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 Veterans Affairs should develop a department-wide succession plan for leadership and mission-critical occupations that incorporates key leading practices for succession planning. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VA reported that it is developing a department-wide succession plan for leadership positions and mission-critical occupations. VA estimated it would complete this plan by September 30, 2020. When VA provides us a copy of the completed plan, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should incorporate key leading practices into VHA's succession planning processes, including monitoring and evaluating VHA's succession planning. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: As of April 2020, VHA reported that it is developing guidance and metrics, developing a process to assess field-based succession planning actions, and incorporating evaluations and updates of implementation strategies into its succession plan. VHA also indicated that it is developing a new VHA Executive Succession Plan. VHA plans to complete these actions by December 2021. When we receive VHA's updated plans and guidance, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Benefits should develop a succession planning process for all leadership positions and incorporate key leading practices into VBA's succession planning for leadership positions and mission-critical occupations. These practices include aligning the plans with strategic goals, identifying strategies to close workforce gaps, and monitoring and evaluating VBA's succession planning. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: As of April 2020, VBA reported that it is developing succession plans that align with VBA's strategic goals and identify succession planning strategies. VBA also indicated that it plans to review, assess, and update the plans annually. According to VBA, its plans will cover mission-critical occupations as well as leadership positions within those mission-critical occupations. However, VBA stated that VA's Corporate Senior Executive Management Office (CSEMO) is responsible for planning related to VBA's senior executives and that VBA will coordinate with CSEMO on succession planning for senior executives. To implement our recommendation, VBA will need to demonstrate that VBA, or CSEMO in coordination with VBA, has developed succession planning processes that cover all leadership positions (including senior executives) and mission-critical occupations. VBA expects to complete its succession plans by September 30, 2020. When we receive VBA's completed plans, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should update VA's 2003 directive on workforce and succession planning to incorporate relevant legal requirements, including Office of Personnel Management strategic human capital management regulation requirements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, VA reported that its updated directive is going through the Department's internal review and concurrence process. VA estimated it would complete the directive by July 31, 2020. When VA provides us a copy of the directive, we will provide updated information.

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 Administrator for the National Nuclear Security Administration should develop and document clear procedures for implementing NAP-4C, specifying the process for collecting contractor performance information and describing how officials are to ensure this information can be traced to rating determinations. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) concurred with the recommendation. In February 2020, NNSA issued its fiscal year 2020 Corporate Performance Evaluation Process Annual Implementation Guidance. This guidance included a new section specifying the process for collecting contractor performance information and further details regarding the preparation of interim feedback reports and final performance evaluation reports. However, the guidance is unclear regarding how this information can be traced to rating determinations. In order to provide more transparency and ensure this traceability, NNSA guidance and the Performance Evaluation Reports themselves should more clearly link how collected performance information tracks to rating determinations.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) partially concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, EERE officials stated that cost performance feedback was included in the 2019 final performance evaluation for the EERE Management and Operating contractor. EERE officials also stated that they had incorporated cost performance evaluation criteria into the fiscal year 2020 Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) for NREL. EERE officials noted that these actions ensure cost performance will be included as part of the ongoing contractor evaluation process. We have requested documentation of the new PEMP and performance evaluation report and, in order to ensure cost performance evaluation criteria are included in the future, EERE should update its policy to require quality information on cost performance going forward.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Environmental Management should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Environmental Management
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Environmental Management (EM) concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, EM officials stated that they will include the requirement for quality information on cost performance in EM's Cleanup Project Management Policy. According to officials, EM is working on this policy, along with an additional Cleanup Program Management Policy that they expect to complete by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Fossil Energy should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Fossil Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) concurred with the recommendation. As of April 2020, FE officials stated that they had revised and executed the Performance Evaluation and Measurements Plan (PEMP), for the current Management and Operating contract to add a new PEMP measure that addresses monitoring cost growth, additional activities in internal audit, and data quality that addresses our recommendation. We have requested documentation of the PEMP showing the new measures and an updated policy requiring inclusion of quality information on cost performance in Performance Evaulation Reports. Upon receiving those, we will review to determine if it addresses our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator for the National Nuclear Security Administration should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 5)

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

Comments: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) concurred with the recommendation. In February 2020, NNSA issued its fiscal year 2020 Corporate Performance Evaluation Process Annual Implementation Guidance. This guidance provides instructions regarding the evaluation of cost performance, including examples of the types of cost information that should be collected and how cost data should be analyzed and described. However, the guidance's template for Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plans does not include any explicit cost performance Objectives or Key Outcomes and it is unclear how the cost performance information discussed in the guidance would enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. In order to provide quality cost information that does enable such an overall assessment, NNSA should clarify its guidance regarding cost performance information and how this information links to overall Management and Operating contractor performance.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Nuclear Energy should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Nuclear Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) partially concurred with the recommendation. As of May 2020, NE officials stated that they will include criteria for "day-to-day" cost performance in the annual Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) for fiscal year 2020. NE's evaluation of the contractor's performance against those criteria will be included in the year-end performance reports of its Management and Operating contractor beginning in fiscal year 2020. NE officials stated that modifying the fiscal year 2020 PEMP with added cost criteria, usually done in April, has been delayed due to COVID-19 and that they expect to complete the modification by the end of May 2020. Once the cost criteria are included and evaluated in the Performance Evaluation Report, we will review to determine if it addresses our recommendation. In addition to changes to the fiscal year 2020 report, NE should update its policy to require such criteria for evaluating contractor cost performance going forward.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Science should update its policy to require that Performance Evaluation Reports include quality information on cost performance to enable an overall assessment of Management and Operating contractor cost performance. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Energy: Office of Science
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Science (SC) partially concurred with the recommendation. In commenting on our report in August 2019, DOE stated that by focusing on the annual Performance Evaluation Reports (PER), our report does not capture the cost performance reviews conducted in day-to-day contract oversight, the annual laboratory planning process, and contract extend/compete decisions. In its comments, DOE stated that since SC conducts cost performance reviews in normal operations and at the year-end annual evaluation process, adequate information is available to assess whether the contractor cost performance is acceptable to the department. As of April 2020, SC had not updated these comments. In the report, we note that SC conducts some cost performance evaluation activities outside of the annual performance evaluation process, although we did not assess these efforts. While there may be adequate information available, SC does not commonly document this information or assessments from such activities in the PERs. We continue to believe that the PERs are important sources of information for contract management--particularly for acquisition decisions and oversight of spending on cost-reimbursement contracts--and that action is needed to improve these formal records of contractor performance. By not including quality information on overall cost performance and assessments in PERs, SC is missing a valuable opportunity to better document contractors' cost performance, improve acquisition decision-making, and strengthen oversight of billions of dollars in contracting. We continue to believe that it is important for SC to implement the recommendation and that by doing so, the office would have better assurance that Management and Operating contractor performance evaluations fully address required elements.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should, in consultation with other U.S. agencies involved in counternarcotics efforts in Colombia, conduct an evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of eradication and interdiction in reducing the cocaine supply. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State generally agreed with our recommendation. As of February 2020, State reported that, working with the Department of Defense, it had signed a contract with RAND for an evaluation of counternarcotics efforts in Colombia. The evaluation will, among other things, asses the effectiveness of U.S. government-funded counternarcotics assistance programs in Colombia from 2000 through 2018. RAND plans to complete the evaluation within 16 months of the contract's execution. We will continue to monitor progress on the evaluation and State's efforts to implement our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should, in consultation with other U.S. agencies involved in counternarcotics efforts in Colombia, undertake a comprehensive review of the U.S. counternarcotics approach in Colombia and identify what changes, if any, should be made to the types and combination of U.S. activities, taking into consideration how the relative benefits and limitations between eradication, interdiction, and alternative development may impact the effectiveness of these efforts. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State generally agreed with our recommendation. As of February 2020, State reported that, working with the Department of Defense, it had signed a contract with RAND for an evaluation of counternarcotics efforts in Colombia. The evaluation will include, among other things, a comprehensive review of the U.S. counternarcotics approach in Colombia that considers the relative benefits and limitations between eradication, interdiction, and alternative development efforts. RAND plans to complete the evaluation within 16 months of the contract's execution. We will continue to monitor progress on the evaluation and State's efforts to implement our recommendation.

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 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: To improve RRB's ability to make accurate disability benefit eligibility determinations, including CDRs, and to decrease the potential for making improper payments, Congress should consider granting RRB access to the Department of Health and Human Services' quarterly earnings information from the National Directory of New Hires database. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, no legislation has been enacted resulting from this matter to Congress. RRB's (the Board) fiscal year 2020 budget proposal included a legislative proposal to provide the Board access to the NDNH. Although the Board reported that the resulting proposed legislation drafted by HHS - the entity that maintains the NDNH - would, if enacted, provide access to the NDNH, the Board opposed the proposal in part because it would not waive associated fees to access the NDNH, and concluded access to the NDNH would not be cost-effective. In January 2020, the Board informed GAO it is not currently seeking legislation to gain access to the NDNH, resulting in the Board continuing to use earnings data that may be outdated in its continuing disability reviews, but that it may seek access in the future.

Recommendation: To enhance RRB's ability to manage and oversee its CDR program, RRB should routinely compile and analyze CDR program data, such as the number of cases selected for review, the number of beneficiaries in each medical improvement category, outcomes, and the costs and benefits of conducting CDRs, to improve program oversight. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Railroad Retirement Board
Status: Open

Comments: RRB agreed with this recommendation. In June 2020, RRB reported that its Program Evaluation and Management Services (PEMS) section will compile and analyze all relevant CDR program case and cost data to better oversee CDRs. RRB said that its first analysis would cover CDR's adjudicated from April 2019 through September 2020; as of June 2020 they had adjudicated 107 CDR cases. In addition, RRB reported that its monthly reporting on CDRs to the Director of Disability includes information on the type of CDR completed, the medical improvement category for medical CDR, and the disposition of the CDR. In August 2018, the agency had reported that it began reporting in October 2017 weekly pending CDR type action cases to the Director of Programs, and that it had begun tracking CDR reason codes for each medical improvement category. To close this recommendation, RRB will need to include an analysis of the costs and benefits of conducting CDRs, including any overpayments or underpayments processed, and share its complete analysis of CDRs through September 2020 after it is completed. At that point GAO will review the analysis and decide if it provides a sufficient bases for program oversight.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA includes all key monitoring provisions specified by applicable guidance as part of agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA officials have full documentation of required monitoring activities in agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Millennium Challenge Corporation
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the CMO and in coordination with the DOD DCMO, should take action, as appropriate and necessary, to improve the monitoring of the military departments' performance on business transformation efforts. This could be done by revising the Defense Business Council's charter to make the council responsible for monitoring such performance to reflect the responsibilities of the DOD DCMO to monitor performance across the entire department.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In response to an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memorandum requiring agencies to develop a reform plan to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability, the Deputy Chief Management Officer issued a memorandum requiring each DOD component--including the military departments--to conduct a thorough review of business operations and to propose reform initiatives to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability within their respective organizations. For those initiatives selected for implementation, components were required to provide additional information on their initiatives, to include performance goals and measures. DOD submitted its agency reform plan to OMB in September 2017, which included military department-level reform initiatives. According to an Office of the Chief Management Officer (OCMO) official, OCMO was in the process of incorporating the military department-level reform initiatives into weekly updates to the Deputy Secretary of Defense and monthly reports to the Secretary of Defense. Once the military department-level reform initiatives are incorporated into these regular reporting mechanisms, we believe DOD's efforts will meet the intent of our recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD has not provided additional information related to this recommendation.

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.