketplace key performance indicators, which according to CMS officials, are similar to operational analysis reviews. However, as of October 2018, HHS had not provided evidence that the Open Enrollment Readiness Reviewed systematically and comprehensively reported on the key performance indicators or include discussion of other key elements identified in best practices for operational analysis reviews, such as how objectives could be better met, or costs could be saved. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to take steps to ensure that metrics collected from states to monitor marketplaces' operational performance link to performance goals and include baselines and targets to monitor progress. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS partially concurred with our recommendation and stated in its December 2017 update that states were responsible for monitoring their own performance measures but HHS would continue to review IT metrics of state marketplaces in the implementation phase of their systems through technical assistance activities and oversight and accountability measures. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided sufficient evidence that it has implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing the recommendation and provide updates when the agency takes action.

Recommendation: To manage the mail program more effectively, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should update VA Directive 6340 to incorporate agency-wide goals and performance measures for mail operations.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: The VA Enterprise Mail Management Program Office revised Directive and Handbook 6340 "Mail Management" to include agency-wide goals and performance measures for mail operations and provided GAO draft versions of both documents in March 2020 that are currently under administration review. According to VA officials, final publication of the revised Directive and Handbook 6340 is estimated to be completed between September and December 2020. GAO will continue to monitor VA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the management of the Armed Forces Sports Program and better determine whether the program is achieving its desired results, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop and implement performance measures for the Armed Forces Sports Program that measure the desired outcomes for the program and, at a minimum, demonstrate linkage to the program's goals or mission, have a measurable target, and include a baseline that can be used to demonstrate program performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of September 2019, DOD officials stated that the Armed Forces Sports Council approved performance measures for the Armed Forces Sports Program at a council meeting held in April 2018. Officials said the approved performance measures went into effect in January 2019 in conjunction with the Armed Forces Sports Program's 2019 calendar year. Officials said that the baseline year for the performance measures is 2019 which they are currently collecting data for. Officials plan to provide an update on the program once they have collected and reviewed the 2019 baseline year performance measures. Additionally, officials said that OSD is working to update DOD Instruction 1330.04 to require the Armed Forces Sports Council to develop and implement performance measures for the Armed Forces Sports Program and review and track performance metrics annually. The DOD Instruction language has been updated and is currently pending review prior to the start of formal coordination.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs to assign responsibility to a specific office or official to develop and implement a plan to assess employees' safety training needs and monitor employees' compliance with Indian Affairs' safety training requirements.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In early August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that BIA regional leadership, in collaboration with Indian Affairs' safety office, will develop and publish a safety training plan for all Indian Affairs employees with responsibilities for safety inspections. Additionally, Indian Affairs reported that BIA and BIE will develop and implement a policy to ensure that first-line supervisors monitor and report on whether employees have completed the training requirements. Indian Affairs reported a target date of January 31, 2020 for implementing this recommendation. In May 2018, Indian Affairs reported that it had completed a draft training plan and noted that it had been submitted to management for review. We requested copies of the training plan but as of August 2018, we had not been provided any. In April 2019, Indian Affairs provided documentation that it had developed and implemented a plan to assess all employees' safety training needs. In addition, agency officials reported that Interior's new training management system allows supervisors to track employees' completion of required safety training courses. However, the agency did not provide documentation that senior managers are overseeing employees' compliance with Indian Affairs' safety training requirements. In May 2020, Indian Affairs officials told us that they had developed a process to generate reports on personnel safety training compliance and would provide documentation demonstrating that such reports are shared with management to address training noncompliance. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions in this area.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to address smuggling through cross-border tunnels, ultralight aircraft, panga boats, and recreational vessels are effective and that managers and stakeholders have the information needed to make decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Commissioner of CBP to assess and document how the alternative technological solutions being considered will fully meet operational needs related to ultralight aircraft.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that it plans to assess and document requirements related to ultralight aircraft threats and how technological solutions will address these requirements as part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Air and Marine Operations (AMO) air domain awareness efforts. In March 2018, CBP completed an Air Domain Awareness Capability Analysis Report that identifies current capability gaps, including those related to ultralight aircraft. CBP stated that it plans to build upon the Capability Analysis Report to identify mission needs, a concept of operations, and operational requirements to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. In February 2020, AMO reported that, in 2019, it conducted a technical assessment of one technology and plans to assess other systems in 2020 and 2021 to help determine if they fit into AMO's larger strategic vision for persistent wide area surveillance to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should assess and document how alternative solutions will meet operational requirements related to ultralight aircraft.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to address smuggling through cross-border tunnels, ultralight aircraft, panga boats, and recreational vessels are effective and that managers and stakeholders have the information needed to make decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Commissioner of CBP and the Director of ICE to jointly establish and monitor performance measures and targets related to cross-border tunnels.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will review available information and develop performance measures and targets as deemed appropriate. As of March 2020, CBP and ICE have not reported taking any actions to develop performance measures and targets. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish and monitor performance measures and targets related to cross-border tunnels.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to address smuggling through cross-border tunnels, ultralight aircraft, panga boats, and recreational vessels are effective and that managers and stakeholders have the information needed to make decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Commissioner of CBP to establish and monitor performance targets related to ultralight aircraft.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred and stated that within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Air and Marine Operations and the U.S. Border Patrol are developing a joint performance measure and targets for interdicting ultralight aircraft. However, in December 2019, CBP reported that it will no longer pursue establishing a performance measure because it found that the ultralight aircraft interdiction rate fluctuated year to year, and that the number of ultralight aircraft incidents had been trending downward. Subsequently, in September 2020, CBP officials stated that they had reinitiated efforts to develop a performance measure and target in response to our continued belief that they can be set and would help CBP monitor performance to ensure that technology investments and operational responses to address ultralight aircraft are effective. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should establish a measure and monitor performance related to ultralight aircraft.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to address smuggling through cross-border tunnels, ultralight aircraft, panga boats, and recreational vessels are effective and that managers and stakeholders have the information needed to make decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) tunnel committee to convene and establish standard operating procedures for addressing cross-border tunnels, including procedures for sharing information.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. However, CBP and ICE agreed that strengthening operational procedures may be beneficial and stated that they will jointly review procedures and discuss revising and/or consolidating the procedures. In May 2018, CBP stated that it is looking for opportunities to standardize procedures for the detection, interdiction, mapping, and remediation of cross-border tunnels. To this end, CBP has plans to develop a standardized training on tunnel identification and tactics, techniques, and procedures for different types of tunnels. In addition, CBP is working to develop a consistent process that will facilitate coordination and collaboration with ICE. In March 2019, CBP reported that CBP and ICE have begun to routinely meet to collectively develop processes for using tunnel robotics, including processes to enhance communication between CBP and ICE. In September 2020, CBP and ICE reported that they do not plan to take any additional steps to address this recommendation. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish standardized procedures for addressing tunnels, including procedures for sharing information with one another.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to address smuggling through cross-border tunnels, ultralight aircraft, panga boats, and recreational vessels are effective and that managers and stakeholders have the information needed to make decisions, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Commandant of the Coast Guard, Commissioner of CBP, and the Director of ICE to establish and monitor Regional Coordinating Mechanisms performance measures and targets related to panga boat and recreational vessel smuggling.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. DHS stated that that it believes that by establishing common terminology to address our first recommendation, the RECOMs will have more reliable, usable analyses to inform their maritime interdiction efforts. However, DHS did not believe that performance measures and targets related to smuggling by panga boats would provide the most useful strategic assessment of operations to prevent all illicit trafficking, regardless of area of operations or mode of transportation. DHS also cited the recent creation of the DHS Office of Policy, Strategy, and Plans that is to work with U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and other components and offices to better evaluate the effectiveness of all operations that work to prevent the illegal entry of goods and people into the country, as appropriate. In February 2020, DHS reported that the department had not taken any further actions to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid and will monitor any actions DHS takes that are responsive to it. For example, in response to a requirement in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, DHS issued reports in May 2018, February 2019, and August 2020 that contain metrics and planned metrics to measure the effectiveness of border security in the maritime environment and other domains. Planned metrics that DHS does not yet have a methodology to measure across all components include situational awareness in the maritime environment, illicit drugs removal rate, and DHS maritime threat response rate. To fully address our recommendation, DHS should measure its performance related to smuggling across U.S. maritime borders.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to expand its performance measures for the 21st Century program to address all program objectives. Specifically, Education should establish performance measures related to key behavioral, including student attendance and disciplinary incidents, and socio-emotional outcomes.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations; rather, it generally noted that it will keep our recommendations in mind as it continues to implement changes in the program as a result of ESSA. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to conduct federal-level data checks on the accuracy of 21st Century program data submitted by states. Such checks could test for logical relationships between fields. Education should also publicly disclose and address any data limitations it identifies, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but stated that it was taking some actions to enhance program data. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to provide written, non-regulatory guidance to states on developing and conducting high-quality 21st Century state evaluations to help address the difficulties states face in measuring program performance and effectiveness.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but identified steps it plans to take to implement it. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should direct the Office of Academic Improvement to use the information it collects from its monitoring visits and ongoing interactions with states to share effective practices across states for sustaining their 21st Century programs once program funding ends. This information could be shared using existing mechanisms such as Education's meetings with 21st Century state coordinators.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but identified steps it plans to take to implement it. We will monitor the agency's progress and consider closing it when the agency provides documentation that these efforts are complete.

Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that DOD's Pilot Mentor-Protege Program meets its mission, the Director, DOD's Office of Small Business Programs, should conduct periodic reviews of the processes DOD components follow to approve agreements and take oversight actions, as appropriate.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of Small Business Programs
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would implement a new standard operating procedure for DOD's Mentor-Protege Program component program managers. According to DOD, the new standard operating procedure would require each component program manager to provide quarterly program management review reports to DOD's Office of Small Business Programs, in addition to annual and monthly reporting, as required by Appendix I of DOD's policies and procedures for the Mentor-Protege Program. DOD's new Standard Operating Procedure would also centralize the implementation of the Mentor Protege Program and, according to DOD, would create process efficiency, and enhanced oversight of the program. The new Standard Operating Procedure would also include a new standardized checklist each Mentor-Protege Program component would utilize to approve mentor protege agreements. The standardized checklist would also include the company North American Industry Classification System code, a mentor approval letter, and a fully completed copy of the mentor protege agreement signed by both parties. Last, DOD would then determine program improvement, once the aforementioned controls are implemented and monitored for effectiveness. As of August 2018, DOD had not provided GAO with documentation of the new standard operating procedure. GAO will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that DOD's Pilot Mentor-Protege Program meets its mission, the Director, DOD's Office of Small Business Programs, should complete actions to develop performance goals and related measures that are consistent with the program's stated purpose.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of Small Business Programs
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation and stated that Mentor-Protege Program components would establish goals for the Mentor Protege Program and those goals would be focused on the Industrial Base and Technology Transfer categories. In addition, DOD stated that it would establish additional surveillance requirements to ensure prime and subcontract opportunities are afforded to the proteges and that instituting a baseline performance goal for all components will ensure the Program achieves the intent desired by Congress. As of August 2018, DOD had not provided GAO with documentation of the new goals or standard operating procedure. GAO will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance interagency collaboration in the Manufacturing USA program, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to work with all non-sponsoring agencies whose missions contribute to or are affected by advanced manufacturing to revise the Manufacturing USA governance system to ensure the roles and responsibilities for how these agencies could contribute to the Manufacturing USA program are fully identified.

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.

Recommendation: To help ensure that its efforts to increase patients' electronic access to health information are successful, the Secretary of HHS should direct ONC to use the information these performance measures provide to make program adjustments, as appropriate. Such actions may include, for example, assessing the status of program operations or identifying areas that need improvement in order to help achieve program goals related to increasing patients' ability to access their health information electronically.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2019, ONC is collecting and evaluating information from national surveys, program data, and third-party data sources. As ONC works to implement its evaluations, it should identify how evidence collected from national surveys, program data and third-party data sources has been used to assess the outcomes of key efforts and adjust programs accordingly.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to develop a process, which may include time frames, to establish appropriate durations of use on labels of all medically important antibiotics used in food animals.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS stated that FDA published a notice in the Federal Register In September 2016 requesting information from the public about how to establish appropriately targeted durations of use for therapeutic products affected by Guidance for Industry #213 with no defined duration of use. According to HHS, FDA evaluated the comments received and plans to develop a strategy to address this issue. In July 2019, HHS stated that FDA published a Request for Applications on April 1, 2019 for study proposals to help establish more targeted or defined durations of use for approved medically important antimicrobial drugs used in the feed of food-producing animals. There are currently no such products approved for use in water with an undefined duration of use. According to HHS, due to significant scientific and technical challenges, FDA anticipates that this initiative will require substantial time to fully implement so the primary objective is to update product dosage regimens to better target when and for how long the drug may be used.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to establish steps to increase veterinary oversight of medically important antibiotics administered in routes other than feed and water, such as injections and tablets.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS stated that FDA recognizes that a limited number of medically important antimicrobial products, available in dosage forms other than feed or water (e.g., injectable), continue to be marketed as OTC products and the agency intends to work with the sponsors to put these products under veterinary oversight. In July 2019, HHS stated that FDA released a broad 5-year plan in September 2018 outlining steps to support stewardship of medically important antimicrobials in veterinary settings. As part of that plan, FDA intends to publish a draft strategy, likely in the form of draft guidance for industry, to bring all dosage forms (such as injectables and tablets) of medically important antimicrobial drugs under veterinary oversight. The draft strategy will also provide a framework, including proposed timelines, for transitioning from over-the-counter to prescription marketing status for all approved medically important antimicrobial drugs that are not yet subject to veterinary oversight. FDA plans to issue this draft strategy no later than the end of fiscal year 2019. In conjunction with issuing the draft strategy, FDA intends to publish a list of affected new animal drug applications.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Commissioner of FDA to develop performance measures and targets for actions to manage the use of antibiotics such as revising the veterinary feed directive and developing guidance documents on judicious use.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS noted that FDA has taken steps to develop performance measures and targets. According to HHS, FDA issued a final rule in May 2016 revising annual reporting requirements for drug sponsors of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals to obtain estimates of sales broken out by major food-producing species (i.e., cattle, swine, chickens, and turkeys). Additionally, in August 2017, FDA published a paper proposing the use of a biomass denominator to adjust annual data on the volume of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals in the United States. According to HHS, this adjusted estimate will provide insight into broad shifts in the volume of antimicrobials sold for use in food-producing animals. FDA is also funding two grants for antimicrobial use data collection. These collection efforts are intended to provide part of the baseline information on antimicrobial use practices in the four major food-producing animal groups (i.e., cattle, swine, chickens, and turkeys), which is a critical element in measuring overall impact of the agency's judicious use strategy. FDA expects these data collection efforts to provide important information on methodologies to help optimize long-term strategies to collect and report such antimicrobial use data. In addition, FDA has been working in close collaboration with USDA, including providing input on recent surveys administered by USDA to collect information on antimicrobial use on farms. In July 2019, according to HHS, FDA agrees that performance measures and targets are needed to help gauge the success of antimicrobial stewardship efforts. While the agency continues to work on developing such measures and targets, FDA reported a decrease in domestic sales and distribution of all medically important antimicrobials intended for use in food-producing animals (e.g. decreased by 33 percent from 2016 through 2017). HHS noted that the reduction in sales volume is an important indicator that ongoing efforts to support antimicrobial stewardship are having a significant impact even though sales data do not necessarily reflect antimicrobial use.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should direct the Administrator of APHIS and the Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service to work with the Director of CDC to develop a framework for deciding when on-farm investigations are warranted during outbreaks.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. In August 2018, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) stated that it is working closely with USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and HHS' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to develop a framework for deciding when on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities are warranted. In September 2019, according to APHIS officials, the lead agencies, including APHIS, FSIS, and CDC, have agreed that it is imperative that cross sector partners from a range of animal agriculture industries be included in developing the framework that was requested in GAO's final report. A framework for making decisions regarding on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities simply will not work without including industry sector partners in the development of the framework, according to APHIS officials. Due to the logistics of getting all of the cross sector partners together, APHIS is unable to schedule the next meeting in the series to develop the Pre-Harvest Framework until December 2019. APHIS anticipates that it will take the remainder of fiscal year 2020 to work through additional meetings with partners and finalize this framework.

Recommendation: To better inform on the effectiveness of CDS implementation and border security efforts, the Chief of Border Patrol should strengthen the methodology for calculating recidivism such as by using an alien's apprehension history beyond one fiscal year and excluding aliens for whom there is no record of removal and who may remain in the United States.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection: Office of the Commissioner: U.S. Border Patrol
Status: Open

Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. DHS noted that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Consequence Delivery System Program Management Office (CDS PMO) uses annual recidivism rate calculations to measure annual change, which is not intended to be, or used, as a performance measure for CDS. We continue to believe that DHS should strengthen its methodology for calculating recidivism. DHS noted in its comments on our report that the recidivism rate is used as a performance measure by U.S. Border Patrol and DHS. Additionally, strengthening the recidivism rate methodology would not preclude its use for CDS as a measure of annual change, and would provide Border Patrol a more complete assessment of the rate of change in recidivism. In January 2018, CDS-PMO officials stated that the office started reporting nationwide the recidivism rates for multiple years to U.S. Border Patrol sectors for situational awareness. However, the methodology for this reported recidivism rate does not exclude aliens for who there is no record of removal. In May 2020, CDS-PMO reported that it has not taken any further steps to implement this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, DHS needs to further strengthen its recidivism rate methodology by excluding aliens for whom there is no record of removal. Further, DHS needs to demonstrate that it is using this updated methodology on a recurring basis and for CDS performance measurement purposes.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection to collaborate on sharing immigration enforcement and removal data to help Border Patrol account for the removal status of apprehended aliens in its recidivism rate measure.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with the recommendation. In May 2017, U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations directorate provided immigration enforcement and removal data on a one-time basis to U.S. Customs and Border Protection's U.S. Border Patrol. In March 2018, U.S. Border Patrol officials requested that ICE provide these data on a quarterly basis. As of July 2020, ICE stated that it had shared the data with U.S. Border Patrol on multiple occasions. To fully implement this recommendation, ICE and U.S. Border Patrol need to document and implement their plans to share the data on a recurring basis.

Recommendation: To improve oversight of states' payment structures for MLTSS, the Administrator of CMS should require all states to collect and report on progress toward achieving MLTSS program goals, such as whether the program enhances the provision of community-based care.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, CMS has not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. CMS previously reported that it is working to develop guidance on how states report on progress towards achieving MLTSS program goals, such as the extent to which the program enhances the provision of community-based care. CMS has contracted with a vendor to produce recommendations for what would be included in the state reporting. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To improve oversight of states' payment structures for MLTSS, the Administrator of CMS should establish criteria for what situations would warrant exceptions to the federal standards that the data used to set rates be no older than the three most recent and complete years.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, CMS has not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. CMS previously reported that it has monitored rate certifications and the data used for rating periods starting on or after July 1, 2017. CMS said that it has not had any states set rates that do not meet the federal standards for the data being no older than the three most recent and complete years and, therefore, does not believe that it should publish guidance on what situations would warrant exceptions. In order to better determine whether there is a need for such guidance, we believe that CMS should continue to monitor rate certifications and assess the data being used, particularly as additional states are developing or considering implementation of MLTSS programs. We will update the status of this recommendation as CMS conducts reviews of other states' payment structures and data used to establish them.

Recommendation: To improve oversight of states' payment structures for MLTSS, the Administrator of CMS should provide states with guidance that includes minimum standards for encounter data validation procedures.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, CMS has not informed us of any additional actions taken to implement this recommendation. CMS previously reported to GAO that it has convened a workgroup to develop an Encounter Data Toolkit, which will provide best practices for encounter data submissions and validation procedures. The workgroup is also discussing minimum standards for states to determine if the encounter data are complete and accurate for purposes of rate setting. The workgroup met in June and July 2018, and two additional workgroup meeting are planned prior to the drafting of the toolkit. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FDA's foreign offices are able to fully meet their mission of helping to ensure the safety of imported products, as the agency continues to test performance measures and evaluate its Office of International Programs (OIP) strategic workforce plan, the Commissioner of FDA should assess the effectiveness of the foreign offices' contributions by systematically tracking information to measure whether the offices' activities specifically contribute to drug safety-related outcomes, such as inspections, import alerts, and warning letters.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June and July 2018 FDA reported on its recent efforts to assess the effectiveness of the foreign offices' contributions to drug-safety related outcomes. These efforts include the development of new performance measures for these offices along with a monitoring and evaluation plan; strengthened communications and collaboration between the foreign offices and FDA program centers and its Office of Regulatory Affairs; and an assessment of the foreign offices to help set their objectives and ensure the right balance of personnel, skillsets, and resources. However, FDA still had to develop intermediate outcomes to link with final outcomes. In an August 2020 written response, the agency reported that because of a reorganization and strategic planning effort for its Office of Global Policy and Strategy, it was still revising and updating its measures and its approach to evaluating impact in 2020 to align with a five-year strategic plan completed in March 2020. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the management of DOD's credentialing program and better determine whether the program is achieving its desired results, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop and implement program performance measures that include key attributes, such as a baseline and goals, that can be used to assess performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with our recommendation to develop and implement performance measures for its credentialing program. In its response to the recommendation, DOD stated that servicemembers are not required to earn credentials and more than half of the credentials earned by servicemembers are voluntary. Therefore, establishing criteria that might create an incentive to force servicemembers into earning voluntary credentials would be counterproductive. DOD also stated that a basic reporting system is in place that captures credential attainment and associated costs that provides basic information to gauge the program's performance. As of April 2020, the department still does not plan to develop performance measures for the program.

Recommendation: To provide agencies access to SSA's more complete set of death data, Congress should consider amending the Social Security Act to explicitly allow SSA to share its full death file with Treasury for use through the DNP working system.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: In fiscal year 2020, the Senate passed S.4104, which included language to address the recommendation. In the context of the Do Not Pay (DNP) working system, the bill, if enacted, would authorize comparison of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) full death file with personally identifiable information reviewed through the working system and would allow redisclosure of such comparison of information to any federal or state agency authorized to use the working system. As of July 15, 2020, the House has not introduced a related bill for fiscal year 2020. Additionally, in February 2020, the administration released its President's 2021 Budget, which proposes legislation to allow the DNP Business Center full access to the SSA full death file. This proposal would include the Department of the Treasury and the SSA working together to determine the most efficient manner to make full death information available for use in preventing improper payment and fraud. We will continue to monitor congressional legislation to address this recommendation. .

Recommendation: To better monitor agency use of the DNP working system once a strategy has been developed, the Director of OMB should develop and implement monitoring mechanisms--such as goals, benchmarks, and performance measures--to evaluate agency use of the DNP working system.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OMB agreed with the concept of monitoring mechanisms and will continue to work with agencies to reduce improper payments and encourage agencies to establish goals to improve payment accuracy that will be monitored and evaluated by OMB. In fiscal year 2019, OMB provided us a status update on July 31, 2019, stating that Treasury does this monitoring and reports updates to OMB on a quarterly basis and that monitoring will occur in conjunction with the President's Management Agenda. In August 2020, Treasury provided us examples of reports that it provides to OMB to assist OMB with evaluating agency use of the DNP working system. We plan to meet with OMB to discuss how it uses these reports and will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To reasonably assure that agency-reported information on use of the DNP working system is reliable, the Director of OMB should develop a process for comparing agency reporting on the use of the DNP working system to available sources, such as OMB guidance and DNP working system adjudication reports.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed with the concept of ensuring that data are reliable and will consider the feasibility of a process to compare agency submissions to available sources to reasonably assure that agency-reported information on use of the Do Not Pay working system is reliable. OMB provided us a status update on July 1, 2019, stating that OMB will work with Treasury to determine feasibility of doing this review and establishing a process during fiscal year 2019. As of February 2020, OMB has not provided any new status updates for this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To reasonably assure that agency-reported information on use of the DNP working system is complete, the Director of OMB should revise its guidance to clarify whether agencies should report on their uses of all of the functionalities of the DNP working system in their agency financial reports.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed with ensuring the completeness of data and will continue to work with agencies and the Chief Financial Officer community to ensure that agency-reported information on the use of the Do Not Pay (DNP) working system is complete. In fiscal year 2019, OMB provided us a status update on July 1, 2019, stating that this recommendation was addressed in OMB's Circular A-136. Additionally, we met with OMB officials on July 31, 2019. During the meeting, OMB officials informed us that the OMB Circular A-136, Section II.4.5 (bullet 3) (dated June 28, 2019) states that "Agencies should provide a brief narrative of the reduction in improper payments that is attributable to the DNP Initiative, as applicable. See OMB Circular A-123, Appendix C, Part V for a thorough overview of the roles and responsibilities of agencies to use centralized data sources such as the Treasury Working System and other government databases to prevent improper payments." We have reviewed OMB Circular A-136 and confirmed that the circular does contain the statements above. However, we do not believe that the OMB Circular A-136 meets the intent of our recommendation. GAO issued its recommendation, in part, because GAO found that OMB guidance does not indicate whether agencies should report on all uses of the DNP working system, including those outside payment integration that the DNP working system does not track. For this reason, GAO report concluded that without complete and reliable data and clear guidance on what information agencies should report, OMB cannot effectively monitor and evaluate the use of the DNP working system. Therefore, we do not believe that the OMB Circular A-136 sufficiently clarifies whether agencies should report on their uses of all of the functionalities of the DNP working system in their agency financial reports. As of February 2020, OMB has not provided any new status updates for this recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that annual training plans are aligned with the Air Force's stated goals to ensure that its forces can successfully achieve missions across a broad range of current and emerging threats, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to comprehensively reassess the assumptions underlying its annual training requirements--including, but not limited to, the total annual training requirements by aircraft, the criteria for designating aircrews as experienced or inexperienced, and the mix between live and simulator training--and make any appropriate adjustments in future training plans.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation. The Air Force has taken steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, Air Force officials stated they have completed one study and have an ongoing study, intended to reassess the assumptions underlying its annual training requirements for fighter aircrews. For example, Air Force officials stated a study was completed in August 2017 reassessing the criteria for designating aircrews as experienced or inexperienced for 4th generation fighter aircraft. In addition, Air Force officials stated that another study was intended to define the optimum mix of annual training requirements for fighter aircrews. These officials stated that the study results were provided to Air Force senior leaders in July 2018 for approval. As of August 2020, the Air Force did not provide any additional documentation on steps taken to address the recommendation. Completion of these studies and the corresponding adjustments to annual training requirements should help the Air Force ensure that their training plans are aligned to achieve a range of missions for current and emerging threats as recommended by GAO in September 2016.

Recommendation: To improve the Air Force's ability to consistently monitor training results and better position it to allocate resources to address factors that limit the effectiveness of training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to establish desired learning objectives and training support elements needed to accomplish the training expectations in its annual Ready Aircrew Program tasking memorandums, and develop a process to collect data to assess the effectiveness of annual training against these features.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation, stating that the Air Force's Ready Aircrew Program training differs significantly from other syllabus-directed courses of instruction and that desired learning objectives for this training are set at the squadron level in accordance with current Air Force guidance. As of August 2020, DOD did not provide any documentation on steps taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Performance Improvement Council and General Services Administration, should ensure the information presented on Performance.gov consistently complies with GPRAMA public reporting requirements for the website's content.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2018, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and General Services Administration launched an updated version of Performance.gov. Our updated analysis of information presented on the site in August 2020 found that it does not meet all requirements. However, OMB continues to take action to address this recommendation. For example, Performance.gov does not include a required inventory of federal programs. In July 2020, OMB reported that it is working with agencies to address this requirement. Beginning with the fiscal year 2021 federal budget cycle, OMB and agencies plan to merge implementation of existing web-based reporting of performance and spending data to provide a more coherent picture of federal programs and activities. We will continue to monitor the status of actions taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure 18F's performance, the Administrator of GSA should direct the Commissioner for the Technology Transformation Service to assess actual results for each performance measure.

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in a March 2020 written response, GSA stated that Technology Transformation Service (TTS) leadership will be briefed on the program's performance measures on a quarterly basis. We are following up with GSA to confirm that its TTS leadership has been briefed on the results on these performance measures. We will continue to evaluate GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to ensure that all goals and associated performance measures are outcome-oriented and that performance measures have targets.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB developed three goals for U.S. Digital Service (USDS): (1) rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; (2) expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools; and (3) bring top technical talent into public service. In addition, OMB established performance measures with targets for its third goal and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the first two USDS goals. Further, the program's third goal is not outcome-oriented. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that USDS established goals for and measured performance on each of the projects the program supports in its fall 2017 report to Congress. Although measuring performance on projects can provide USDS with valuable information, this effort does not address goals and performance measurement on the overall USDS program. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to assess actual results for each performance measure.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in its December 2016 report to Congress, OMB assessed the results of performance measures for one of the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) program's goals--bring top technical talent into public service--and for each of the program's major projects. However, OMB has not established performance measures for the other two USDS goals--rethink how the federal government builds and buys digital services; and expand the use of common, platforms, services, and tools. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that USDS established goals for and measured performance on each of the projects the program supports in its fall 2017 report to Congress. As of July 2019, USDS has not publicly released any subsequent reports to Congress or additional information on its goals and performance measures. Although measuring performance on projects can provide USDS with valuable information, this effort does not address performance measurement on the overall USDS program. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively measure performance, prioritize USDS's resources, and ensure that CIOs play an integral role in agency digital service teams, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to update USDS policy to clearly define the responsibilities and authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and the digital service teams and require existing agency digital service teams to address this policy. In doing so, the Federal Chief Information Officer should ensure that this policy is aligned with relevant federal law and OMB guidance on CIO responsibilities and authorities.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. In particular, OMB updated its digital service team policy to require that teams appropriately inform their chief information officers (CIO) regarding U.S. Digital Service (USDS) projects. However, the policy does not describe the responsibilities or authorities governing the relationships between CIOs and digital service teams. In May 2018, an USDS staff member stated that the program updated digital service team charters to address the role of agency CIOs. As of May 2020, USDS has yet to provide us with the updated digital service team charters. In May 2020, OMB stated that they would provide an update on the agency's efforts to address the recommendation by June 2020. We will continue to evaluate OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that FAMS uses its resources to cover the highest-risk flights, in addition to considering risk when determining how to divide FAMS's international flight coverage resources among international destinations, the Director of FAMS should incorporate risk into FAMS's method for initially setting its annual target numbers of average daily international and domestic flights to cover.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration: Office of Law Enforcement - Federal Air Marshal Service
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2016, we found that FAMS officials considered risk when selecting specific domestic and international flights to cover, but they did not consider risk when deciding how to initially divide their annual resources between domestic and international flights. Rather, each year FAMS considered two variables--travel budget and number of air marshals--to identify the most efficient way to divide the agency's resources between domestic and international flights. As a result, we recommended that FAMS incorporate risk into FAMS's method for initially setting its annual target numbers of average daily international and domestic flights to cover. In March 2018, FAMS revised its deployment methodology to no longer set an annual target number of average daily international and domestic flights to cover. Rather, FAMS now prioritizes deploying air marshals on as many flights as possible with passengers who have been identified as potentially higher risk because they match TSA's intelligence-based screening rules, among other risk-based priorities. In August 2020, FAMS officials explained that they were evaluating their concept of operations and planned to more fully develop a risk basis for dividing its resources between international and domestic flights. By doing so, FAMS could better ensure it is targeting its limited resources to the highest risk flights and better aligning with FAMS's stated goal of using risk-based decisions to guide mission operations. As a result, this recommendation remains open.

Recommendation: To assist in determining whether to require USPS and PRC to report on delivery performance for rural and non-rural areas, Congress should direct USPS to provide cost estimates related to providing this information.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not taken any action to direct USPS to provide cost estimates related to reporting on delivery performance for rural and non-rural areas

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has identified five priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. USDA states that action plans and progress updates for these goals are "coming soon". In a November 2018 letter to the Comptroller General, USDA's Inspector General acknowledged that additional efforts are needed to better describe the quality of the data supporting the APGs and said that the Department will increase the amount of information provided in the quarterly APG updates. In April 2020, we followed up and once more requested updated information from USDA officials. As of May 6, 2020, we have not received the requested information. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) has identified three priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. DOD states action plans and progress updates are "coming soon" for Performance.gov. In March 2020, DOD officials reported that they continue to work to address our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by working with OMB to describe on Performance.gov how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of the Interior (Interior) has identified six priority goals (APGs) for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. Interior states on Performance.gov that action plans and progress updates are "coming soon". We will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Performance Plan and Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Performance Report provides a general statement on how the agency uses a standardized methodology to measure its performance and that agency officials attest to the quality of the performance information. USDA also identifies its priority goals for fiscal years 2020 and 2021, but specific data quality explanation is not provided for these APGs. In a November 2018 letter to the Comptroller General, USDA's Inspector General stated that the Department agrees with the recommendation and will begin providing data quality explanation for the APGs in its next annual performance plan and report to be published in February 2019, but our review in 2019 found no such explanation. Further, as noted above the most recent plan and report do not provide the required explanation. In April 2020, we once more requested updated information from USDA officials and as of May 6, 2020 have not received the requested information. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense's (DOD) Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Annual Performance Plan and FY2019 Annual Performance Report states that, "each goal owner has attested the performance results and narrative information included in this report is complete, accurate, and reliable; and that data validation and verification procedures are documented and available upon request," and DOD refers readers to Performance.gov for more information about its priority goals (APGs). However, the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 requires agencies to publish more specific data quality explanation for each APG in performance plans and reports and on Performance.gov. DOD's performance plan and report does not contain the more specific explanation required. Nor did our review of Performance.gov find the required explanation. In March 2020, DOD officials reported that they continue to work to address our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the public reporting about how agencies are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their priority goals, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Defense, Interior, and Labor, and the Administrator of NASA should more fully address GPRAMA requirements and OMB guidance by describing in their agencies' annual performance plans and reports how they are ensuring the quality of performance information used to measure progress towards their APGs.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of the Interior's (Interior) 2021/2020 Annual Performance Plan & 2019 Report (APP&R) includes a section concerning data accuracy and reliability and describes in general terms how Interior ensures the accuracy and reliability of performance information and how it addresses the five data quality requirements in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. Interior states in this section that measurement procedures for agency performance goals are described on Performance.gov. As of May 2020, our review found that Interior has not provided specific data quality explanation for its APGs on Performance.gov. We will continue to monitor Interior's efforts to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that CMS and ONC can effectively monitor the effect of the EHR programs and progress made toward goals, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the agencies to develop performance measures to assess outcomes of the EHR programs--including any effects on health care quality, efficiency, and patient safety and other health care reform efforts that are intended to work toward similar outcomes.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. In July 2015, CMS noted that the agency is working to align the programs to better enable monitoring using outcome-oriented performance measures and noted that the agency is collecting data that will help them to develop such measures. CMS did not indicate when HHS plans to develop such measures as GAO recommended. In June 2016, CMS also noted that it analyzed the results of the EHR programs as of October 2015, but did not indicate that it used performance measures that assess outcomes. In September 2017, HHS officials provided us a variety of publically available reports, which they indicated show how program participants are progressing in the EHR programs and the related impacts. In 2018, CMS changed the name of these programs to the Promoting Interoperability programs to focus on improving interoperability and patients' access to health information, and officials noted that the agency is working to develop related outcome-based measures. To fully implement this recommendation, CMS needs to develop performance measures that enable the agency to assess whether the Promoting Interoperability programs are improving outcomes, such as health care quality, efficiency, and patient safety, as we recommended.

Recommendation: To ensure that CMS and ONC can effectively monitor the effect of the EHR programs and progress made toward goals, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the agencies to use the information these performance measures provide to make program adjustments, as appropriate, to better achieve program goals.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In written responses provided by HHS in February 2014, on a draft of the report, the agency indicated that it agrees that outcome-oriented performance measures will be useful to evaluating the extent that the EHR programs--enacted through legislation--achieve the expected results. However, HHS did not identify any specific actions that it might undertake to address our recommendation. In July 2015, CMS indicated that the agency is still working to develop additional performance measures, which is a necessary first step towards implementing our recommendation to HHS that CMS and ONC use the outcome-oriented performance measures to make program adjustments, as appropriate. In September 2017 and March 2018, HHS officials provided us documents, which they indicated show how information gathered through monitoring activities was used to inform the EHR programs. In November 2018, HHS officials noted that CMS is actively working to use data submitted for the Promoting Interoperability Programs to improve upon the outcomes of patients, and also indicated (as noted above) that CMS is collaborating with stakeholders to develop outcome-based measures for the Promoting Interoperability Programs. To fully implement this recommendation, CMS needs to develop outcome-oriented performance measures and then demonstrate it is using them to make appropriate program adjustments. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To enhance the value of Performance.gov for intended audiences and improve the ability to identify and prioritize potential improvements, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget--working with the Performance Improvement Council and the General Services Administration--should seek to ensure that all performance, search, and customer satisfaction metrics, consistent with leading practices outlined in HowTo.gov, are tracked for the website, and, where appropriate, create goals for those metrics to help identify and prioritize potential improvements to Performance.gov.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and General Services Administration (GSA) had taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. According to information that OMB staff provided in March 2019, OMB and GSA tracked 12 metrics for Performance.gov that are recommended for federal websites. However, as of October 2020, OMB and GSA had not created goals for any of those metrics, nor did they track 12 additional recommended metrics. In March 2019, GSA staff told us that, in lieu of goals, OMB and GSA staff held regular meetings to discuss the data collected for the metrics they tracked. However, without the additional metrics or any goals, OMB and GSA lack a full understanding of how well the website is performing, and what actions are needed to improve its performance and usability to achieve desired results. We will continue to monitor the status of actions taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to define by when and how the department plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include, among other things, (a) information about the specific business systems that support business enterprise architecture (BEA) business activities and related system functions; (b) business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes; and (c) sufficient information about business activities to allow for more effective identification of potential overlap and duplication.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD has made significant progress addressing the recommendation; however, as of November 2019, more remained to be done. In particular, in 2015, we reported that the department had taken steps to improve the integration of business enterprise architecture information with other existing information, which allows DOD to identify information such as mapping of existing business systems to system functions. More recently, in 2017, the department awarded a contract to improve its business enterprise architecture. According to the department, the objective of the contract was to improve business and system optimization by providing mechanisms to ingest and discover enterprise architecture content from all department components and allow for cross-domain portfolio reviews to include duplication analysis. More specifically, the contract called for developing three major capabilities, including the ability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains. In October 2019, the Office of the Chief Management Officer (CMO) demonstrated that it had completed development of the three planned capabilities and the office said it was working to host the capabilities in a government-approved cloud environment. With regard to including business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes in the business enterprise architecture, the department stated that the new architecture is to identify the business capabilities and processes associated with Lines of Business, which will be defined as a decomposition of the products and services that the business enterprise delivers to the department's components. In September 2019, officials from the Office of the CMO stated that the department plans to review end-to-end processes that comprise the current business enterprise architecture for currency and relevancy. However, the officials did not indicate when they expect to complete this review.

Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to ensure that the functional strategies include all of the critical elements identified in DOD investment management guidance, including performance measures to determine progress toward achieving the goals that incorporate all of the attributes called for in the department's guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, the Department of Defense (DOD) had not addressed the recommendation. In May 2013, we reported that, for the fiscal year 2013 certification of business systems, functional strategies included many, but not all, of the critical elements required by DOD's guidance. Specifically, not all functional strategies demonstrated linkages to business goals in DOD's strategic management plan, and not all included expected outcomes for all functional area goals. In addition, some, but not all, had performance measures in place for assessing progress toward achieving stated goals. However, none of the functional strategies included performance measures that reflected all of the key attributes identified in DOD's guidance. We also reported that for the 2014 certification cycle, the functional strategies had been improved. However, not all of them had performance measures that included all key attributes called for in the guidance. Specifically, all performance measures did not include baseline and target measures, and provide a rationale for the identified targets. In June 2018, DOD revised the required functional strategy elements in its defense business system investment management guidance. However, as of November 2019, the department had not ensured that its functional strategies include all of the elements identified in the guidance. The guidance still requires that functional strategies include business outcomes that link to goals in DOD's strategic management plan. In addition, while the guidance no longer calls for the key performance measure attributes that we assessed in our 2013 report (i.e., baseline and target measures and a rationale for identified targets), the new guidance requires that business outcomes include measurable targets. However, none of the fiscal year 2019 functional strategies fully addressed most of the required elements. For example, none of the functional strategies demonstrated that business outcomes were clearly linked to the department's strategic management plan goals, as required by the 2018 investment management guidance. In addition, none of the strategies included measurable targets, An official from the office of the Chief Management Officer (CMO) demonstrated that the department's Integrated Business Framework-Data Alignment Portal, which is used to record functional strategies, includes business outcomes that are aligned to goals and objectives in the National Defense Business Operations Plan (i.e., the agency strategic plan). The official also demonstrated that most functional strategies link to at least one performance measure from the National Defense Business Operations Plan. However, the official agreed that the published functional strategies did not clearly link outcomes to the department's strategic management plan. Further, officials from the office of the CMO stated in September 2019 that the functional strategies for fiscal year 2019 were not revised for fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to select and control its mix of investments in a manner that best supports mission needs by (a) documenting a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds; (b) ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date; and (c) ensuring that the documents provided to the Defense Business Council as part of the investment management process include critical information for conducting all assessments.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, DOD had not addressed the recommendation. In 2013, we reported that the department's investment management guidance did not specify a process for conducting an assessment or call for the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds for evaluating portfolio performance. In addition, the department did not call for assessments to be conducted in four key areas-benefits attained, current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated or accepted to date. We also reported in 2013, that the department's investment management guidance identified four criteria and specified the associated assessments that were to be conducted when reviewing and evaluating components' organization execution plans in order to make a portfolio-based investment decision. However, the guidance did not call for the department's organizational execution plans to include critical information for conducting assessments associated with three of the four criteria. Specifically, it did not include information for conducting assessments associated with strategic alignment (i.e., information on alignment with the capital planning and investment control practices and Better Buying Power guidance), utility (i.e., interoperability among systems and system scalability to support additional users) and total cost (i.e., cost in relationship to return on investment). In September 2019, the department stated that the Office of the Chief Management Officer's investment management guidance, investment management training materials, and organizational execution plan, addressed elements of the recommendation. However, the documents did not specify a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds. Regarding ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date, the June 2018 investment management guidance requires organization execution plans to include risks and risk mitigation strategies. In addition, the investment management guidance requires the plans to include information about benefits attained. Specifically, the plans are to include progress against targets for business goals documented in functional strategies. However, the guidance does not address the remaining key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been eliminated or accepted to date. In addition, the guidance does not call for this information to be used as part of portfolio assessments. Regarding ensuring that the documents provided to the Defense Business Council as part of the investment management process include critical information for conducting assessments, in September 2019, the department stated in a written response that business system certification decisions are made in accordance with criteria established in 10 U.S. Code Section 2222. However, as of November 2109, the department had not demonstrated that it established guidance that calls for documents to include critical information on alignment with the capital planning and investment control practices and Better Buying Power guidance), utility (i.e., interoperability among systems and system scalability to support additional users) and total cost (i.e., cost in relationship to return on investment), which are criteria it established in its investment management guidance for making certification decisions.

Recommendation: When such revisions are made, the Director of OMB should work with the Performance Improvement Council to test and implement these provisions.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. According to information provided by OMB and PIC staff in June 2015, although OMB revised its guidance as we recommended, it did not work with the PIC to test implementation of these provisions. Instead, they told us that both PIC and OMB staff ensure agencies are implementing these provisions of their guidance when reviewing agency priority goal (APG) quarterly update submissions. However, our analyses of agencies' APG updates since that time has continued to find that implementation of these provisions is mixed. We will continue to monitor progress.

Recommendation: In addition, as OMB works with agencies to enhance Performance.gov to include additional information about APGs, the Director of OMB should ensure that agencies adhere to OMB's guidance for website updates by providing a description of how input from congressional consultations was incorporated into each APG.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken limited actions to address this recommendation. In July 2017, OMB staff said that they planned on highlighting the requirement for congressional consultation as they updated the 2018-2019 APGs, which were first published in February 2018 and were updated quarterly. However, our periodic analyses of Performance.gov showed that neither the updated version of the site, nor the reporting templates for individual APGs, contained a space for providing a description of input from Congress. In its July 2020 guidance, OMB directed agencies to highlight congressional input, if such input was relevant to setting a specific goal, in the APG overview section of the template. We will continue to monitor progress.

Recommendation: To ensure reliable measurement of veterans' wait times for medical appointments, the Secretary of VA should direct the Under Secretary for Health to take actions to improve the reliability of wait time measures either by clarifying the scheduling policy to better define the desired date, or by identifying clearer wait time measures that are not subject to interpretation and prone to scheduler error.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. VA has taken actions intended to address the reliability of appointment wait times through improvements in appointment scheduling, including issuing a revised scheduling policy, providing and documenting scheduler training and improving oversight through scheduler audits. While the revised scheduling policy and subsequent guidance changed the terminology of wait time measures, it did not substantively clarify or define the desired date, one of the dates used for measuring appointment wait times. Therefore, we continue to believe that the desired date is still subject to interpretation and prone to scheduler error, which poses concerns for the reliability of wait times measured using the patient's desired date. Furthermore, in its internal audit report dated February 2019, VA reported it was unable to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of its wait-time data due to the lack of business rules for calculating them, indicating that additional efforts are needed to address this issue. In January 2020, VA reported to us that the internal audit did not test whether schedulers entered the patient's desired date into the scheduling system in compliance with VHA policy because of the lack of verifiable source documentation. Given our continued concerns about VA's ability to ensure the reliability of the wait-time data, we have requested additional information from VA about its wait time methodology and assessment of evidence underlying the audit findings.

Recommendation: To improve timely medical appointments and to address patient and staff complaints about telephone access,the Secretary of VA should direct the Under Secretary for Health to ensure that all VAMCs provide oversight of telephone access and implement best practices outlined in its telephone systems improvement guide.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation and stated that VISN and VA Medical Center leadership would use best practices to develop and implement improved telephone service plans. As of March 2015, VA had developed a standardized telephone assessment tool and requested that facilities that care for 5,000 or more veterans complete the assessment and select actions for improvement based on its existing telephone systems improvement guide. Based on this request, VA received telephone assessment and improvement plans from 286 facilities that care for 5,000 or more veterans. VA is monitoring the facilities' telephone performance and is re-baselining call center infrastructure at each facility with a survey and new performance goals. In September 2015, VA issued an updated Telephone Access and Contact Management Improvement Guide. VA has also drafted an update to its directive on telephone access to outpatient care. As of July 2019, VA decided not to advance the draft policy for review and approval at this time, because of the significant uncertainty due to ongoing development of VA clinical contact centers and telehealth services. VA stated that it remains committed to developing sound policy related to virtual (telephone, video, and web-chat) access to clinical care.

Recommendation: To enhance collaboration among the various entities involved in delivering employment services to military spouses and to better monitor the effectiveness of these services, the Secretary of Defense should consider incorporating key practices to sustain and enhance collaboration when developing and finalizing its spouse employment guidance, such as agreeing on roles and responsibilities and developing compatible policies and procedures.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of September 2019, DoD has addressed some but not all aspects of this recommendation. According to DoD officials, the Spouse Education and Career Opportunities (SECO) programs have mechanisms for operating across agency boundaries by fostering open lines of communication and other collaborative practices. Specifically, according to DoD officials, these mechanisms provide SECO program and military service officials, who operate employment assistance programs at military installations, full knowledge of the relevant resources and activities focused on military spouse employment. For example, SECO provides quarterly webinars to military service employment program officials; and, leaders at SECO and installations have bi-monthly calls to provide updates on their respective initiatives. However, SECO has not fully developed guidance describing its overall strategy and how its various programs should coordinate to help military spouses obtain employment, which could include clarifying the roles and responsibilities of SECO and the military service programs. Our prior work has found that such documentation can help improve coordination by clarifying who does what in a partnership. Although DoD had intended to develop a separate policy (or DoD Instruction) for spouse employment, agency officials said they abandoned this effort. DoD plans to issue new guidance, but as of September 2019, DoD has not provided an update on this guidance or other examples of documentation that outline roles and responsibilities. Until DoD develops guidance, these programs face increased risk for poor coordination and program overlap.

Recommendation: To enhance FAA's efforts to improve general aviation safety, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to improve measures of general aviation activity by requiring the collection of the number of hours that general aviation aircraft fly over a period of time (flight hours). FAA should explore ways to do this that minimize the impact on the general aviation community, such as by collecting the data at regular events (e.g., during registration renewals or at annual maintenance inspections) that are already required.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, GAO confirmed that FAA still does not plan to collect General Aviation (GA) flight hour data during registration renewals or annual maintenance inspections because this would require rulemaking and could have a significant economic and paperwork impact on the GA industry. While FAA has made changes to the GA Activity Survey to improve the accuracy of the flight hour data collected for a sample of GA populations, FAA still does not plan to collect all GA flight hour data as part of its GA Activity Survey. GAO maintains that without comprehensive GA flight hour data, estimates from the GA Activity Survey may not be sufficient for drawing conclusions about changes in crash rates over time and that more precise flight hour data could allow FAA to better target its safety efforts within the GA industry.

Recommendation: To enhance FAA's efforts to improve general aviation safety, and to ensure that ongoing safety issues are addressed, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to set specific general aviation safety improvement goals--such as targets for fatal accident reductions--for individual industry segments using a datadriven, risk management approach.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2019, GAO confirmed that FAA still does not plan to develop safety targets for different segments of the General Aviation (GA) industry. While FAA's General Aviation Joint Steering Committee was exploring metrics for monitoring different GA industry segments, it was determined that developing credible metrics was not feasible using the GA Activity Survey. GAO maintains that FAA needs to develop specific general aviation safety improvement targets for individual industry segments to support a data-driven, risk management approach.

Recommendation: To enhance FAA's efforts to improve general aviation safety, and to determine whether the programs and activities underlying the 5-year strategy are successful and if additional actions are needed, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA Administrator to develop performance measures for each significant program and activity underlying the 5-year strategy.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: FAA reported it established performance measures for significant programs and activities underlying its 5-year strategy. However, as of July 2019 FAA has still not provided GAO with documentation of these performance measures. Without this documentation, GAO cannot confirm that the agency has developed performance measures for each significant program and activity underlying its 5-year strategy.

Recommendation: To clarify IT requirements within the Executive Agreement, to enable VA and DOD to make an informed recommendation about whether the FHCC should continue after the end of the demonstration, and to provide useful information for other integrations that may be considered in the future, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should develop plans with clear definitions and specific deliverables, including time frames for two IT capabilities-documentation of patient care to support medical and dental operational readiness and outpatient appointment enhancements-and formalize these plans, for example, by incorporating them into the Executive Agreement.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information. As of September 2019, VA and DOD officials have not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To clarify IT requirements within the Executive Agreement, to enable VA and DOD to make an informed recommendation about whether the FHCC should continue after the end of the demonstration, and to provide useful information for other integrations that may be considered in the future, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should develop plans with clear definitions and specific deliverables, including time frames for two IT capabilities-documentation of patient care to support medical and dental operational readiness and outpatient appointment enhancements-and formalize these plans, for example, by incorporating them into the Executive Agreement.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information. As of September 2019, VA and DOD officials have not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FEMA's agencywide workforce planning and training efforts are conducted in a comprehensive and integrated manner, the FEMA Administrator should identify and document long-term and quantifiable mission critical goals that reflect the agency's priorities for workforce planning and training.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, agency officials said they had contracted for the development of a Workforce Strategic Plan that is intended to assess current steady state staffing needs based on mission requirements and establish workforce models capable of determining future needs based on workload drivers. Further, they said the plan will monitor and evaluate FEMA's progress towards mission critical goals and the contribution that human capital results have made towards achieving programmatic priorities. In July 2017, they provided an updated estimate that the plan will be completed by June 2020. Pending completion of this effort, the recommendation will remain open. As of February 2020, GAO is awaiting additional information about these actions.

Recommendation: To help ensure that FEMA's agencywide workforce planning and training efforts are conducted in a comprehensive and integrated manner, the FEMA Administrator should establish a time frame for completing the development of quantifiable performance measures related to workforce planning and training efforts.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2016, agency officials said they had contracted for the development of a Workforce Strategic Plan that is intended to assess current steady state staffing needs based on mission requirements and establish workforce models capable of determining future needs based on workload drivers. Once complete, they said the plan will identify performance metrics to track FEMA's progress towards mission critical goals regarding workforce planning and training efforts. In July 2017, they provided an updated estimate that the plan will be completed by June 2020. Pending completion of this effort, the recommendation will remain open. As of February 2020, GAO is awaiting additional information about this effort.

Recommendation: To better inform FEMA's decision-making related to agencywide workforce planning and training efforts, the FEMA Administrator should develop systematic processes to collect and analyze workforce and training data.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2017, officials reported that FEMA's Chief Component Human Capital Office was preparing a Training Plan that will outline the collection and analysis methodology of training data with an estimated completion date of September 2018. Pending documentation of the results of these efforts, this recommendation will remain open. As of February 2020, GAO is awaiting additional information about these efforts.