Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: "Policies and procedures"
GAO-20-699, Sep 25, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-5130
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence: Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Central Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Central Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Central Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Reconnaissance Office: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Security Agency/Central Security Service: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: National Security Agency/Central Security Service: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-574, Sep 22, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-431, Sep 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-4456
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-599, Sep 8, 2020
Phone: (202)512-8777
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-586, Aug 25, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3406
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it has already taken steps to address this recommendation by updating guidance to federal entities for the preparation of the fiscal year 2020 Agency Financial Reports or Performance and Accountability Reports. In addition, Treasury stated that it has drafted a memo to the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board to seek clarification of existing guidance related to reporting differences for federal entities that prepare financial reports according to FASB standards.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it has already taken steps to address this recommendation by updating guidance to federal entities for the preparation of the fiscal year 2020 Agency Financial Reports or Performance and Accountability Reports.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it drafted a memo to the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board to seek clarification of existing guidance related to reporting differences for federal entities that prepare financial reports according to FASB standards.
GAO-20-560, Aug 7, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-553, Jul 17, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-332, Jun 18, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2989
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and highlighted steps taken or planned to address this recommendation. Specifically, in FY19, the Air Force assessed the current-state of the risk management programs throughout the Air Force and developed a maturity model, implementation plan, and a governance structure to comply with OMB A-123 requirements. These enhancements will be implemented and formalized in policy in FY20. Further, beginning in FY19, the Air Force Senior Assessment Team (SAT) and the Senior Management Council (SMC) monitored corrective action plans for material weaknesses identified internally and by independent public accountants, including their impact on the Air Force's ability to achieve its enterprise objectives. In addition, the Air Force developed a process for the SAT and the SMC to discuss corrective action plans for material weaknesses on a quarterly basis as opposed to an annual basis, which will be evidenced in the form of board briefings and meeting minutes. Additionally, in FY19 the Air Force engaged the Enterprise Productivity Improvement Council to serve as the Air Force Risk Management Council (RMC) to oversee enterprise risk management as defined by their Charter, which was signed in February 2020. The Air Force will refine its policies and procedures to clearly specify the risks associated with the material weaknesses being addressed by the Air Force governance boards. Due to the need for coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2020 and publish the policies by September 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described steps taken or planned to address the recommendation. The Air Force SAF/FM performs both entity-level control assessments against all internal control components and principles and performs process level control assessments for internal controls over financial reporting and financial systems. The Air Force Audit Agency and the Air Force Inspector General have performed assessments related to operations and compliance. The Air Force will document those roles and responsibilities in formal policies. Due to the need for coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2020 and publish the policies by September 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described steps taken or planned to address this recommendation. The Air Force test plans for internal controls over financial reporting and financial systems tie back to their relevant risk frameworks embedded in authoritative audit guidance. The framework used for financial reporting is the Financial Audit Manual, and the framework used for financial systems is the Federal Information Systems Controls Audit Manual, and include the nature, scope and timing of procedures performed. The Air Force's process-level internal control test plans are aligned with business process-level risks and objectives and are not directly associated with the Air Force's strategic objectives. The Air Force Business Operations Plan identifies strategic objectives, not business process-level objectives. Additionally, the Air Force considers previously identified internal control deficiencies in its annual documented internal control assessment scoping process. The Air Force will refine its policies and procedures regarding the use of test plans including operational and compliance controls. Due to the need for policy, procedure, and documentation updates required for operational and compliance controls, and the coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine policies, procedures, and documentation by September 2021 and publish the associated policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Air Force will design policies and procedures to determine assessable units and verify that results are current on an annual basis. Due to the need to reevaluate the Air Force's assessable unit structure and the associated change management that will be necessary to implement the changes to sustain an effective program, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2021 and publish the policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Air Force will design policies and procedures to consider the impact of waivers to the overall assessment of the system of internal control. Due to the need for coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2020 and publish the policies by September 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described steps taken or planned to address the recommendation. Specifically, the Air Force is implementing multiple changes to the Air Force's ERM and internal control program, including improved governance, standardized processes and documentation for enterprise risk management, entity-level and process-level controls, training, fraud risk management, and data quality management. Training content in FY20 was updated to reflect additional information, including definitions for internal controls and considerations for determining material weaknesses for operations. The Air Force will continue to update its the policies, guidance, and training to coincide with the current progress of the program. The Air Force will continue to refine the audience of its training to verify that those responsible for implementing and assessing ERM and internal controls are trained sufficiently. Due to the need for policy, procedure, documentation, and training updates required for operational and compliance controls, and the coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies, procedures, documentation, and training by September 2021 and publish the associated policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Air Force will verify that all definitions and concepts in its policies are current and consistent with other authoritative guidance. Due to the need for coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2020 and publish the policies by September 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described actions taken or planned to address the recommendation. Specifically, the Air Force performs annual training to Major Commands, Direct Reporting Units, and Functional Executives. In FY20, the Air Force included business process assessable leads in this training. The Air Force plans to continue to refine the audience of its training to verify that those responsible for implementing and assessing ERM and internal controls are trained sufficiently by September 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described actions taken or planned to address the recommendation. Specifically, the Air Force's scoping procedures, beginning in FY19, consider materiality, both quantitative and qualitative risk, as well as risks identified in the enterprise risk management process. The Air Force assesses internal controls over financial reporting and financial systems using a risk-based approach as evidenced currently in documented procedures and testing templates. The Air Force will refine its procedure documentation to include the assessment of internal controls over operations and compliance using a risk-based approach. Due to the need for policy, procedure, and documentation updates required for operational and compliance controls, and the coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies, procedures, and documentation by September 2021 and publish the associated policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation and described actions taken or planned to address the recommendation. The Air Force documents processes and assesses internal controls over financial reporting and financial systems related to mission critical assets that includes determinations as to internal control design, implementation, operating effectiveness and risks. The Air Force will enhance its approach for documenting processes and assessing internal controls over operations and compliance not related to financial reporting and financial systems through policy. Due to the need for policy, procedure, and documentation updates required for operational and compliance controls related to mission-critical assets, and the coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies, procedures, and documentation by September 2021 and publish the associated policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Air Force reports material weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting and financial systems related to mission critical assets through SAF/FM, but it will solidify its reporting channels for material weaknesses in internal controls over operations and compliance through policy. Due to the need for policy, procedure, documentation, and training updates required to appropriately report deficiencies in internal control over operations and compliance, and the coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies, procedures, documentation, and training by September 2021 and publish the associated policies by September 2022.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Air Force will develop procedures to enhance communication between business process leads and Air Force unit managers to verify that deficiencies are reported appropriately in supporting statements of assurance. Due to the need for coordination across multiple Air Force organizations to seek input, approve, and concur with policy changes, as well as the change management needed to implement additional communications and protocol processes, the Air Force plans to refine the policies by September 2021 and publish the policies by September 2022.
GAO-20-377, Jun 1, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with the recommendation and stated that it will develop an action plan to address the recommendation to better align its contingency plan with OMB guidance. When we confirm what actions Commerce has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security agreed with the recommendation and and stated that it has begun to take steps to better address OMB guidance on contingency plans. When we confirm what actions DHS has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) partially agreed with the recommendation. IRS agreed with one element of our recommendation to include additional detail in its agency contingency plan and stated that it is in the process of adding procedures for resuming program activities following a government shutdown into its contingency plan. IRS did not agree with the other elements of the recommendation because it believes it has already addressed plans for a potential prolonged shutdown and flexibilities for supervisors if employees are unable to return to work at the end of a shutdown in its contingency plans. We agree that while IRS has included some details on these elements in its plans, we continue to believe that it should provide more detail, such as points in time when the furlough status of an employee may change, how many employees would be affected, and the legal basis for the changes, within its publically available contingency plan to fully address these elements. We will continue to monitor IRS's efforts in this area.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. USTR stated that it has already begun addressing our recommendations on aligning its contingency plan with OMB guidance. When we confirm what actions USTR has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Commerce: International Trade Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with the recommendation and stated that the International Trade Administration (ITA) has documented its shutdown planning processes and recall processes for furloughed employees during a shutdown. When we confirm what actions ITA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. USTR stated that it has already begun addressing our recommendations on documenting its shutdown processes. When we confirm what actions USTR has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security agreed with the recommendation and stated that Customs and Border Protection plans to analyze existing systems to determine which is best suited to track and document employee work during a government shutdown and will ensure that the chosen system is available should a future shutdown occur. When we confirm what actions CBP has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agreed with the recommendation but stated that because Customs and Border Protection (CBP) does not have systems capable of efficiently restoring physical access for furloughed employees, it would have to reinstate employee access individually and the cost would be substantial. DHS stated that CBP plans to update procedures to ensure more comprehensive workspace access guidance for furloughed employees. We continue to believe that physical access controls are important during shutdowns in order to prevent misuse of government resources. We encourage CBP to improve their systems to be able to efficiently implement such controls and will monitor CBP's efforts going forward.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Internal Revenue Service disagreed with this recommendation. IRS stated that it believes that it has effective controls in place to manage physical workspace access during a shutdown. In addition, IRS said that it believes that implementing additional access controls do not justify the corresponding resource investments. We continue to believe that IRS should improve its access controls, which currently rely on managers and furlough letters to communicate limits on workspace access. While we recognize the costs of increased access controls, government shutdowns are unique events that require additional access controls in order to prevent potential misuse of government resources and will monitor IRS's efforts to address it.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. USTR stated that it has made the Executive Office of the President (EOP) aware of the recommendations on developing controls for physical workspace access during a shutdown. We will continue to monitor USTR's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agreed with the recommendation. DHS stated that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) believes that furloughed employees must be able to passively monitor the status of the government shutdown and access important agency communications using DHS-issued electronic devices. Additionally, disabling and reactivating thousands of employee user accounts during a shutdown posed a significant burden. DHS said that CBP plans to update shutdown procedures to clarify allowed use of DHS-issued electronic devices by furloughed employees. We agree that CBP should update procedures on workspace access as suggested, and continue to believe that virtual access controls are important during shutdowns in order to prevent misuse of government resources. We encourage CBP to improve their systems to be able to efficiently implement such controls and will monitor CBP's progress going forward.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Internal Revenue Service disagreed with this recommendation. IRS stated that it believes that it has effective controls in place to manage virtual workspace access during a shutdown. In addition, IRS said that it believes that implementing additional access controls do not justify the corresponding resource investments. We continue to believe that IRS should improve its access controls, which currently rely on managers and furlough letters to communicate limits on workspace access. While we recognize the costs of increased access controls, government shutdowns are unique events that require additional access controls in order to prevent potential misuse of government resources and will monitor IRS's efforts to address it.
Agency: Department of Commerce: International Trade Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with the recommendation and stated that the International Trade Administration (ITA) has established and documented internal controls to limit virtual workspace access to excepted or exempt employees during a government shutdown. When we confirm what actions ITA has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. USTR stated that it has made the Executive Office of the President (EOP) aware of the recommendations on developing controls for virtual workspace access during a shutdown. We will continue to monitor USTR's efforts to address this recommendation.
GAO-20-480R, Apr 30, 2020
Phone: (202)512-9377
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that the Wage and Investment organization will update the Courier Contingency Plan polices and procedures to provide for appropriate segregation of duties or other curative measures.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that the Wage and Investment organization agrees that actions need to occur to address duplicate tax refund conditions through improved manual refund procedures to require (1) initiator to document the justification for bypassing the Integrated Automated Technologies (IAT) tool warning related to potential duplicate tax refunds on taxpayers' accounts and (2) managers to review the justification documented for bypassing the IAT tool warning for reasonableness prior to approving manual refund forms. However, IRS also stated that it was unable to commit to implementing a corrective action plan at this time due to budgetary constraints on system enhancements.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that the CFO organization will determine the reasons for business unit(s) non-compliance with established policies and procedures related to timely recording of receipts and acceptance of goods and services and, based on this evaluation, develop an action plan that once completed will provide additional tools to aid the business units in reasonably ensuring compliance with established requirements.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: The IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that the CFO organization will update policies and procedures to include additional instructions needed to calculate the future lease payments due on the non-cancelable leases with terms greater than one year and will also create an automated calculation to determine the number of remaining months of lease payments.
GAO-20-303, Apr 22, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9627
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.
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.
GAO-20-308, Apr 9, 2020
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open
Comments: Interior concurred with this recommendation. They expect their newly expanded JOM program workforce to develop, publish and implement a comprehensive JOM policy and procedure that includes a systemic process for identifying JOM contractors and maintaining a complete and accurate list of contractors. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open
Comments: Interior concurred with this recommendation. The BIE, BIA and other partners will work collaboratively to publish and implement a policy and procedure that accurately tracks and monitors timely disbursement of JOM funds to these contractors. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open
Comments: Interior concurred with this recommendation. They expect that their newly expanded JOM program workforce will expedite the BIE's review and information collection efforts. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open
Comments: Interior concurred with this recommendation. SIE and JOM staff will be tasked with developing a technical assistance framework for contractors and a training plan as part of the wider JOM program policy and task procedures. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Indian Education
Status: Open
Comments: Interior concurred with this recommendation. The BIE, BIA and other partners plan to work collaboratively to develop an inter-bureau policy that clearly identifies each agency's roles and responsibilities. They are also developing a data-informed workforce analysis for the JOM program. They will continue to develop and implement a data-informed workforce strategy to identify human capital needs and clearly identifies and assigns critical JOM-related functions among BIE divisions, offices and staff. We will monitor the progress of these efforts.
GAO-20-281, Mar 26, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2775
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-59, Feb 27, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9342
Agency: National Archives and Records Administration: Office of the Archivist
Status: Open
Comments: The National Archives and Records Administration concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Archives and Records Administration: Office of the Archivist
Status: Open
Comments: The National Archives and Records Administration concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Armed Forces Retirement Home
Status: Open
Comments: The Armed Forces Retirement Home did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Armed Forces Retirement Home
Status: Open
Comments: The Armed Forces Retirement Home did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Armed Forces Retirement Home
Status: Open
Comments: The Armed Forces Retirement Home did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Armed Forces Retirement Home
Status: Open
Comments: The Armed Forces Retirement Home did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open
Comments: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the bureau states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Election Assistance Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Election Assistance Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Election Assistance Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Election Assistance Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Election Assistance Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Federal Trade Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Trade Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Marine Mammal Commission
Status: Open
Comments: The Marine Mammal Commission did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the commission states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the foundation states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the foundation states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the foundation states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the foundation states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the National Drug Control Policy did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the National Drug Control Policy did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of the National Drug Control Policy did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the office states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management: Office of the Director
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
Status: Open
Comments: The Overseas Private Investment Corporation did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
Status: Open
Comments: The Overseas Private Investment Corporation did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
Status: Open
Comments: The Overseas Private Investment Corporation did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
Status: Open
Comments: The Overseas Private Investment Corporation did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Peace Corps
Status: Open
Comments: The Peace Corps did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Peace Corps
Status: Open
Comments: The Peace Corps did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Peace Corps
Status: Open
Comments: The Peace Corps did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the agency states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: The Udall Foundation concurred with this recommendation. As of June 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the foundation states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
GAO-20-274, Feb 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to DHS, in June 2020, DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics launched a Family Status Data Standards Community of Interest (COI) under the purview of the DHS Immigration Data Integration Initiative. In August 2020, DHS reported that the Family Status COI includes subject matter experts and data system managers from DHS components, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The COI's mandate includes drafting common DHS-wide and interagency data standards (common codes, common definitions, common formats) for all topics related to family status, including codes to identify the reasons for family separation, members apprehended together, and unaccompanied children. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Identifying and communicating department-wide information needs with respect to family members who have been apprehended together should help provide DHS with greater assurance that its components are identifying all individuals who may be eligible for relief from removal from the United States based on their family relationships.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) will work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on the Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. As of August 2020, DHS reported that DHS OIS continues to work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that, upon implementation of the steps the department plans to take in response to our second recommendation, CBP will issue guidance to the field to ensure that CBP agents and officers document the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members. In August 2020, DHS reported that component agencies continue to collaborate to define the process of family members apprehended together, as will be reflected on CBP Form I-213. DHS estimates issuing this guidance by March 31, 2021. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.immigration or other proceedings.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) plans to work with relevant components to develop a unique shared identifier linking family members apprehended together. According to DHS, DHS OIS launched the Family Status Community of Interest (COI) in June 2020, and the COI has since established a bi-weekly meeting schedule. The COI's initial focus is on standard codes describing the reasons for family separations. Upon completing the family separation reason standard, DHS reported that the COI will prioritize developing common codes to identify family members apprehended together. DHS estimates completing these actions by March 31, 2021. Evaluating options for developing a shared unique family member identifier across components that would allow each component access to certain information about family members apprehended together would help bridge the information gaps about family relationships between components caused by DHS's fragmented data systems.
GAO-20-250, Feb 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-110, Feb 12, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Army partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy partially concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: The Navy concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Status: Open
Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, this recommendation remains open.
GAO-20-199, Feb 11, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9342
Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OCWR noted that it was in the process of revising its IT systems project planning to ensure the development and implementation of policies and procedure incorporating key cybersecurity activities. The agency also stated that it plans to hire an IT Security Project Manager in order to acquire the necessary cybersecurity expertise needed to implement this recommendation and to ensure that sufficient time and resources can be dedicated to the development and implementation of these policies and procedures. We will continue to monitor OCWR's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OCWR noted that it was beginning to plan for developing and implementing oversight procedures for each externally-operated system. We will continue to monitor OCWR's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OCWR noted that it had expanded the office's IT Director's role to formally include the functions of an IT Risk Executive and was in the process of establishing the roles and responsibilities. We will continue to monitor OCWR's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OCWR noted that it was beginning to plan for developing and implementing a cybersecurity risk management strategy. We will continue to monitor OCWR's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OCWR noted that, once the position of IT Security Project Manager is filled and the IT Risk Executive functions are formalized, the agency is planning to commit to a time frame for developing and implementing policies and procedures for managing cybersecurity risk. We will continue to monitor OCWR's progress in addressing this recommendation
GAO-20-118, Jan 29, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 4 priority recommendations
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-210, Jan 27, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9110
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.
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.
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.
GAO-20-212, Jan 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation and in August 2020 stated that it is developing guidance to state Medicaid programs directing them to strengthen policies and procedures related to 340B drugs for Medicaid beneficiaries.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Health Resources and Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation and, as of August 2020, did not plan to take any actions to implement the recommendation. As noted in our report, covered entities' compliance with state Medicaid programs' policies and procedures is fundamental to preventing duplicate discounts. Thus, we continue to believe that HRSA's audit process should include an assessment of covered entities' compliance with state Medicaid programs' policies and procedures related to 340B drugs as it is necessary to identify potential duplicate discounts and to ensure covered entities' compliance with 340B Program requirements.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Health Resources and Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation and, as of August 2020, did not plan to take any actions to implement the recommendation. As noted in our report, HRSA officials told us that covered entities' obligations for preventing duplicate discounts are the same for Medicaid fee-for-service and managed care. Thus, we continue to believe that when duplicate discounts related to Medicaid managed care have been identified, the agency should require covered entities to work with manufacturers to remedy them as they do for duplicate discounts related to Medicaid fee-for-service to help ensure compliance with 340B Program requirements.
Phone: (202) 512-2989
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Finance and Accounting Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. They stated that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) will update the Financial Management Regulation (FMR) and implement procedures to help ensure Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) reconciliations are performed consistently and appropriate research on the causes of any difference arising from these reconciliations is reviewed and documented by all DFAS sites. Further, DFAS will update internal documentation/policy to outline DFAS roles and processes for FBWT reconciliations as well as include guidance on the execution of DOD's FMR FBWT reconciliation requirements. The estimated completion date for the implementation of this recommendation is December 2020. We will continue to follow-up with DOD on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. They stated that the Department is developing a checklist of required supporting documents for incorporation into the DOD Financial Management Regulations (FMR). They will update the DOD FMR Volume, 6A, Chapter 2 to define the required supporting documentation for system generated accounting adjustments. Additionally, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) will update internal documentation to include narratives outlining the business rules for system generated accounting adjustments with the required supporting documentation. The estimated completion date for the implementation of this recommendation is December 2020. We will continue to follow up with DOD on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department intends to collaborate with the financial community to update the category codes within the DOD Financial Management Regulations (FMR). Specifically, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense will perform a comprehensive review of Journal Voucher Category Codes listed in DOD FMR, Volume 6A, Chapter 2 and update regulations based on feedback. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service will update internal documentation and procedures to reflect any code changes identified in the revised DOD FMR. The estimated completion date for this recommendation is July 2020. We will continue to follow-up with DOD on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department plans to update the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Form 9339 and develop and conduct refresher training to all users of the Form 9339. The estimated completion date for this recommendation is September 2020. We will continue to follow-up with DOD on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department is collaborating on utilizing existing data to identify and resolve out-of-balances and update DOD Financial Management Regulation, Volume 6A, Chapter 2 to include a section conveying out-of-balance accounting adjustments are not authorized. Root cause analysis efforts will be performed in conjunction with corrective action plans (CAPs) for recommendations 6--8. The estimated completion date for this recommendation is December 2020. We will continue to follow-up with DOD on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department, in conjunction with the Director of Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), intends to utilize existing advanced analytics tools to research and document root cause analyses. The estimated completion date for the implementation of this recommendation is December 2020. We will continue to follow-up on this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department intends to collaborate with the financial community, including the Director of the Defense Financial and Accounting Service (DFAS), and utilize existing tools for documenting and implementing consistent procedures for action plans of accounting adjustments. The analytical tool, Advana will be used to analyze the action plan code for consistent analysis to be performed across the DOD. The estimated completion date for the implementation of this recommendation is February 2021. We will continue to follow-up on this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. The Department, in conjunction with the Director of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, plans to utilize existing tools to define and measure the outcomes of accounting adjustments. The estimated completion date for the implementation of this recommendation is April 2021. We will continue to follow-up on this recommendation.
GAO-20-120, Jan 9, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that it had revised related policies in February 2020, and had planned to issue guidance and video-on-demand training to further clarify policies and procedures in this area. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed further implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency said it had planned to issue guidance reinforcing its policy on properly documenting decisions involving the Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation process. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.
GAO-20-47, Oct 28, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission: Division of Enforcement
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-141, Oct 8, 2019
Phone: 2025123841
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: Since GAO's October 2019 report, FEMA updated its guidance and has provided information to local entities on project eligibility and the industry standards it would accept for restoring the grid. In addition, in January 2020, FEMA provided training to FEMA regional officials and local entities on how to implement this guidance. Despite these efforts, uncertainty remains regarding the extent to which local entities in Puerto Rico have sufficient information to implement projects to promote grid resilience. This is in part due to challenges such as the need for written guidance on how project development will proceed after the fixed-cost estimate is finalized. GAO will continue to monitor FEMA progress towards implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2020, HUD had not published a federal notice outlining the grant process and requirements for CDBG-DR funding available for improvements to Puerto Rico's electricity grid, nor has it established time frames and a plan for issuing this notice. We continue to believe that the action we recommended is needed and will monitor HUD's efforts as part of our regular recommendation follow-up and additional work examining federal support to improve grid resilience in Puerto Rico. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: FEMA and DOE have enhanced coordination efforts between their respective agencies and with local entities involved in long-term grid recovery in Puerto Rico via the Technical Coordination Team but until the team's fiscal working group demonstrates how it will help coordinate different potential funding sources, the extent to which these efforts will enhance progress toward grid recovery is uncertain. FEMA can demonstrate this, in part, by providing documentation of efforts to coordinate funding for long-term recovery projects. GAO will continue to monitor agency efforts to support grid recovery in Puerto Rico.
GAO-19-698, Sep 30, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Army has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Air Force has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of the Navy has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 15, 2020, the Department of Defense has neither concurred nor non-concurred with this recommendation.
GAO-19-339, Sep 18, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, DOE officials told us that its Office of Environmental Management (EM) had recently reinvigorated efforts to develop a comprehensive program-wide strategy to address risks in a consistent manner to align cleanup plans and activities with programmatic priorities and available budgets. According to DOE officials, EM plans to revise and replace its 2017 Cleanup Policy with a Cleanup Project Management Protocol and and EM Cleanup Program Management Policy. Officials stated that the Cleanup Program Management Policy will establish an approach for the EM program and DOE sites to apply the essential elements of risk-informed decision-making framework. DOE officials estimated that this effort would be completed by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2020, DOE officials told us that DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) is developing a new Cleanup Program Management Policy that will incorporate the essential elements of risk-informed decision-making, as appropriate, into EM program management policy. DOE officials estimated that this effort will be completed by December 31, 2020.
GAO-19-624, Sep 4, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remains open. Treasury enhanced its procedures to include additional management reviews, particularly the Financial Reports and Advisory Division Director, for restatements, reclassifications, and adjustments to beginning net position. Although FRAD took steps to enhance its review procedures, the additional review did not prevent FRAD from including descriptions in the draft CFS that were not supported by entity financial statements or from excluding some information from the CFS notes. Further steps are needed to define procedures to ensure consistent and accurate treatment of restatements, reclassifications, and adjustments to beginning net position in the CFS. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remains open. Treasury and OMB (1) increased guidance to federal entities in the Treasury Financial Manual section 2-4700; (2) included an illustrative Contingent Loss Table in OMB Circular No. A-136 for agencies to use as guidance when reporting probable and reasonably possible losses; (3) provided guidance to agencies through monthly Central Reporting Team (CRT) meetings with the agencies' financial reporting staff and at the Government Financial Management Conference; (4) communicated regularly with Department of Justice officials regarding the preparation of the government-wide legal representation letter; and (5) increased the number of Treasury staff performing the legal letter analysis. However, we noted inconsistencies among the significant component entities' financial statement note disclosures, management schedules, and legal representation letters, and the legal contingency loss information reported in the CFS, as well as inconsistencies between entities' year-end management schedules/legal representation letters and the final government-wide legal representation letter. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-19-658, Aug 6, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and stated that it intends to implement it by January 2021. We will continue to monitor CBP's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and stated that it intends to implement it by November 2021. We will continue to monitor CBP's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in March 2020, it provided information on its plans to conduct a comprehensive analysis after completing several covert tests. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should implement a policy to conduct periodic comprehensive analyses of covert test findings. We will continue to monitor CBP's ongoing efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and stated that it intends to implement it by January 2021. We will continue to monitor CBP's ongoing efforts to do so.
GAO-19-545, Jul 26, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In January 2020, OMB officials stated that they have incorporated agency feedback for enhancing the CyberStat program into an updated concept of operations document that is currently in draft. To consider this recommendation fully implemented, OMB needs to provide us with an updated concept of operations document for the CyberStat program, and demonstrate the expansion of CyberStat review meetings to agencies that require additional assistance due to persistent information security deficiencies. As of September 2020, OMB has not provided sufficient evidence to close this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, we were still waiting to receive OMB's 180-day letter detailing the actions it plans to take to address the recommendation.
GAO-19-384, Jul 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9342
including 25 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Management and Budget did not say whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once OMB has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it is developing a Risk Management Framework implementation plan, which is to include a comprehensive Cybersecurity Strategy. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it is developing a Risk Management Framework implementation plan which will include updates to USDA's process guide to ensure informed security control tailoring and updates to USDA's Plan of Actions and Milestones (POA&M) Standard Operation Procedure to inform prioritized POA&M mitigation strategies, through a consistent and repeatable security risk assessment process. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Agriculture did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that it plans to establish a governance framework for USDA Enterprise Risk Management (ERM), which will provide a platform to increase coordination between stakeholders within the cybersecurity and enterprise risk management functions. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Commerce did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to planned actions for this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Commerce did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, the department stated that its intends to evaluate whether there are any gaps in its cybersecurity policy pertaining to the establishment of an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment and will establish a plan to fill in gaps as necessary. The department added that it is making strides in the implementation of a tool that can aggregate data into a dashboard for a unified visibility across the department. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it was developing a department-wide risk management plan, to include a risk management strategy, and this would be completed by May 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is drafting a cybersecurity risk management memo that will detail its risk management strategy, including how the department will assess, respond to, and monitor risk. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services partially concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is in the process of updating its policies to address the missing elements and plans to finalize the revisions by March 2021. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, HHS stated that it is drafting a cybersecurity risk management memo and capability model that will include a process for an organization-wide assessment of cybersecurity risk. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it was in the process of developing an enterprise-wide Cybersecurity Risk Management Strategy that will define cybersecurity risk tolerance thresholds and promote inclusion of cybersecurity risk management into the Department's overall risk management capabilities. The estimated completion date for this effort is July 31, 2020. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that, once developed, its Cybersecurity Risk Management Strategy will incorporate clarifications of the cybersecurity risk executive's role and will be coordinated with the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer, other offices within the DHS Management Directorate, and Department Components, as appropriate. The department estimated completing this effort by July 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department said it planned to develop a cybersecurity risk management strategy that will determine how cybersecurity risks will be identified, framed, assessed, respond to, and monitored. The Department estimated completing this effort by August 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Interior concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it cybersecurity and enterprise risk management teams would establish a process for bi-directional communication and status reporting. The Department estimated completing this effort by July 31, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its comments on our draft report, the Department of Justice did not state whether it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, . the department reported that it had an integrated strategy for identifying, prioritizing, assessing, responding to, monitoring, and reporting on cybersecurity risks. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its comments on our draft report, the Department of Justice did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is developing an ongoing mechanism to institutionalize coordination between its cybersecurity and ERM functions in fiscal year 2020. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department states that it has taken action, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is actively working to update the applicable policies and procedures. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of State concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it is actively working to update the applicable policies and procedures. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it would update its cybersecurity risk management strategy to include the identified missing elements. The Department estimated completing this effort by October 1, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it would update it policies and procedures to require an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. The Department estimated completing this effort by July 1, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of the Treasury did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the department has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the department stated that it plans to develop a comprehensive risk management strategy in accordance with its updated cybersecurity program directive and plans to finalize the strategy by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA stated that it plans to incorporate this requirement into its updated policies by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA stated that it plans to fully document its process for an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, VA described efforts under way to institutionalize coordination between cybersecurity and enterprise risk management functions and stated that this coordination will be documented in detail by June 30, 2020. Once the department has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, EPA stated that its strategic plans are under review beginning in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, EPA stated that it is establishing a process to review, update, and reissue its policies. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency did not state whether or not it concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the agency has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The General Services Administration concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the agency stated that it would establish a process for conducting an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. The administration estimated completing this effort by June 30, 2020. Once the administration has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the agency stated that it is working to address gaps in its cybersecurity policy. Once NASA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, NASA stated that the agency is in the process of documenting its process for conducting an organization-wide cybersecurity risk assessment. NASA's planned completion date for this effort is September 30, 2020. Once NASA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the commission has provided information, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, we had not received information pertaining to this recommendation. Once the commission has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, OPM stated that it planned to update its policies to address the missing elements. Once OPM has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the office stated that it planned to formalize its process for an organization-wide cybersecurity assessment. Once OPM has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SBA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, SBA stated that it intends to finalize its process for an agency-wide cybersecurity risk assessment by March 31, 2020. Once SBA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SSA concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, SSA stated that it has initiated a formal process for coordination between its cybersecurity risk management and enterprise risk management teams and that this process should be fully established by the third quarter of FY 2020. Once SSA has provided evidence of these actions, we plan to verify whether implementation has occurred.
GAO-19-573, Jul 24, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: On August 18, 2020, DHS informed us that the work it is undertaking to respond to this recommendation is ongoing.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: On May 11, 2020, DHS provided GAO with copies of standard operating procedures for addressing EEO program deficiencies for seven out of eight operational components as well as DHS headquarters. Each of the components' standard operating procedures require that action plans are in place to address any outstanding EEO program deficiencies.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: On August 18, 2020, DHS informed us that the work it is undertaking to respond to this recommendation is ongoing.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: On August 18, 2020, DHS informed us that the work it is undertaking to respond to this recommendation is ongoing.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: On August 18, 2020, DHS informed us that the work it is undertaking to respond to this recommendation is ongoing.
GAO-19-547, Jul 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: Department of State officials stated in January 2020 that the department plans to address this recommendation by increasing the frequency and specificity of E-2 content through webinars, workshops, and cables. The Department of State also plans to develop subject matter experts on business and tax related documents that can provide consultative services on an as-needed basis. As of July 2020, Department of State officials said that they had not yet implemented these actions. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: Department of State officials stated in January 2020 that the department plans to address this recommendation by incorporating into policy a 5-year mandatory review of companies registered at any post using a company registration program. As of July 2020, Department of State officials said that they had not yet implemented these actions. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: Department of State officials stated in January 2020 that the department plans to communicate a reminder to posts abroad that there is a requirement to scan required E-2 documentation into each visa applicant's record. Department of State also plans to provide regular policy guidance to consular managers at posts that adjudicate E-2 visa applications. Further, Department of State officials stated in July 2020 that the department plans to incorporate the supplemental E-2 visa application (DS-156E) into the standard online application for all nonimmigrant visa applicants (DS-160). However, the officials stated that they experienced technical challenges in doing so, and was still working to resolve the challenges as of July 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation as the Department of State works to address the technical challenges.
GAO-19-534, Jul 11, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in March 2020, provided a plan for conducting FCAs at some, but not all, CBP-owned land border crossings. According to officials, CBP will update this plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings and may coordinate with the DHS Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer to ensure the plan is consistent with DHS Directive 119-02-004. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should complete the FCA plan to include all CBP-owned land border crossings.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in February 2020, GSA confirmed that it received FCA reports from CBP for GSA-owned land border crossings. GSA also confirmed that it provided CBP with a spreadsheet containing data from GSA Building Assessment Tools. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is using GSA Building Assessment Tool information to inform its FCAs at GSA-owned land border crossings.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided documentation that it received CBP FCAs and provided Building Assessment Tool information to CBP. GSA further provided updated guidance describing how it will share this information with CBP going forward. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should demonstrate that it using CBP FCA reports to inform its Building Assessment Tool assessments.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: GSA concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, stated that it would share this information with CBP on a monthly basis until it is available to CBP for self-service on a shared data system. To fully address this recommendation, GSA should provide documentation that CBP has access to the shared data system.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2019, reported that it began documenting processes for validating and correcting existing records in TRIRIGA using information on maintenance and repair work conducted by GSA. In addition, CBP reported that it is developing a standard operating procedure for TRIRIGA data entry. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is regularly receiving information on maintenance and repair work performed by GSA and that it is using this information to update data in TRIRIGA.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document establishing time frames for stakeholders involved in the five-year plan review and approval process. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it has communicated these time frame expectations to stakeholders.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: CBP concurred with the recommendation and, in April 2020, provided a document that formally establishes and documents a methodology for its land border crossing prioritization process, including procedures and time frames for each step. To fully address this recommendation, CBP should demonstrate that it is implementing this methodology during its annual five-year capital investment planning process.
GAO-19-280, Jul 8, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, EPA restated its reasons for disagreeing with this recommendation. (EPA's rationale for disagreeing was originally stated in a June 2019 letter included in an appendix in our report.) We will provide updated information regarding this recommendation when it becomes available.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, EPA notified GAO that it expects to launch an electronic financial disclosure reporting system for special government employees in January 2021. Once financial disclosure forms for these individuals are available electronically, EPA's Ethics Office will be better positioned to audit or review the forms, according to EPA officials. In addition, the electronic filing system should minimize errors (e.g. failing to record the date that the form was received) made by filers and reviewers, according to EPA officials.
GAO-19-347, Jun 25, 2019
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open
Comments: Education generally agreed with this recommendation. Education stated that the President's fiscal year 2020 budget request includes a proposal that Congress pass legislation allowing the IRS to disclose tax return information directly to the department for the purpose of administering certain federal student financial aid programs. According to the agency, such legislation, if enacted, would allow borrowers to more easily certify their income on an annual basis to maintain enrollment in IDR plans, and allow the department to use the information to mitigate improper payments to borrowers as a result of misreported income data. Section 3 of the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for Education Act (FUTURE Act), enacted in December 2019, provided Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). As of August 2020, Education had begun planning for the implementation of the legislation. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that use of this authority to verify eligibility for IDR plans could result in over $2 billion in savings for 2020-2029.
Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open
Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and from January to March 2020 initiated a pilot program with three of its loan servicers to conduct additional verification of income or family size information on IDR plan applications for a random sample of borrowers each month. When initiated, the pilot focused on IDR borrowers who self-certified that they had no income or who reported certain family sizes. According to Education, selected borrowers would be asked to provide documentation to their servicers to support the income or family size reported on their IDR application. In the event errors were identified, servicers would work with the borrowers to update their applications. If these reviews resulted in changes to a borrower's monthly payment amount, the borrower would be expected to begin paying the new amount within the next 60 days. According to Education, as of the end of March 2020 when the pilot was put on hold, participating servicers selected 48,855 borrowers for verification. The verification pilot was put on hold as it implemented student loan relief for borrowers under the CARES Act in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic (Public Law 116-136). Specifically, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was enacted, which suspended student loan payments due, interest accrual, and involuntary collections for Direct and Federal Family Education Loans held by Education through September 30, 2020. According to Education, the Department suspended all IDR recertifications during this period. On August 8, 2020, the President issued a presidential memorandum directing the Secretary of Education to extend this relief to borrowers through December 31, 2020. Education reported that it will weigh options for resuming the pilot against other critical priorities and available resources, noting that its long-term strategy is to fully implement the authorities granted under the FUTURE Act, which provides Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). GAO will continue to monitor Education's actions in this area, and will close the recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has implemented data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to review and verify that borrowers reporting zero income on IDR applications do not have sources of taxable income at the time of their application.
Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open
Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and from January to March 2020 established a pilot program with three of its loan servicers to conduct additional verification of income or family size information on IDR plan applications for a random sample of borrowers each month. When initiated, the pilot focused on IDR borrowers who self-certified that they had no income or who reported certain family sizes. According to Education, selected borrowers would be asked to provide documentation to their servicers to support the income or family size reported on their IDR application. Education noted that under the pilot, loan servicers were required to request additional information from borrowers to verify family sizes greater than five; specifically, a statement listing each family member residing with the borrower and for whom the borrower pays at least 51 percent of the support. In the event errors were identified, servicers would work with the borrowers to update their applications. If these reviews resulted in changes to a borrower's monthly payment amount, the borrower would be expected to begin paying the new amount within the next 60 days. According to Education, as of the end of March 2020 when the pilot was put on hold, participating servicers selected 48,855 borrowers for verification. The verification pilot was put on hold as Education implemented student loan relief for borrowers under the CARES Act in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic (Public Law 116-136). Specifically, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was enacted, which suspended student loan payments due, interest accrual, and involuntary collections for Direct and Federal Family Education Loans held by Education through September 30, 2020. According to Education, the Department suspended all IDR recertifications during this period. On August 8, 2020, the President issued a presidential memorandum directing the Secretary of Education to extend this relief to borrowers through December 31, 2020. Education reported that it will weigh options for resuming the pilot against other critical priorities and available resources, noting that its long-term strategy is to fully implement the authorities granted under the FUTURE Act, which provides Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). GAO will continue to monitor Education's actions in this area, and will close the recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has implemented data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to review and verify family size entries in IDR borrower applications.
GAO-19-517, Jun 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-495, Jun 7, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to create an internal procedure manual which will document the Office of Exemption Determinations' process for managing IRA prohibited transaction exemption applications. When we confirm what actions DOL has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to periodically discuss all IRA exemption cases with IRS and did not elaborate on the formal means for this information sharing. IRS said that it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation and said it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.
GAO-19-416, Jun 6, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, we reported on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) efforts to handle, track, and monitor cases related to veterans. We found that ICE has developed policies for handling cases of potentially removable Veterans, but does not consistently adhere to those policies. Therefore, some veterans who were removed may not have received the level of review and approval that ICE has determined is appropriate for cases involving veterans. We recommended that ICE take action to ensure consistent implementation of its policies for handling cases of potentially removable veterans. ICE agreed with this recommendation. In November 2019, ICE reported that it had established a working group to gather requirements for ERO officer and HSI agent training and will identify all of the lesson plans, practice exercises, and checklists to ensure veteran status information is collected during the booking process. In July 2020, ICE reported that the efforts of the working group were ongoing. We will continue to monitor ICE's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, we reported on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) efforts to handle, track, and monitor cases related to veterans. We found that ICE has not developed a policy to identify and document all military veterans it encounters. Without such a policy, ICE has no way of knowing whether it has identified all of the veterans it has encountered and, therefore, does not have reasonable assurance that it is consistently implementing its policies and procedures for handling veterans' cases. We recommended that ICE develop and implement a policy or revise its current policies to ensure that ICE offices and agents identify and document veteran status when interviewing potentially removable individuals. ICE agreed with this recommendation. In November 2019, ICE reported that its internal working group is gathering requirements to systematically collect and maintain veteran status information. ICE noted that once the requirement gathering is complete it will revise existing ICE guidance on the issuance of issuing Notices to Appear for individuals with U.S. military service. In July 2020, ICE reported that the working group reviewed and updated its current policy and the Office of Policy and Planning is in the process of reviewing the updates. However, ICE was unable to provide an estimated completion date for finalizing the policy. We will continue to monitor ICE's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, we reported on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) efforts to handle, track, and monitor cases related to veterans. We found that ICE does not maintain complete electronic data on veterans who have been placed in removal proceedings or removed. As a result, ICE does not know exactly how many veterans have been placed in removal proceedings or removed, or if their cases have been handled according to ICE's policies. We recommended that ICE collect and maintain electronic data on veterans in removal proceedings or who have been removed. ICE agreed with this recommendation. In November 2019, ICE reported that its internal working group is analyzing systems and processes used by ICE officers and agents to identify the components in need of updating to properly capture veteran status. As of July 2020, the working group has identified fields that will be added to its integrated database to capture and maintain veterans' status information. Once the working group is done gathering systems, procedural, and training requirements, this work will also identify updates needed for ICE policies for handling cases of potentially removable veterans. We will continue to monitor ICE's efforts to address this recommendation.
GAO-19-405, Jun 3, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2834
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-19-352, May 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Status: Open
Comments: FDIC agreed that a structure should be enhanced to allow staff to further categories MRBAs at the point of entry into the system. As of March 2020, no action has been taken on this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor for any updates to FDIC procedures.
GAO-19-43, May 14, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3133
Agency: Export-Import Bank of the United States
Status: Open
Comments: EXIM concurred with our recommendation and stated that it will consider establishing documented policies and procedures for determining medium-term delegated authority lenders' eligibility for continued participation in EXIM's programs and decertifying or taking other appropriate actions for such lenders that do not meet compliance or eligibility standards. If implemented effectively, EXIM's planned actions should address the intent of our recommendation. An EXIM official indicated that actions to address this recommendation would be completed during 2020.
Agency: Export-Import Bank of the United States
Status: Open
Comments: EXIM concurred with this recommendation and stated that it will establish documented policies and procedures for periodically reviewing credit programs in which the government bears more than 80 percent of any loss to determine whether private sector lenders should bear a greater share of the risk. If implemented effectively, EXIM's planned actions should address the intent of our recommendation. An EXIM official indicated that actions to address this recommendation would be completed during 2020.
GAO-19-412R, May 9, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9377
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. During fiscal year 2019, IRS documented the key management decisions in the design and use of the estimation process. This step should reduce the risk that IRS may perform sampling procedures inconsistent with management intent or plans. Continued management commitment and sustained efforts are necessary to build on the progress made to date and to fully address IRS's remaining unresolved issues concerning the management and reporting of unpaid assessments. We will assess IRS's progress in addressing these issues during our audit of IRS's fiscal year 2020 financial statements.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that Facilities Management and Security Services is in the process of developing and documenting a formal, comprehensive strategy. According to IRS officials, this strategy will include different overarching goals, such as improving workforce effectiveness, ensuring appropriate monitoring functions and employee accountability, and improving coordination and communication of policies and procedures. IRS plans to complete the formal, comprehensive strategy during fiscal year 2020 and finalize the implementation of this strategy by March 2021.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. During fiscal year 2019, IRS used a questionnaire survey and obtained feedback from security section chiefs and physical security specialists to determine the reasons staff did not consistently comply with IRS's existing requirement to maintain an emergency contact list at all IRS facilities. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Facilities Management and Security Services will establish a process to better enforce compliance with the requirement based on the results of the feedback obtained.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Facilities Management and Security Services will (1) update the Internal Revenue Manual to reflect the requirement to use the Alarm Maintenance and Testing Certification Report to document alarm testing results, including any malfunctioning alarms and related corrective actions taken, as appropriate;, and (2) review the Alarm Maintenance and Testing Certification Report Form and incorporate any additional instructions and fields to document the specific alarms tested, the testing results, and related corrective actions taken, as appropriate.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Facilities Management and Security Services will develop, document, and implement policies or procedures, or both, to provide reasonable assurance of the accuracy and physical security of the video surveillance systems at all IRS facilities by including periodic checks and adjustments, as needed, as part of the annual service and maintenance of security equipment.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Information Technology and the Criminal Investigation organizations will update and implement their policies or procedures, or both, to clarify (1) who is responsible for conducting the annual review of the visitor access logs, (2) the date by which the review is to be conducted, and (3) how the review should be documented.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that the Small Business/Self-Employed (SB/SE) Field Collection organization determined that the reasons the policies and procedures were not always followed were either a lack of understanding of the requirements or a lack of consistency in adhering to them. In order to address this, in October 2019, Field Collection distributed a memorandum to its area directors, territory managers, and group managers, reminding them of the required remittance processing procedures, emphasizing the importance of following the procedures, and requesting that they distribute the information in the memorandum within their organization. IRS officials stated that the memorandum will help assure that SB/SE Field Collection units comply with the applicable policies and procedures. Since this memorandum was issued after the end of our fiscal year 2019 audit, we will review the implementation of this action during our fiscal year 2020 audit. Further, IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the SB/SE Examination organization will identify the reason that IRS's policies and procedures for transmittal forms were not followed, and based on this, it will add guidance to the applicable Internal Revenue Manual sections to clarify and supplement the service-wide guidance for the appropriate control, monitoring, and review of the forms used to transmit packages containing personally identifiable information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. During fiscal year 2019, the Information Technology (IT) organization updated IRS's Integrated Data Retrieval System (IDRS) security policy contained in the Internal Revenue Manual to ensure that the IDRS account administration process complies with IRS's personnel security policy regarding background investigation completion dates. In addition, IRS officials stated that by November 2020, the IT organization will update the Unit Security Representative (USR) designation form, as well as policies and procedures, to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of second-level managers and IDRS security account administrators for validating the information on USR designation forms, including how the information should be validated.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During fiscal year 2019, the Information Technology organization updated its standard operating procedures to clearly specify the tax refund data elements that the Processing Validation Section Certifying Officers are required to verify before certifying the tax refunds in the Secure Payment System. Since IRS completed this action after we had already performed our fiscal year 2019 testing related to the certification of tax refunds, we will evaluate IRS's actions to address this recommendation during our fiscal year 2020 audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Wage & Investment organization will establish and implement a review process to provide reasonable assurance that the Refund Schedule Numbers on manual refund forms are transcribed accurately into the Integrated Submission and Remittance Processing system.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS officials stated that the Wage and Investment organization agrees that developing and implementing a Unified Work Request for programming changes is needed to systemically validate the refund schedule numbers input into the Integrated Submission and Remittance Processing system; however, IRS officials indicated that the organization is unable to commit to implementing a corrective action because of budgetary constraints. As a result, IRS will place this recommendation on hold until funds are available.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that by April 2020, IRS will update and implement policies or procedures, or both, requiring that reviewers follow up with tax examiners to verify that the errors tax examiners made in working a case related to suspicious or questionable tax returns are corrected.
GAO-19-315, Apr 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In response to this recommendation, HHS stated that existing regulations permit CMS at its discretion to direct an additional public comment period when states make a modification to an application that substantially changes the design. In July 2020, CMS officials said the agency would continue to exercise its regulatory discretion as needed and planned no further action in response to this recommendation. In light of past CMS decisions to not require states to first seek public comment before submitting major changes to their demonstration applications, we maintain that a policy is needed defining when changes are considered major and should prompt a new review of the application against transparency requirements. We will continue to monitor CMS's actions in this area.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS stated that it plans to implement a policy applying state public input processes and application criteria to amendments proposing significant or substantial changes in the same manner as for new demonstrations. In July 2020, CMS stated the agency plans to develop criteria for determining whether an amendment application proposes a substantial change to an existing demonstration and to include this in guidance by early 2021. We will continue to monitor CMS's actions in this area and will close this recommendation once this policy guidance is issued.
GAO-19-284, Mar 22, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB has taken steps to restructure the federal data ecosystem, including issuing government-wide guidance covering all federal data and creating a Business Standards Council. However, given the complexity of recent changes, OMB needs to explicitly and publicly describe how those changes-developed in the context of other government-wide initiatives-apply to DATA Act data element definitions.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, OMB staff cited its Federal Spending Transparency Data Standards website and specifically notations on that site regarding the dates of revisions made to those standards as being responsive to this recommendation. However, the specific notations cited by OMB only show changes made back in 2015 and do not reflect nor explain some of the more recent revisions that led to GAO making this recommendation.
GAO-19-22, Mar 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy plans to clarify and consolidate its consultation policies and practices for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations by June 2021.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In December 2019, EPA created a draft document, Guiding Principles for Consulting with Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act Corporations, and issued it for consultation with Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs). The draft guiding principles seek to clarify EPA's consultation and coordination practices with ANCs. Additionally, according to agency officials, an EPA working group is in the process of developing an internal, best practices implementation guide. As of April 2020, EPA expects to finalize these guidance documents in 2020
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.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2019, the Department of Homeland Security provided GAO documentation supporting a planned time frame of March 2020 for developing and updating its consultation policy to implement the statutory requirement to consult with ANCs in response to this recommendation. We plan to close the recommendation after reviewing documentation that the policy has been updated.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Development
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Corps of Engineers: Civil Works
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) plans to amend its tribal consultation policy with policies and procedures for communicating with tribes after consultation by December 2020.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of April 2020, the Department of Energy indicated that it plans to document policies for communicating about how input from tribal consultation was considered in agency decisions on infrastructure projects by June 2021.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of 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.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-223, Feb 19, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 2 priority recommendations
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that consistently documenting internal deliberations that lead to consequential decisions for the bank could increase the transparency and accountability of examination teams' findings and decisions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that revising the policy to ensure that drafts of key documents are not deleted will help OCC increase the transparency and accountability of the supervisory review process.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that having meeting minutes and other documentation of key communications would provide OCC with a more complete and transparent record of the information banks provide to examiners and how that information impacts supervisory decisions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that tracking and monitoring the use of informal recommendations could increase transparency of the supervisory process, which could help Large Bank Supervision mitigate the risk of regulatory capture.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020,, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and does not plan to develop a policy to check if employees have active conflicts of interest during the staffing process for examinations and other supervisory activities. OCC noted in its December 2018 response letter to the report that they believed such a policy would shift the responsibility for ensuring compliance with recusal requirements from employees to those responsible for staffing. We maintain that this recommendation does not aim to alleviate the personal responsibility all employees have to comply with recusal requirements. Rather, our recommendation aims to strengthen the due diligence of those responsible for staffing by requiring an independent, preliminary check of active conflicts of interest.
GAO-19-132, Jan 23, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-4841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. Army officials acknowledged the importance of demonstrating technology in an operation environment prior to starting system development and stated that they have taken steps to assist in the identification and removal of infeasible or immature technologies. For example, development of the Integrated Visual Augmentation System includes a series of user engagements where soldiers interact with the system in a field environment and provide feedback to guide development and design. To fully implement this recommendation the Army will need to demonstrate that all of the technologies it is developing are matured in accordance with leading practices. Including soldier engagement in the development of the Integrated Visual Augmentation System is a positive step in that it uses operational experience to determine the utility of technologies on the battlefield. However, demonstrating that those technologies function as expected in an operational environment is equally important. Our past work has shown that demonstrations in an operational environment reduce the risk that technologies will not operate as intended or desired. It is important that the Army continue and expand its efforts to eliminate infeasible, or immature technologies across all of its development programs.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. According to Army officials, cross-functional teams routinely meet to discuss both successes and challenges. Additionally, senior Army leadership hosts weekly meetings with cross-functional teams to discuss decision points and concerns. Army Futures Command plans to include leadership from all cross-functional teams at future meetings to enhance knowledge sharing and ensure leadership viewpoints are communicated across the enterprise. These actions do incorporate elements of leading practices for cross-functional teams such as open and regular communication and senior management support. To fully implement this recommendation the Army should continue and expand this knowledge sharing as planned as well as ensure other elements of leading practices for effective cross-functional teams are implemented. These include the establishment of well-defined team operations with project-specific rules and procedures as well as appropriate training and learning environments for all cross-functional team members.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. According to Army officials an analyst from the Center for Army Lessons Learned has embedded a permanent analyst at Army Futures Command who is capturing lessons learned and best practices from across the cross-functional teams. The results of this analysis are provided across Army Futures Command and to other stakeholders. Additionally, Army Futures Command has established the Directorate of Systems Integration to act as a repository and action office for lessons learned. This office hosts recurring coordination events to further the communication of lessons learned .
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. According to Army officials Army Futures Command is applying leading practices for mergers and organizational transformations as it continues to establish the command. These practices include total employee involvement in the transformation process with senior leadership championing the overarching transformation. In addition, the command has worked to identify processes that need improvement as it incorporates the organizations transferred from other commands. It also continues to evolve its staff and functions as needs are identified. According to officials, Army Futures Command continues to select high-performing team members to guide its transformation through selective recruitment and talent management as well as augmenting its growing staff with other Army personnel selected for temporary assignments. The command is also involving employees to obtain their ideas and gain their ownership for the transformation by encouraging them to share their thoughts and ideas. Importantly, according to officials, the command recognizes the need to have an enduring change model to consistently reassess and reorganize the command to consistently deliver products in relevant timeframes. These actions do demonstrate elements of leading practices for mergers and organizational transformations. However, to fully implement this recommendation, Army Futures Command should formalize and institutionalize its authorities, responsibilities, policies and procedures as they relate to these leading practices, especially as leadership within the command and the Army change.
GAO-19-27, Jan 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that the National Guard Bureau had begun updating Chief of the National Guard Bureau Instruction 3100.01A to comply with the most recent published Secretary of Defense guidance and that they planned to expedite the issuance of the accompanying manual. In August 2020, DOD provided GAO with a draft of the manual; however, officials from the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats noted that the manual was still being reviewed within DOD and expected that it would be finalized by the end of December 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats would continue to work with the National Guard Bureau to improve the State Plans review process for fiscal year 2020 and beyond. DOD's response noted that State Plans Guidance will reiterate that, in accordance with statute, funding may not be provided for a State's counterdrug program until the Secretary of Defense has approved its plan. In September 2019, DOD officials from the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats provided information showing improvements in the timing of the review process for approval of the State Plans, but noted more needed to be done in order to ensure all State Plans were approved by the Secretary of Defense prior to funding being provided to State counterdrug programs. In January 2020, officials from the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats stated they were continuing to monitor the updated process for fiscal year 2021 and hoped for further improvements.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that officials from the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats would work with the National Guard Bureau to support its efforts to incorporate and align DOD strategic priorities into its planning and resource allocation processes. In February 2020, DOD documents noted that this recommendation was assigned to the Counterdrug Advisory Counsel and Threat Based Resourcing Model Target Team for action and estimated a December 2020 completion date.
GAO-19-140, Dec 10, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2757
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its February 2019 action plan, the Bureau indicated having updated the Census Field Supervisor hiring assessment to include questions on supervisory experience, in line with draft documentation provided near the end of our engagement. The Bureau also indicated that, by June 2019, it would communicate as part of supervisor training increased supervisory responsibilities and the need to more actively work with enumerators in answering casework questions. In August 2020, the Bureau informed us that the Bureau would not be altering the information flows for 2020 operations to ensure that census field supervisors receive the same guidance and procedural updates that managers within the area census office receive. To fully implement this recommendation for future fieldwork, the Bureau's planned or other actions will also need to demonstrate how the census field supervisors will have the information they need to carry out their responsibilities to provide supervisory support to enumerators.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In its February 2019 action plan, the Bureau indicated that it plans, by June 2019, to give area census offices (ACOs) the ability to distribute training and informational updates to their local workforces through the Operational Control System. As of January 2020, we are reviewing updated Bureau training documentation on planned mid-operation procedural changes. In April 2020, the Bureau informed us that ACOs would not be empowered during 2020 operations to deliver to their workforces standardized, mid-operation guidance that would be targeted to specific issues being observed locally in the field. Officials noted that they would revisit this issue after 2020 operations have concluded. To fully implement this recommendation for future fieldwork, the Bureau will need to demonstrate the ability of ACOs to identify procedural or other implementation issues encountered locally and develop some form of actionable guidance disseminated systematically to its workforce in near-real time.
GAO-19-102, Nov 27, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3604
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-19-33, Nov 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA developed and distributed a Standard Operating Procedure that established the Office of Administrative Services as having jurisdiction and program oversight for all internal agency exchange/sale transactions. GSA's Office of Administrative Services had also taken steps to coordinate with other GSA offices to coordinate annual exchange/sale data reporting for the agency. We will continue to monitor GSA's actions in addressing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, VA's Office of Acquisition and Logistics, in conjunction with Veterans Health Administration's Procurement and Logistics Office, was working on updating the status of two policy notices to amend existing policy to include details on the exchange/sale authority and to collect data on exchange/sale usage within the agency as a basis for reviewing progress and compliance with VA utilization officers. We will continue to monitor the status of VA's actions to address our recommendation.
GAO-19-49, Nov 13, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided documentation regarding its IT budget procedures. However, DOE has not yet developed procedures that explicitly require that all transactions with an IT component be included in the expenditure reporting to the CIO. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided documentation regarding its IT budget procedures. However, DOE has not yet documented procedures for ensuring the CIO is included in budget decisions for all programs with IT resources, including those within NNSA and the national laboratories. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided charters that included the CIO as a member of department-level governance boards that inform IT decisions. However, DOE has not provided charters that include the CIO as a member of component-level IT governance boards. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided IT governance board and budget procedures. However, DOE has not documented procedures by which the CIO is to work with program leadership in planning IT resources for all programs, including those within NNSA and the national laboratories. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The department has provided IT budget procedures. However, DOE has not documented procedures by which the CIO is to review and approve all major IT investments, including those within NNSA and the national laboratories. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided IT budget procedures. However, DOE has not documented procedures for the CIO's review of IT resources that are to support major program objectives and significant increases and decreases in IT resources for department and component agency budget requests. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. The department has provided IT budget procedures. However, DOE has not developed procedures for documenting steps the CIO is to take to ensure that the IT portfolio includes appropriate estimates of all IT resources. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: DOE agreed with our recommendation and is planning to take steps towards implementing it. Specifically, DOE plans to implement the Technology Business Management Framework by December 2021. Additionally, the department is coordinating internally to update its financial and procurement systems to better identify IT spending. DOE anticipates that its updates will allow the agency to compare actual IT spending against estimates in the portfolio. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with this recommendation and plans to develop relevant policies and procedures by June 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the agency intends to update its IT investment planning policy to include requirements for reporting expenditures that apply to all transactions with an IT component. We will continue to monitor the department's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the agency intends to update its IT investment planning policy to amplify the CIO's role in the planning and budgeting stages for all programs with IT resources. Also, HHS intends to document procedures for ensuring that all delegated authorities are carried out. We will continue to monitor the department's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation. The department has provided charters that included the CIO as a member of department-level governance boards that inform IT decisions. However, HHS has not provided charters that include the CIO as a member of component-level IT governance boards. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. For example, HHS plans to develop an asset management policy and introduce a pilot program to manage inventories across the agency. However, the department has not developed policies and procedures that incorporate the processes by which the program leadership are planning the IT portfolio with the CIO for existing investments greater than or equal to $20 million annually and for investments delegated to components. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the department intends to update its IT investment planning policy to amplify the CIO's role in reviewing major investments. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation and has taken steps towards implementing it. Specifically, HHS documented procedures that require the CIO to hold annual IT investment review meetings with components to review changes in IT resources. However, HHS has not documented procedures for the CIO's role in reviewing major program objectives. We will continue to monitor the department's progress toward implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the department intends to assess and update its existing policies and procedures to document the steps the CIO is to take to review the IT portfolio for appropriate estimates of all IT resources. We will continue to monitor the department's progress toward implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the department intends to develop an IT governance policy to define the accountability of the CIO over all IT projects and establish processes detailing quality reviews and the level of rigor that should be applied by its IT governance board. We will continue to monitor the department's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and is planning to take steps to implement it. Specifically, the agency intends to update its IT acquisition program policy and related processes. HHS also plans to document standard operating procedures for agency wide dissemination to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of IT investment governance through transparent and repeatable procedures. We will continue to monitor the agency's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with the recommendation and are planning to take steps towards implementing it. Specifically, HHS established a working group and developed a roadmap for implementing the Technology Business Management Framework by fiscal year 2022. The agency anticipates that its strategy and approach will enable HHS to, among other things, link IT portfolio data, procurement system data, and financial system data. We will continue to monitor the department's progress towards implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: The department agreed with the recommendation and has taken steps towards implementing it. Specifically, in October 2019, the DOJ CIO issued a memorandum requiring component CIOs to establish a process for providing IT investment information to the DOJ CIO. The component CIO's process is to either include the DOJ CIO as a member of component investment review boards or provide an alternative mechanism for obtaining the DOJ CIO's input on component IT investments. We will continue to monitor the department's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Status: Open
Comments: FBI agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the department has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-57, Nov 5, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, OMB has developed guidance to help federal agencies implement the capital planning requirements described in OMB's November 6, 2019 Memorandum 20-3, "Implementation of Agency-wide Real Property Capital Planning." According to OMB officials, this guidance was distributed to agencies in July 2020. Agency plans were due to OMB by August 15,2020. This recommendation remains open pending further information from OMB on the status and contents of these plans.
GAO-19-29, Nov 1, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9971
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. In June 2019, in response to our recommendation, the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a charter for the NDERG that included information about the roles and responsibilities for the members of the NDERG. The charter also indicated that this information should be included in the appropriate DOD directive and/or issuance. This effort is still in progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. In June 2019, in response to our recommendation, the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a charter for the NDERG that included information about the roles and responsibilities for the members of the NDERG. The charter also indicated that this information should be included in the appropriate DOD directive and/or issuance. This effort is still in progress.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 2020, according to DOD officials, DOD is working to update applicable guidance.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. As of July 2020, according to DOD officials, DOD is working to update applicable guidance.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, GAO confirmed that FERC had developed new standard operating procedures related for tracking deficiencies and follow-up items arising from dam safety inspections and other dam safety reviews. In addition, FERC told GAO that they plan to update their tracking system beginning in fiscal year 2021, which will facilitate the complete recording and subsequent analysis of safety deficiencies from inspections across FERC's portfolio of regulated dams. GAO will continue to monitor FERC's efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2019, FERC told GAO that it had begun developing a screening-level risk-assessment program to assess safety risks across the inventory of regulated dams and to help guide safety decisions. In February 2020, GAO confirmed that FERC had completed this screening-level risk assessment, and conducted some preliminary analysis of the results. In addition, FERC told GAO that the results of the screening level risk analyses will be used to revise the potential timing, frequency, and technical disciplines represented on dam safety inspections; to confirm or revise the urgency of existing and potential new follow up dam safety actions; and to identify previously unrecognized dam safety concerns and issues; to identify new dam safety priorities. GAO will continue to monitor FERC's efforts to implement this program.
GAO-19-15, Oct 3, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7215
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.
GAO-18-671, Sep 28, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and stated that it has already taken steps to improve compliance with secondary authorization request approval timeframes.by identifying challenges, agreeing on improvement actions, and providing training. According to VA, its new Health Share Referral Manager system, which VA expects will be fully implemented across all medical facilities by December 2019, will automate secondary authorization request reporting and tracking. According to VA, it will utilize this new system to ensure compliance with secondary authorization request approval time frames.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and stated that it currently does not have the ability to monitor and assess the performance of customer service operations under the Choice Program contracts. VA has included additional requirements for customer service in the Veterans Community Care Network request for proposals and plans to monitor compliance with these requirements under the Veterans Community Care Program. VA expects to implement this recommendation by December 2019.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: United States Postal Service
Status: Open
Comments: USPS has completed a cost study to adopt an operational internal control framework. USPS has targeted December 31, 2020, for completion and implementation of this new internal control framework.
GAO-18-666, Sep 24, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, SBA officials told us that the agency is re-aligning resources and developing standards to reflect new processing times for certifications and recertifications, which will include revised employee performance elements and quarterly performance reviews. When SBA has completed these changes, we will assess whether the agency is conducting and documenting reviews of staff compliance.
GAO-18-659, Sep 21, 2018
Phone: (202) 512- 9110
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. As of April 2020, the Office of Appeals stated that it is working with the IRS Human Capital Office to design a questionnaire for all Appeals managers to identify the technical and organizational skills necessary to meet organizational short and long-term needs for the Appeals Officer position. This information will be used to conduct a skills gap analysis on the current Appeals workforce and to enhance the selection/hiring process to ensure future hires possess necessary skills. IRS plans to complete these actions by October 2020, and Appeals stated that time frame for this corrective action may be affected by budgetary and resource constraints. GAO will continue to monitor IRS's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2019, IRS evaluated the existing monitoring for collection due process appeal requests to identify any impediments to collection staff timely transferring these requests to the Office of Appeals and provided the studies and related recommendations to GAO. The affected IRS collection units have developed action plans to address deficiencies in case transfer time. These plans include modifying inventory software to alert both staff and managers on the number of days collection due process requests have been under review. IRS also plans to update relevant IRM documentation in early 2020 to ensure that receipt dates of collection due process appeal requests are recorded for all cases and that there is appropriate notation of reasons why certain cases exceed established timeframes for transfer to the Office of Appeals. To fully implement this recommendation, IRS will need to provide GAO copies of the updated IRM as well as evidence of other corrective actions outlined in its evaluations of its monitoring procedures for collection due process appeal requests. GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. All four IRS business operating divisions have a corrective action plan and established and documented time frames for timely appeal transfer as of February 2020. While three business operating divisions have reporting procedures planned for monitoring timely appeal transfer, one division has not provided a plan for monitoring its timeliness in transferring cases to the Office of Appeals. To fully implement this recommendation, IRS needs to assess whether the planned monitoring actions will result in timely transfer of examination appeals. As of February 2020, data tracking the time from taxpayer request for appeal to when it is received by the Office of Appeals indicated that the actual transfer times are longer than the established time frames. Delays in transferring such requests can result in increased interest costs for taxpayers because interest continues to accumulate on the tax liability during the appeal process. Further, taxpayers unsure of their appeal status may call or write to IRS, tying up other IRS staff to respond to inquiries about appeals delayed in transfer. GAO will continue to monitor IRS's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. In February 2019, IRS stated that the Chief of Appeals will share with each compliance unit data on the time elapsed between when a taxpayer requests an appeal to when it is received in the Office of Appeals. Appeals will also conduct an assessment with IRS compliance units of the time elapsed between when a taxpayer requests an appeal to when it is received in the Office of Appeals and implement improvements based on that assessment. As of February 2020, Appeals demonstrated that it provided to compliance units initial example data that tracks the time from taxpayer request for appeal to when it is received by the Office of Appeals. As of April 2020, it continues to refine the format of these reports. Appeals said it plans to do an assessment of the data with compliance units and will provide an example of this analysis when it is complete. IRS plans to complete these actions by October 2020, and GAO will continue to monitor IRS's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. In February 2019, IRS stated that the Chief of Appeals will review appeal resolution times and participate in IRS-wide efforts to improve transparency of resolution timeframes. As of June 2019, the Office of Appeals explained that IRS was beginning to simplify its website, including the Appeals website, with a focus on making it more customer friendly. IRS plans to complete these actions by June 2020, and GAO will continue to monitor IRS's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury agreed with this recommendation and plans to monitor IRS implementation. In February 2019, IRS stated that it will publish customer service standards and related performance measure results on the Office of Appeals web page on IRS.gov. As of April 2020, the Office of Appeals stated it plans to use information from its redesigned customer satisfaction survey to address this recommendation and is determining how to include the performance information on its website. IRS plans to complete these actions by June 2020, and GAO will continue to monitor IRS's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury agreed with this recommendation and will monitor IRS implementation. In February 2019, IRS stated that it will leverage existing IRS advisory bodies to solicit customer perspectives. In January 2020, the Office of Appeals reported that it had begun to meet with the IRS Advisory Committee (IRSAC) to solicit customer perspectives, with its first interactions beginning in November 2019. The Office of Appeals stated that, in addition to this action, its leadership continues to meet with other external bodies to capture public input and customer feedback on an ad hoc basis. As of April 2020, the Office of Appeals stated it plans to participate in IRSAC's public meetings. Since the Office of Appeals has only begun leveraging IRSAC to solicit customer perspectives in November 2019 in a working session, GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation to ensure sustained interaction with IRSAC through working sessions, as well as public meetings.
GAO-18-518, Sep 17, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9342
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA concurred with this recommendation and the agency stated that loan servicers are scheduled to be enrolled in its ongoing security authorization program beginning in fiscal year 2019. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA stated that it concurred with this recommendation, but the actions it said it planned to take would not fully address it. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA concurred with this recommendation and described planned actions to address it. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation has a pending date of 5/31/2020 for completion When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA partially concurred with this recommendation and described actions it planned to take in response. However, we believe the entire recommendation is still warranted. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA stated that it partially agreed with this recommendation; however, if effectively implemented, the planned actions it described would address this recommendation. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: FSA did not concur with this recommendation. However, we believe it is still warranted. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-643, Sep 10, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA stated that the authority periodically evaluates the risks posed by the unfunded liabilities for its pension plans and other post-employment benefits. Specifically, WMATA officials stated that consulting agencies are used to conduct sensitivity analysis regarding the funded status of WMATA's five pension plans under various economic scenarios. However, WMATA has not yet provided GAO with these analyses to assess what information they contain and whether they include information on potential future required payments and unfunded liabilities under adverse scenarios. GAO will continue to work with WMATA to obtain these analyses and monitor WMATA's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA officials stated that the Authority did not provide funding in 2019 to obtain a consultant to assist with authority-wide strategic workforce planning, as WMATA had previously planned. WMATA officials told us that the Authority is evaluating funding availability for this effort in the upcoming fiscal year, but in consideration to the impacts of the coronavirus crisis, broad economic uncertainties, and other challenges facing the Authority. WMATA did not provide information as to whether it would be conducting additional workforce planning efforts using its in-house staff and resources. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA created documented procedures for managers and staff who are not represented by a union to use in the performance management cycles for fiscal years 2019 and 2020. These included guidance, instructional videos, or other tools for setting employee performance objectives in relation to WMATA's strategic priorities, and conducting mid-year reviews and end-of year performance evaluations. WMATA reported that it also intends to develop procedures to support performance management for some of its union-represented employees, starting in fiscal year 2021 with the Metro Transit Police Department. WMATA expects to implement changes for other represented employee groups beginning in fiscal year 2022. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's progress in addressing this recommendation.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA has taken steps to establish controls for its employee performance management system. Specifically, WMATA developed an automated tool to track employee and supervisor compliance with WMATA's performance management requirements, and provided GAO with information on how WMATA used this tool to set employee performance objectives and complete mid-year reviews in the fiscal year 2020 performance cycle. WMATA reported that end-of-year performance evaluations would be completed by the end of July 2020. GAO will review WMATA's completion of the 2020 performance cycle to process to assess whether WMATA has fully implemented our recommendation.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, WMATA officials told us that its automated performance management tool will provide information on employee performance information across the organization and allow for data-driven decision making. Specifically, WMATA stated that managers can view year-end ratings and other information for every employee within their chain of command, and WMATA's senior leadership have a global view of the ratings to compare performance ratings distributions across departments. WMATA reported that it is currently completing its fiscal year 2020 performance cycle, which ends July 31, 2020. GAO will continue to follow WMATA's progress addressing this recommendation, including assessing whether the information in its automated performance management tool will help WMATA monitor progress toward achieving its strategic goals.
GAO-18-550, Aug 8, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. Customs and Border Protection provided an estimated completion date for their workforce assessment of September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. The Federal Emergency Management Agency plans to establish a policy for requirements development by September 30, 2020, about one year after it completes changes to its governance processes.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken action to implement it as of August 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken action to implement it as of August 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken action to implement it as of August 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken action to implement it as of August 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The National Protection and Programs Directorate changed its name to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in January 2018. DHS concurred with this recommendation. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency estimates that it will have a final policy by September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. In January 2018, the National Protection and Programs Directorate changed its name to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency estimates that it will establish an independent requirements organization by September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. In January 2018, the National Protection and Programs Directorate changed its name to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency estimates it will complete an assessment to account for an independent requirements organization's workforce needs by September 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services estimates that it will establish an independent requirements development organization by September 30, 2020.
GAO-18-564, Aug 6, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: CMS has taken steps to conduct a comprehensive national risk assessment. As of October 2019, CMS had developed a standard tool to assess risk and staff capacity. The agency indicated that once the assessment is complete, CMS will identify opportunities to increase resources, review the current allocation of financial staff, and determine the appropriate allocation of staff by state. We will continue to monitor CMS's action to complete this assessment.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, CMS indicated that the agency held meetings to clarify internal guidance on the variance analysis and is the process of drafting updated guidance for the CMS-64 review. We will continue to monitor CMS's actions to update the guidance.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, CMS indicated that given their current resources, they believe the sampling methodology is sufficient and have no plans to revise it. The agency noted that the current methodology requires a minimum sample size but gives reviewers the flexibility to expand the size of the sample if warranted by risk and as resources permit. We continue to believe that the current methodology does not sufficiently target areas of high risk.
GAO-18-93, Aug 2, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The agency partially agreed with the recommendation, and planned to issue guidance that addressed eight of the 12 CIO responsibilities discussed in this report that were not included in existing OMB guidance. As of July 2020, the agency had not issued such guidance and asserted that its existing Circular A-130 guidance is adequate to address this recommendation. However, the Circular A-130 does not address these 12 CIO responsibilities. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address these requirements.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation to define the authority that Chief Information Officers (CIOs) are to have when agencies report on CIO authority over information technology spending. However, as of July 2020, the agency had not updated its definition. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation and, in May 2019, the agency revised its departmental policies to address 21 of the 22 responsibility gaps identified in the report. The remaining responsibility is for the Chief Information Officer (CIO) to report annually to the head of the agency on progress made in improving IT personnel capabilities. In particular, while USDA's CIO is required to conduct an annual assessment on IT personnel, there is no indication that the results are reported to the agency head. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address these requirements.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation and, in October 2018, described a a number of steps it planned to take to address the responsibility gaps identified in the report. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address these requirements.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: We will provide updated information when we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: We will provide updated information when we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: The department planned to complete several steps by the end of 2019. When we confirm these actions, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation and revised its policies to address three of the 23 responsibility gaps identified in the report. In particular, it has addressed the responsibilities for the Chief Information Officer to: 1) report directly to the agency head or that official's deputy, 2) improve the management of the agency's IT through portfolio review (PortfolioStat), and 3) maintain an inventory of data centers. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address the remaining responsibilities.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation, and revised and provided additional departmental directives and delegations to address 19 of the 21 responsibility gaps identified in the report. The remaining responsibilities are for the Chief Information Officer (CIO) to 1) review and approve IT contracts, acquisition plans, or strategies; and 2) ensure that all personnel are held accountable for complying with the agency-wide information security program. In particular, while the DHS CIO has the authority to coordinate with the Chief Acquisition Officer on acquisition strategies, coordination is not the same as reviewing and approving. Regarding holding agency personnel accountable for information security, DHS's Sensitive Systems Policy Directive gives that authority to the heads of DHS's components, rather than the DHS CIO. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address these requirements.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: The department indicated that it has work underway to address this recommendation, which it plans to complete in March 2020. When we confirm those actions, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The department planned to review its policies and take corrective actions, as necessary. When we confirm those actions, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: Justice concurred with our recommendation and started work to address it. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: Labor has taken a number of steps in response to this recommendation. However, the agency's policies did not address the six key areas of responsibility for CIOs.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The department has begun changing its policies to address this recommendation. When we review those changes, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: DOT agreed with many of the responsibilities in our recommendation, and in September 2019, the agency planned to leverage their technical infrastructure modernization initiative to further define the CIO responsibilities identified in the 18 responsibility gaps identified in the report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation and, as of January 2020, is working to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: EPA neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation, but agreed that CIO authorities should be adequately documented in appropriate policies. EPA officials have stated that they continue to work to address this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to address the 20 responsibility gaps identified in the report, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with our recommendation and stated that the agency was updating its policies to address the responsibilities identified in the report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open
Comments: NSF agreed with our recommendations, and in February 2020, the agency issued a new CIO Authorities Policy and revised other departmental policies to address 22 of the 23 responsibility gaps identified in the report. The remaining responsibility for the CIO to benchmark agency processes against private and public sector performance has not been established through the agencies' policies. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the remaining responsibility, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: NRC disagreed with our recommendation but generally agreed with our findings, and the agency had departmental policies to address three of the 15 responsibilities identified in the report. In March 2020, the agency stated it was identifying the appropriate agency policy to amend to address the remaining responsibility gaps. It anticipated that it would complete those updates by the end of the second quarter of FY 2020. We will continue to monitor the steps the agency takes to address this requirement.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM agreed with our recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SBA agreed with most of our recommendations and, in September 2018, the agency said it is revising its departmental policies to address the responsibility gaps identified in the report. SBA's Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI) Strategic Plan's revised in 2019 addresses two of the 19 responsibility gaps identified in the report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-553, Jul 30, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9601
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In February and May 2019, DSCA informed us that it had taken some steps to implement this recommendation, including establishing an automatic interface with certain DOD components' accounting systems to provide DSCA with daily information and data on those components' actual spending of FMS administrative funds. DSCA noted that it is working toward establishing automatic interfaces for the other components that receive these funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that implementation is ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation .
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, DSCA noted that it is undertaking an initiative to incorporate reconciliation capabilities into its oversight of components' use of FMS administrative funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that efforts to implement this recommendation are ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation .
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, DSCA informed us that it had conducted two business process reviews for military departments in 2019. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, DSCA informed us that it planned to conduct one review for another DOD component (e.g., other than a military department) in fall 2019. In January 2019, it collaborated with other DOD components that receive FMS administrative funds to develop risk-based criteria for selecting components for periodic business process reviews . DSCA also provided updated policies and procedures for these reviews, which state that DSCA will conduct at least one review for another DOD component annually. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, DSCA provided supporting documentation to show that, as part of its annual budget review cycle, it had required DOD components to provide a list of sub-components/organizations that receive FMS administrative funds. In October 2019, DSCA provided a list of sub-components/organizations that DSCA obtained as part of the 2019 annual budget cycle. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, DSCA provided updated standard operating procedures for selecting military department organizations for reviews of their business processes for administrative funds. As of August 2020, we are reviewing the documentation provided and following up with DSCA to determine the extent to which the new procedures reflect a risk-based approach.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it had updated its policies and procedures to reflect that it will track action items from business process reviews every 30 days, until the action items area completed. DSCA needs to providing supporting documentation for its efforts to track action items. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation .
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it was in the process of conducting "mock" audits of DOD components' use of FMS administrative funds, and that it was undergoing efforts to ensure that a process is in place for the financial review of components' actual spending of these funds. DSCA noted that these efforts were ongoing in October 2019. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In February and May 2019, DSCA informed us that it had taken some steps to implement this recommendation, including establishing an automatic interface with certain DOD components' accounting systems to provide DSCA with daily information and data on those components' actual spending of FMS CAS funds. DSCA noted that it is working toward establishing automatic interfaces for the other components that receive these funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that implementation is ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2019, DSCA noted that it is undertaking an initiative to incorporate reconciliation capabilities into its oversight of components' use of FMS CAS funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that efforts to implement this recommendation are ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it was in the process of conducting "mock" audits of DOD components' use of FMS CAS funds, and that it was undergoing efforts to ensure that a process is in place for the financial review of components' actual spending of these funds. As of October 2019, DSCA noted that these efforts were ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing efforts to implement this recommendation.
GAO-18-466, Jun 14, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-6244
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Commerce (Commerce) officials concurred with our recommendation and planned to evaluate the level of preparedness for cybersecurity personnel not currently holding certifications to take certification exams, and to identify strategies for mitigating any gaps identified. As of August 2020, Commerce had not provided sufficient evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: Department of Energy (DOE) officials concurred with our recommendation and planned to evaluate the level of preparedness for cybersecurity personnel not currently holding certifications to take certification exams using the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) certification mapping that is due for release in November 2018. DOE officials plan to develop criteria to identify personnel who are prepared to take certification exams and will perform a department-wide evaluation, after which they plan to report to Congress by a target date of September 30, 2019. As of August 2020, DOE had not provided evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: Department of the Interior (Interior) concurred with our recommendation. Officials from the department stated they were developing a plan to assess the workforce's preparedness to complete and maintain certifications. Interior officials stated that they were planning to leverage its learning and performance management system for assessing the level of preparedness of cybersecurity personnel to take certification exams and planned to report to Congress by March 2021. As of August 2020, HUD had not provided evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) did not concur with our recommendation and has not yet provided evidence that it has implemented the recommendation as of August 2020. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Small Business Administration (SBA) officials concurred with our recommendation. SBA officials stated that they have made significant progress in the workforce assessment area, and have recently completed an assessment of the SBA's IT workforce and reported on existing skills gaps. SBA officials stated that they plan to execute against the IT workforce plan to include addressing requirements within the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act of 2015. As of August 2020, SBA had not provided evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Small Business Administration (SBA) officials concurred with our recommendation. SBA officials stated that they have made significant progress in the workforce assessment area, and have recently completed an assessment of the SBA's IT workforce and reported on existing skills gaps. SBA officials stated that they plan to execute against the IT workforce plan to include addressing requirements within the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act of 2015. As of August 2020, SBA had not provided evidence that it had implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the situation.
GAO-18-421, Jun 5, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8678
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: For the second and third recommendations, related to lender's use of the credit elsewhere criteria as part of its monitoring of lender practices, on June 11, 2019, SBA provided information on 7(a) lender reviews and summary reports. On September 27, 2019, we discussed these recommendations and SBA's responses with an SBA official. Specifically, we discussed the role of statistical sampling in addressing lender practices and SBA's selection of lenders for further review. On November 22, 2019, an SBA official stated that the agency plans to provide additional documentation in six months to further support actions taken. We will continue to monitor SBA's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: For the second and third recommendations, related to lender's use of the credit elsewhere criteria as part of its monitoring of lender practices, on June 11, 2019, SBA provided information on 7(a) lender reviews and summary reports. On September 27, 2019, we discussed these recommendations and SBA's responses with an SBA official. Specifically, we discussed the role of statistical sampling in addressing lender practices and SBA's selection of lenders for further review. On November 22, 2019, an SBA official stated that the agency plans to provide additional documentation in six months to further support actions taken. We will continue to monitor SBA's efforts to address this recommendation.
GAO-18-411, Jun 4, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM concurred with this recommendation. However, the Bureau has yet to provide information concerning the current status of this recommendation. We will update the recommendation's status when we receive such information.
GAO-18-370, Jun 1, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
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.
GAO-18-377, May 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2623
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB partially concurred with this recommendation. On July 31, 2019, we met with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). At the meeting, OMB officials indicated that OMB's position has not changed since the issuance of the GAO report and what OMB had already communicated to GAO at the exit conference. Specifically, OMB stated that it should not have to develop more specific guidance as each program and activity has its own risks. Instead, inspectors general are better equipped and positioned to review the sampling and estimation plans as part of their annual Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 compliance audits and that agencies, their statisticians, and inspectors general should work out the best testing procedures for their agencies. We continue to believe that OMB could provide suggestions during OMB's annual town meeting related to improper payments for areas that inspectors general may consider. Further, although we agree that programs and activities may face different risks of improper payment, we continue to believe that guidance from OMB on how agencies test to identify improper payments, such as using a risk-based approach, could help ensure that agencies address the specific risks they identify when developing improper payment estimates. In February 2020, OMB informed us that it had no status updates to provide at this time. We will continue to monitor agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB concurred with this recommendation. On July 31, 2019, we met with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). At the meeting, OMB officials indicated that OMB's position has not changed since the issuance of the GAO report and what OMB had already communicated to GAO at the exit conference. At the meeting, OMB officials stated that OMB will "consider" updating guidance in OMB Circular A-123, Appendix C, to direct agencies to treat nonresponse cases such as improper payments and to include a new category for tracking such cases but only after assessing the impact such guidance would have on the agencies testing and reporting of improper payments. OMB has not taken action to develop this guidance. In February 2020, OMB informed us that it had no status updates to provide at this time. We will continue to monitor agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) partially concurred with this recommendation. Prior to 2006, the improper payment estimate sampling methodology used by OPM included both new and old adjudicated claims. After analyzing several years of data using this methodology, OPM found that including older claims in the sample could result in claimant's records being sampled multiple times. In addition, OPM also found that the variance in the number of errors detected in new claims versus old claims was very low. OPM also looked at the resources used in performing the audit of old and new claims and based on these factors, management determined that it was not an efficient use of resources to include both old and new claims in the review. The methodology was updated to make the process more efficient. By using new claims only, OPM was able to provide feedback to program managers more timely. As a result, management can address issues negatively impacting the improper payment rate and prevent improper payments promptly. OPM agrees with the intent of our recommendation; however, OPM does not agree with our recommendation regarding a risk assessment on eligibility. Eligibility is determined before annuity/survivor benefits are fully adjudicated. As part of its correction plan, OPM stated that it will conduct an audit of older claims to determine if there are different risks to new claims. In February 2020, OPM indicated that it is currently in the process of pulling/gathering the cases that should be in the universe of this audit. OPM plans to complete the corrective action by end of 4th quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-18-326, May 24, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4456
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.
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.
GAO-18-337, May 22, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA did not concur with this recommendation. As of October 2019, the agency reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer was beginning its involvement with the agency's Mission Support Architecture Program which aims at re-aligning mission support functions from a decentralized model to an enterprise model. The office's participation in the re-alignment effort has an estimated completion date in fiscal year 2023.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that the agency intended to address this recommendation by documenting its approach for governing IT investments. In February 2020, NASA reported that the agency remained committed to taking action to address this recommendation and reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer had established a process to govern IT investment funds and had planned additional modifications for that framework. The agency now expects to complete actions to address this recommendation by November 2020.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had begun updating policies and procedures for developing the portfolio criteria. In April 2019, NASA provided copies of its updated guidance. Among other things, the guidance described criteria for the portfolio and defined policies and procedures for creating the portfolio. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided evidence that it had developed policies and procedures for evaluating the portfolio. We plan to continue following up on the status of efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had hired a Chief Cybersecurity Risk Officer in April 2018 and that it had also approved a charter for an agency-wide Cybersecurity Integration Team. As of September 2020, NASA reported that it intends to deliver a cybersecurity risk management strategy that addresses the elements outlined in this recommendation by 2021.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of September 2020, NASA reported that the Chief Information Officer had initiated a review of the agency's cyber policy management framework and that any related updates were expected to be completed by 2021.
GAO-18-407, May 14, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Service
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and as of February 2019, stated that it continues to pilot DSS in Transition at cleared facilities and use information gathered from stakeholders, including key government and industry stakeholder organizations to refine the process. On August 12, 2020, DOD stated that DSS was in the process of drafting a Corrective Action Plan. At that time, DOD officials explained that this plan would be completed in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019. As of September 2020, this plan has not been completed.
GAO-18-348, May 8, 2018
Phone: (617) 788-0580
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD officials noted they plan to pilot a staffing tool that will help the Services determine the number of family support providers needed at each installation. The pilot currently includes multiple Services and is expected to last two years. DOD officials also noted that DOD is in the process of standardizing its case management processes for military families with special needs through its family needs assessment form. Among other things, this form is meant to help family support providers address requirements for individualized services plans and gain a better understanding of each family's current needs and goals. In its 2018 annual report to the congressional defense committees, DOD noted the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 requirement to develop and continuously update an individualized services plan for each military family with special needs. However, DOD said OSN may propose legislative changes to this requirement that would require an individualized services plan to be developed and updated only for those families that request services from family support providers. As of June 2020, we will consider closing this recommendation when the staffing tool is finalized and OSN has assessed each Service's number of family support providers and efforts to develop services plans.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD officials noted that each Service submits data for assignment coordination and family support to the EFMP data repository on a quarterly basis. According to DOD officials, in 2018, the data repository was expanded to include a full year of quarterly data for each Service, and OSN is currently developing additional performance metrics for assignment coordination and family support. DOD also noted that it will continue to use the data repository to identify gaps and trends related to assignment coordination and family support, including collecting data from each installation. As of June 2020, we await documentation that OSN has developed performance metrics for assignment coordination and family support and uses them to identify gaps and trends across the Services.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD said the family support component is monitored and evaluated through the each Service's certification process which includes specific standards for the EFMP. In addition, OSN participated in a monitoring site visit to Marine Corps Base Quantico in December 2018 and plans to participate in additional site visits that are coordinated by each Service's certification team. As of June 2020, we will consider closing this recommendation when DOD implements a process to evaluate the results of each Service's certification process.
GAO-18-393R, May 7, 2018
Phone: (202)512-9377
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. As of September 30, 2019, three of the four operating divisions involved in this recommendation designed and implemented the corrective actions necessary to reasonably assure that IRS effectively resolved and recorded unpostable transactions in a timely manner. In March 2019, one operating division determined that based on the research performed, no actions needed to be taken by the operating division to effectively resolve and record unpostable transactions in a timely manner. We will continue to evaluate IRS's actions to address this recommendation during our audit of IRS's fiscal year 2020 financial statements.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During fiscal year 2019, IRS developed policies in the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) for conducting and monitoring the Submission Processing internal control review. Specifically, the IRM addresses the (1) designated roles and responsibilities among IRS business units for ensuring the review questions and associated criteria are assessed and updated to align with internal controls under review; (2) requirements for periodically evaluating the error threshold methodology used in the review; (3) procedures for the review to assess and monitor (a) internal control activities across work shifts and (b) internal control activities for appropriate use and destruction of hard-copy taxpayer information. However, the IRM did not include requirements for reporting findings identified during all components of the internal control review and for assessing and monitoring results of relevant functional level reviews. Since IRS developed the relevant IRM policies and procedures after we had already performed our fiscal year 2019 internal control testing, we will evaluate IRS's implementation of the established procedures during our fiscal year 2020 audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, IRS notified stakeholders of the added procedures to the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) for (1) conducting the Audit Management Checklist reviews, including how frequently the reviews should be completed; (2) developing corrective actions for deficiencies; and (3) tracking the status of the corrective actions until fully implemented. Since IRS provided us the IRM procedures after the end of our fiscal year 2019 audit, we will evaluate IRS's implementation of the established procedures during our fiscal year 2020 audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, IRS notified stakeholders of the added procedures to the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) for conducting the All Events History Report reviews, including developing and monitoring corrective actions for deficiencies until fully implemented. Since IRS provided us the IRM procedures after the end of our fiscal year 2019 audit, we will evaluate IRS's implementation of the established procedures during our fiscal year 2020 audit.
GAO-18-319, Mar 22, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, GSA has provided GAO with some documents that indicate steps toward addressing this recommendation. For example, the documents cover topics on workplace and space design. GSA officials said that they are working on a document that focuses on the relationship between space planning and telework that will more directly address this recommendation. The estimated completion date for this document is the end of fiscal year 2020.
GAO-18-256, Jan 30, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Federal Reserve System
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, Federal Reserve staff told us that they continue to review their policies and procedures to ensure compliance with RFA requirements. While Federal Reserve staff said that they use an RFA handbook developed by the SBA Office of Advocacy to support their analyses, the Federal Reserve has not made changes to its policies and procedures based on our recommendations. Until the Federal Reserve develops and implements RFA policies and procedures consistent with the recommendation, it remains open.
Agency: Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, CFTC staff told us that they formed a working group to enhance its implementation of RFA requirements. While this working group has begun drafting compliance procedures for RFA reviews, the procedures are incomplete and CFTC staff said it will have to finish updating the "small entity" definition before it can complete these procedures. CFTC staff told us that the working group has focused much of its work on updating the agency's definition of "small entity" because the definition was outdated. The identification of "small entity" is an important preliminary step for RFA analysis. CFTC staff does not expect to publish a proposal to amend the "small entity" definition until the summer 2020. Until CFTC finalizes and implements the new procedures for RFA reviews, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2019, SEC provided us with supplemental policies and procedures it developed for compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), including section 610 reviews. The procedures require staff to publish on SEC's website a notice that section 610 reviews have been completed and, if the agency plans any further actions, a published RFA agenda would so indicate. Although these notices communicate with interested entities about the status of ongoing as well as completed section 610 reviews, they will not include any details about the basis for SEC's conclusions during the review. Therefore, they do not full implement GAO's recommendation, which remains open.
GAO-18-196, Jan 19, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS did not agree with this recommendation. The agency stated that it clarified guidance in the areas we raised. HHS also believes it is necessary to allow states the flexibility to meet the requirements in the context of their state CPS program. However, we found that states reported issues with the guidance and it did not address a key ongoing challenge regarding CAPTA requirements. HHS indicated that it will continue to provide technical assistance to states and fund demonstration sites to establish or enhance collaboration across community agencies and courts. Although continuing to provide technical assistance to states should be beneficial, our findings demonstrate that additional guidance is also needed. We continue to believe our recommendation is warranted. As of February 2020, the agency continues to disagree.
GAO-18-220, Jan 19, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7114
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.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
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.
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.
GAO-18-214, Jan 10, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: CBP agreed with our recommendation and said they would complete their corrective actions by April 30, 2020. To fully implement it, CBP should develop a monitoring system that observes agency verification of licenses for imported radiological materials to ensure CBP officials are complying with existing policies and procedures.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: CBP agreed with our recommendation and said they would complete their corrective actions by April 30, 2020. To fully implement it, CBP should develop a system to better identify which shipments of radiological material pose the greatest risk and revise their policies and procedures for verification of the licenses for these shipments accordingly.
GAO-18-42, Jan 10, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The agency concurred with our recommendation, and in June 2018, USDA CIO delegated the review and approval of acquisition plans and strategies to the Capital Planning and Information Technology Governance Division (CPITGD) through the Associate CIO of the Information Resource Management Center. However, as of June 2020, the agency had not provided evidence to demonstrate that these reviews and approvals are taking place as required by OMB's guidance. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In a March 2018 response to our report, the agency agreed with our recommendation and stated that the CIO and the Senior Procurement Executive will issue a memo to their acquisition and CIO member offices clarifying the offices joint responsibilities to ensure that all IT acquisitions are submitted to the CIO for review and approval. The memo is also to provide guidance on the process by which the CIO will review proposed contract actions. However, as of February 2020, the agency had not responded to requests for updates. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In a March 2018 response to our report, the agency agreed with our recommendation and stated that it intended to clarify its policies and procedures to comply with OMB rules, including the IT acquisition checklist, which must be completed for every proposed contract action. In addition, the CIO and Senior Procurement Executive will work together to review existing acquisition plan review and approval processes. However, as of February 2020, the agency had not responded to requests for updates. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with our recommendation and in an April 2018 update stated that HHS has a policy for the HHS IT acquisition review process for acquisition strategies. However, as of February 21, 2020, the agency had not provided evidence that the CIO (or designee) was reviewing and approving IT acquisition plans, as required. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with our recommendation, and in a December 2019 update provided information on the agency's CPIC process and a template for IT acquisition strategies. However, it is not clear whether the CIO is reviewing and approving IT acquisitions plans through the CPIC process and the template does not provide a place for the CIO review and approval. In addition, we have requested evidence of CIO approval of selected IT acquisitions. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: The agency did not state whether it agreed or disagreed with the recommendation. In March 2019, Treasury issued a memo that requires the CIO to review and approve IT acquisition plans for acquisitions with a total value of $68 million or more, or for actions with a period of performance longer than 5 years. The review and approval of all other IT acquisition plans are delegated to the component CIOs or Chief Technology Officers. However, the agency had not yet provided evidence that the CIO (or designee) was reviewing and approving selected IT acquisition plans, as required. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The agency concurred with the recommendation. In October 2019, Transportation issued guidance requiring that the CIO or designee to review and approve all IT acquisition plans. We have requested that the agency provide us evidence of CIO-approved IT acquisition plans. The agency stated that it planned to respond by May 15, 2020. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The agency concurred with the recommendation. In November 2019, VA issued guidance that requires the CIO, in conjunction with the Chief Acquisition Officer, to review and approve all IT acquisition strategies and plans. Specifically, the CIO is to review and approve IT acquisitions valued at $15 million or more. The CIO has delegated the review and approval of IT acquisitions less than $15 million to other designees, based on the value of the contract. However, the agency had not provided evidence that the CIO (or designee) was reviewing and approving selected IT acquisition plans, as required. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The agency concurred with the recommendation, and in September 2017, NASA's CIO delegated the review and approval authority of IT acquisitions to the Center CIOs. We have requested evidence of CIO-approved IT acquisitions. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The agency concurred with the recommendation and in an April 2020 updated stated that OPM has contracted with a third-party vendor to evaluate the OPM IT human capital, architecture, and governance processes from planning to acquisition to implementation. The agency further stated that it is working to fully implement an IT governance process where the OPM CIO fully reviews and approves IT acquisition plans and processes. We will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
GAO-18-41SP, Nov 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. In November 2017, OMB staff noted that the agency was developing its next set of CAP goals, which are usually reserved for a limited set of priorities, and expects to announce these goals concurrent with the FY19 budget. As part of the process, agency staff said they consult relevant Congressional committees and other stakeholders. As of September 2019, OMB had not provided an update on its efforts.
GAO-18-12, Nov 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7215
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Labor: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: OSHA stated that it agrees that workers should be able to report injuries, illnesses, and hazards free of intimidation. OSHA noted that its Field Operations Manual prescribes procedures for facilitating the free and open exchange of information, such as conducting onsite worker interviews without management present. OSHA further stated that when workers indicate interest in offsite interviews, the agency will conduct those interviews as prescribed by the Field Operations Manual. We note in our report that because inspectors inform plant management which workers they want to speak with, supervisors know the identity of workers interviewed onsite. Workers and worker advocates we spoke with expressed concerns about this. OSHA told us that inspectors interview meat and poultry workers offsite infrequently, since these interviews can be challenging and take additional time, and OSHA also may be challenged to find an acceptable venue when the employee is available. In June 2020, DOL informed us that OSHA had signed an alliance with several meat and poultry-related industry associations and that they expect this alliance to help improve overall safety and health for the industry's workers. We continue to believe that there are additional steps OSHA can take to better encourage workers to disclose sensitive concerns, and we look forward to learning how OSHA will draw upon this alliance to help take these steps.
Agency: Department of Labor: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: OSHA stated that meat and poultry workers should have bathroom access as prescribed by the agency's regulations. They noted that if it is observed that processes indicate lack of bathroom access, or if a worker indicates there is an issue, the agency will investigate. Our report identified a mismatch between the concerns we heard from workers about lack of bathroom access and the problems reported by OSHA. We also reported that workers may not volunteer information about lack of bathroom access unless specifically asked. OSHA may choose to address this issue without routinely asking workers about bathroom access, such as by selectively querying workers based on criteria determined by the agency. In June 2020, DOL informed us that OSHA had signed a national alliance with several meat and poultry-related industry associations, and that bathroom access is one of the topics that will be addressed within this alliance, with a goal of developing educational materials. We note that this is a positive step forward, and we continue to stand by our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Labor: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, DOL informed us that OSHA continues work on updating its guidance for employers on how to manage their health units to address the challenges of managing these units, and that OSHA anticipates initiating clearance of the draft updated guidance in fall 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when this effort is complete.
Agency: Department of Labor: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In February 2020, OSHA reported that OSHA and FSIS drafted an updated MOU, which both parties are reviewing. The two agencies met in Summer 2019 to discuss workplace safety, collaboration between the two agencies, and the implementation of the MOU. During a series of working meetings, they discussed each aspect of the MOU, including training and coordination activities. FSIS and OSHA will continue to meet routinely and review the MOU to determine whether adjustments are needed, as appropriate. We will consider closing this recommendation when this effort is complete.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: FSIS stated that it already has directives in place to recognize and report hazards affecting FSIS employees, and acknowledged that the MOU was designed to additionally have FSIS employees report hazards affecting plant employees due to the regular presence of its inspectors in plants. FSIS noted that in collaborating with OSHA, FSIS will need to ensure its primary mission is not compromised by undertaking activities that take time and resources away from its food safety inspection responsibilities. In January 2019, OSHA reported that it met with FSIS several times to discuss chemical exposures, referrals, and issues of jurisdiction in state plan states. FSIS subsequently shared the results from a NIOSH health hazard evaluation that was conducted, as well as the efforts to track the source of the infected birds. To fully implement this recommendation, FSIS should strengthen the MOU and develop a mechanism to regularly evaluate it would help ensure that the goals of the MOU are met; leveraging FSIS's presence in plants provides the federal government with a cost-effective opportunity to protect worker safety and health.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Food Safety and Inspection Service
Status: Open
Comments: FSIS stated that the agency already has a process for sharing chemical safety information with its inspectors. However, FSIS has not provided us with evidence that it has shared the worker safety information it collects related to new chemicals, such as safety information that is specific for dilution levels and conditions of use at plants, as noted in the report. FSIS also stated that it would take certain steps to share information about approval of chemicals with other agencies such as OSHA and NIOSH, but the steps identified did not include sharing worker safety information. Incorporating worker safety information would further help enhance this information sharing. FSIS further stated that some of the information collected during its review of new chemicals may be proprietary.
GAO-18-148, Nov 7, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, a Department of Agriculture official stated that the department was working to establish a policy to include the information noted in our recommendation and planned to finalize a policy by the end of December 2019. We will continue to monitor the department's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has taken action, and stated that it would draft a policy to address our recommendation. In November 2019, a VA official stated that the department is working to address our recommendation but did not identify timeframes for when all activities would be completed. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it planned to develop a policy to implement this recommendation and other FITARA issues. Specifically, EPA officials reported in July 2019 that the agency was continuing to work to address the recommendation but did not provided a time frame for when a policy would be finalized. We will continue to monitor EPA's progress on these efforts.
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the agency was in the process of addressing it. Specifically, NASA officials reported in June 2020 that its guidance is currently being updated to include the information noted in our recommendation and will be finalized by September 2020. We will continue to monitor NASA's progress on these efforts.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) concurred with our recommendation and stated that it would update its policies and processes to include the elements we recommended. Specifically, OPM officials reported in November 2019 that guidance on CIO certification was being developed but the agency had not yet determined a time frame for finalizing the policy. We will continue to monitor OPM's progress on these efforts.
GAO-17-715, Sep 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8980
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our report, State concurred with our recommendation. As of January 2020, the Director of ALS has not granted any Director Points since the subject GAO review was completed. According to State officials, should points be necessary in the future, ALS will document why the conditions at relevant posts require the use of Director Points connected with hardship pay rates. We will continue to follow-up on this.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation, and reported that the department is taking a two-pronged approach to reviewing the issue. First, the Department is conducting a comprehensive review of all costs associated with the processing of hardship and other associated allowance and differential cables through reviews of post-level and central expenditures. This review is expected to be complete by October 2020. Second, the Department is costing out alternative methods of addressing allowance and differential costs that reduce the manual effort on the Department but address the need to support costs incurred by Foreign Service Officers overseas. Meetings with Foreign Service Officer staff to understand variances in the current model were held in the summer of 2019. Highlights from those sessions are being incorporated into a proposal to coincide with the review of costs from the first phase. The final proposal is expected to be complete by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: State concurred with this recommendation. According to State, it continues to identify and seek repayment of improper payments and communicate the importance of timely actions to the regional bureaus and posts to ensure improper payments do not occur. In addition, the Bureau of the Comptroller and Global Financial Services (CGFS) supports the roll out of the Overseas Personnel System, which will centralize the collection of arrival and departure data for the calculation of improper payment notification and risk analysis. To fully implement the recommendation, the Bureau of Human Resources (HR) must complete worldwide deployment of the Overseas Personnel System, and both HR and CGFS would need to complete integration work to enable arrival and departure data to flow in an automated fashion between the two systems. CGFS would then need to provide documentation that the system allows it to more easily identify and prevent improper payments. Preliminary development of the integration will begin in the summer of 2020 while the OPS roll-out continues.
GAO-17-706, Jul 31, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: We reported that the Department of State and DHS's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have not jointly assessed applicant fraud risks across the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), consistent with federal internal control standards and leading practices for fraud risk management. Specifically, we reported that although State and USCIS perform a number of fraud risk management activities and have responded to individual instances of applicant fraud in the program, these efforts do not position State and USCIS to assess fraud risks program-wide for USRAP or know if their controls are appropriately targeted to the areas of highest risk in the program. Therefore, we recommended that the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. USCIS concurred with our recommendation. In response, State reported that it will work together with USCIS to conduct joint risk assessments by jointly developing a risk assessment framework. According to DHS and State documentation, the departments finalized a joint framework in January 2018. In February 2019, DHS and State provided us with the interim progress report on their efforts to conduct an assessment of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. In June 2019, USCIS reported that DHS and State have completed the planned analysis and the draft report is being prepared for leadership review and clearance. DHS estimated that the report will be completed by September 30, 2020. To fully address the recommendation, State and USCIS should jointly conduct regular fraud risk assessments across USRAP.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: We reported that the Department of State and DHS's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have not jointly assessed applicant fraud risks across the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), consistent with federal internal control standards and leading practices for fraud risk management. Specifically, we reported that although State and USCIS perform a number of fraud risk management activities and have responded to individual instances of applicant fraud in the program, these efforts do not position State and USCIS to assess fraud risks program-wide for USRAP or know if their controls are appropriately targeted to the areas of highest risk in the program. Therefore, we recommended that the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. USCIS concurred with our recommendation. In response, State reported that it will work together with USCIS to conduct joint risk assessments by jointly developing a risk assessment framework. According to DHS and State documentation, the departments finalized a joint framework in January 2018. In February 2019, DHS and State provided us with the interim progress report on their efforts to conduct an assessment of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. In June 2019, USCIS reported that DHS and State have completed the planned analysis and the draft report is being prepared for leadership review and clearance. DHS estimated that the report will be completed by September 30, 2020. To fully address the recommendation, State and USCIS should jointly conduct regular fraud risk assessments across USRAP.
GAO-17-395, Jul 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6244
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of FY 2019 IRS financial statements, IRS did not submit this recommendation for closure, but the agency provided some evidence of its progress in implementing this recommendation. When IRS fully implements this recommendation, we will review relevant IRS actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of FY 2019 IRS financial statements, IRS did not submit this recommendation for closure, nor did the agency provide evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. When IRS indicates that it has implemented this recommendation, we will review relevant IRS actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of FY 2019 IRS financial statements, IRS did not submit this recommendation for closure, nor did the agency provide evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. When IRS indicates that it has implemented this recommendation, we will review relevant IRS actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of FY 2019 IRS financial statements, IRS did not submit this recommendation for closure, nor did the agency provide evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. When IRS indicates that it has implemented this recommendation, we will review relevant IRS actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of FY 2019 IRS financial statements, IRS did not submit this recommendation for closure, nor did the agency provide evidence that it had implemented this recommendation. When IRS indicates that it has implemented this recommendation, we will review relevant IRS actions.
GAO-17-613, Jul 18, 2017
Phone: (404) 679-1875
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: We found that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had developed and documented misconduct policies and procedures for most employees, but not its entire workforce. Specifically, FEMA had not documented misconduct policies and procedures for Surge Capacity Force members, who may augment FEMA's workforce in the event of a catastrophic disaster. As a result, we recommended that FEMA document policies and procedures to address potential Surge Capacity Force misconduct. In September 2017, FEMA officials reported taking action to address this recommendation. Specifically, FEMA distributed a memorandum to Federal Coordinating Officers and Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinators providing guidance on how and to whom to report allegations of misconduct by Surge Capacity Force members, coordination efforts regarding investigations, and how to address the member's duty status during the course of an investigation. FEMA stated that it will further address this recommendation by updating the FEMA Human Capital Plan for the Surge Capacity Force. As of August 2020, FEMA was finalizing a comprehensive Human Capital Guide based on lessons learned during the 2017 disaster season, which will address the Surge Capacity Force. This recommendation will remain open until the Human Capital Guide is completed.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: We found that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) policies and procedures for Reservist employees did not outline disciplinary options to address misconduct or address the appeals process available for Reservists. As a result, we recommended that FEMA document Reservist disciplinary options and appeals policies and procedures that are currently in practice at the agency. In September 2017, FEMA reported that the Office of Response and Recovery was drafting an addendum to the FEMA Reservist program manual. As of August 2020, FEMA was finalizing a FEMA Reservist Performance Management Directive which will provide agency-wide guidance for Reservist management and discipline. FEMA expects the directive to be completed by November 2020. This recommendation will remain open until the directive is complete.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: We found that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) did not regularly conduct trend analysis on misconduct cases, and that the quality of the data restricted the agency's ability to identify and address trends. As a result, we recommended that, once steps were taken to improve the quality of the data, FEMA should conduct routine reporting on employee misconduct trends. As of July 2020, FEMA's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) changed plans on which information system to use for reporting purposes due to cyber security concerns. According to FEMA officials, OPR will be using a DHS enterprise system and the system will be able to generate regular reporting. FEMA anticipates reporting functionality by October 2020. We will continue to monitor FEMA's efforts to address the recommendation.
GAO-17-524, Jul 12, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3406
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), we determined that this recommendation remained open. Treasury believes that its current remediation plan, including its various corrective action plans (CAPs), is comprehensive, appropriate, and effective, with robust and ongoing monitoring processes in place. However, we continue to note that the CAPs in these three areas do not include sufficient steps to effectively address related control deficiencies involving processes used to prepare the CFS. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
GAO-17-569, Jun 20, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Telecommunications and Information Administration: First Responder Network Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, FirstNet had taken some action in response to this recommendation but had not fully implemented it. Once we confirm that FirstNet has taken additional action, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-312, Apr 3, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has taken steps to improve the consistency of oversight of federal spending under section 1115 demonstrations. In November 2018, HHS officials reported that they have developed draft guidance, including a standard reporting tool for states, to better ensure consistent reporting of the elements needed to assess compliance with demonstration spending limits and was in the process of testing the tool with two states. In addition, the agency is developing standard operating procedures for agency staff to require consistent tracking of unspent funds under the spending limit. As of November 2019, HHS has not provided any updates. GAO will continue to monitor HHS's actions and once procedures are in place, GAO will assess whether they address our recommendation.
GAO-17-204, Mar 23, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6912
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2017, we found that USCIS does not track or monitor whether SAVE users have completed training and therefore does not have reasonable assurance that users have mastered SAVE policies and procedures prior to accessing the system. We recommended that USCIS develop and implement a mechanism to oversee agencies' completion of training on additional verification in accordance with SAVE provisions and program policies. The USCIS Verification Division reported that it planned to address providing additional training for SAVE users developed by December 31, 2017. The SAVE Program would then offer training events for agencies on the new material reflecting the agency user requirements for additional verification as well as system enhancements. In September 2017, the Verification Division implemented part one of this recommendation, a monthly webinar training session on user agency responsibilities and additional verification. This training can also be delivered to user agencies upon request. For part two of this recommendation, the SAVE program also developed training features to oversee agencies' completion of training. These training features are a system enhancement that will be incorporated into SAVE's overall modernization effort and was expected to be completed by September 30, 2019. In the interim, SAVE is implementing several other enhancements that will reduce the number of cases sent to additional verification, including the completion of modernized matching logic and initial verification screens and retiring less efficient access methods. In September 2019, SAVE officials told us that SAVE has reduced the number of cases sent to additional verification by retiring inefficient access methods and completing modernization of SAVE matching logic and initial verification screens. However, SAVE officials said they also determined that they must update the SAVE tutorial platform and content to account for these and other changes. Officials said that while SAVE is updated, the program continues to provide training, resources, and other support to user agencies to help ensure they are performing additional verification in accordance with SAVE MOA provisions and program policies. The new estimated completion date is February 28, 2021.
GAO-17-348, Mar 14, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, WMATA is managing three efforts focused on improving WMATA's asset inventory and condition assessment processes. Specifically, WMATA reported that it is developing Data Governance and Standards rules and working with contractors to improve WMATA's asset inventory and condition assessment processes. These efforts should all be complete by the end of 2020. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's efforts to address this recommendation.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, WMATA has implemented a new process to evaluate major projects. More specifically, WMATA's new initiative includes a process for assessing and presenting alternative strategies for selected major projects. WMATA currently has a number of cases moving through this process for the first time, and GAO will assess the outcomes of these cases as well as the extent to which this process is codified in WMATA policies later in 2020.
Agency: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, WMATA is updating its Infrastructure Project Implementation Manual, which would cover projects such as new construction and rehabilitation of facilities and systems. WMATA is planning to issue the update for the Project Implementation Manual by end of September 2020. GAO will continue to monitor WMATA's progress in addressing this recommendation.
GAO-17-316, Mar 3, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6991
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.
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.
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.
GAO-17-247, Feb 17, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter to GAO dated May 26, 2017, the Department of Labor stated that the department currently offers interactive manager/supervisor telework training to all supervisors, the completion of which is documented in the manager and supervisor training records. However, officials said this training was strongly encouraged but not required. In fiscal year 2019, telework training was added as a mandatory course for all managers and supervisors, the completion of which is documented in manager and supervisor training records and reported to departmental leadership. As of August 2020, the Department of Labor was developing and testing a telework tracking application system that will require and document completion of manager/supervisor telework training through the Department's internal learning development system before a supervisor can use the system to approve telework agreements. The Department of Labor anticipates the system will be ready for implementation in FY 2021. We will continue to follow up with the Department of Labor on this and will provide an update when available.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter to GAO dated May 26, 2017, the Department of Labor stated that the current policy requires supervisors to conduct an annual review of telework agreements to ensure the arrangement is current and the needs of the agency are being met. In October 2019, Department of Labor officials stated the department is revising its telework processes to include a defined procedure for managers/supervisors to document and report the annual reviews. As of August 2020, the Department of Labor was developing and testing a telework tracking application system that will require and document annual telework agreement recertification for all telework program participants and their supervisors to ensure a regular review of telework agreements. The Department of Labor anticipates the system will be ready for implementation in FY 2021. When we confirm that Labor has fully completed these actions, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter to GAO dated May 26, 2017, the Department of Labor stated that it will benchmark best practices used by other federal agencies to explore options for utilizing its existing telework agreement tracking system to facilitate more timely access to telework agreement data. As of October 2019, Labor is developing a telework tracking application to improve access to telework data and the quality of telework data reported by its agencies. It is projected this tracking application will be launched as part of a broader internal web-based collaborative platform in FY 2021. When we confirm that Labor has fully completed these actions, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: In a letter dated May 16, 2017, the acting director stated that OPM did not agree with the recommendation. While OPM recognizes the importance of data accuracy to effectively evaluate federal telework programs, OPM does not agree that the Telework Enhancement Act imposes any obligation on OPM to allocate significant resources necessary to validate telework data collected from agencies or that a year-over-year comparison of survey data is needed or advantageous to ensuring a reasonable and rigorous data analysis. We agree that OPM should not independently validate agency data, but OPM should take the steps necessary to identify and explain data outliers and limitations. Because OPM is the agency responsible for reporting telework data, OPM should ensure its annual reports to Congress include a clear discussion of data reliability limitations. Following up on data outliers and large year-to-year changes can help OPM identify data errors that could be corrected by agencies and provide OPM with the opportunity to discuss data limitations with agencies. Including such information clearly in the annual telework reports to Congress can make them more useful to Congress and to others. As of January 2020, OPM has not taken action on this recommendation. If we confirm that OPM does take action in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-159, Feb 16, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2623
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS is adding a bullet that states that the Federal awarding agency must "ensure that audits are completed and reports are received in a timely manner and in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.512(a)." FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. However, to fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS stated that it is expanding upon an existing bullet that states that the Federal awarding agency must "issue a management decision on audit findings within six months after receipt of the audit report....". FNS indicated this section of the manual will be expanded to include the four elements that a management decision must clearly state in writing as prescribed in 2 CFR 200.521(a). FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. However, to fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation. As of February 3, 2020, FNS stated that it has made revisions to the agency audit manual to meet the intent of the recommendation. In a section of the manual devoted to Cognizant and Awarding Agency Responsibilities (2 CFR 200.513), FNS is adding a bullet stating that the cognizant agency is responsible for "developing a risk-based approach to manage high-risk and recurring single audit findings to identify problems so that adequate resources can be dedicated to address the problem." FNS plans on releasing the full agency audit manual to FNS users in final by the end of Fiscal Year 2020. We believe that FNS's corrective actions will partially help FNS to meet the intent of our recommendation with regards to designing policies. When designing policies, we believe FNS also needs to clearly provide guidance on the risk management strategy over high-risk and recurring single audit findings, including the steps to follow for identifying problem areas and setting priorities for addressing them. To fully meet the intent of the recommendation, in addition to revising policies, FNS also needs to implement procedures to ensure staff are following the revised policies. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated that it has developed a disbursement report that will capture disbursements equal to or greater than $750,000 and is currently documenting that process and creating instructions for the program areas. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated it has developed a Management Decision Manual template that the program areas will use and is currently creating instructions for the program areas. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development (RD) concurred with our recommendation. To address the GAO recommendation, in February 2020, RD stated that it has developed a process to rate each single audit finding. According to RD, the ratings will be tracked in an Access Database, where it will generate reports indicating reoccurring and high-risk findings by borrower and by program. RD indicated that it plans to complete these actions by June 30, 2020. We will assess these efforts once completed.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) stated that it did not agree with GAO's emphasis on high risk/recurring single audit findings. Nevertheless, in March 2019, HUD's CPD stated that it is working towards a redesigned model for analyzing risk as a basis for monitoring. In August 2020, HUD informed us that CPD is finalizing the beta test for the risk model. Although the risk model will be further defined and enhanced in fiscal year 2021 for fiscal year 2022, CPD plans to roll out the beta test of the risk model to develop the fiscal year 2021 risk rankings. Single audit will be one factor that is included in calculating the risk scores. CPD will validate and assess the results of the beta test and make adjustments as needed. We will continue to monitor agency's actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) agreed with this recommendation. On May 7, 2018, PIH stated that it had implemented a Risk Based Approach Tool designed to identify and manage high-risk and recurring single audit findings. The Risk Based Approach tool was intended to track and focus on audit findings reported as material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and was designed to determine the resources needed and available to assist in mitigating the audit findings. However, in March 2019, PIH informed us that in late 2018, PIH began to work toward repositioning goals, priorities and identification of key risk indicators. PIH stated that it is now focused on aligning risk indicators to the HUD and PIH priorities. PIH priorities for fiscal year 2019 include addressing Public Housing Authorities insolvency which may be identified through an Independent Public Accountant audit or through other means. PIH stated that it no longer uses the assessment tool that included over 100 risk indicators. PIH indicated that it has a revised risk mitigation framework proposal that will be presented to the Enterprise Risk Counsel in the near future. In fiscal year 2020, we have sent additional follow-up questions to the agency and are currently waiting for a response. We will continue to monitor agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-17-85, Feb 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-9869
including 5 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. The Army stated that the Accountability and Audit Readiness Directorate has completed actions to enhance its current standard operating procedures to include (1) updating its corrective action plan (CAP) database and reporting tool, (2) documenting its reporting procedures, and (3) updating its CAP template to include additional elements recommended by the Implementation Guide for OMB Circular A-123. In addition, the Army stated that its policies and procedures include steps to incorporate external financial management-related audit findings assigned to the Accountability and Audit Readiness Directorate by the Internal Review Directorate and that the existing process the Army uses to prioritize findings and the related CAPs and to monitor the progress and status of CAPs has been documented. We reviewed Army's documentation that was provided in January 2020. Army's documentation did not show that it has a process for ensuring that all financial management related findings and recommendations are identified and tracked. To implement this recommendations Army needs to enhance their policies and procedures related to tracking and monitoring the status of these audit findings.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. In January 2018, the Air Force stated that it continues to develop a process for identifying and tracking financial management-related findings and recommendations from all audit sources by updating its process guidance. In August 2019, we received draft guidance that Air Force is developing as guidance and procedures for a universe of financial management-related findings and recommendations. In January 2020, we also received a list of the Air Force deficiencies being tracked in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) database. After assessing the provided documentation, we found that the draft does not include procedures for identifying GAO, DODOIG, and Air Force Audit Agency (AFAA) findings and the database did not include deficiencies identified by those external auditors. As a result of our review of the documentation provided, we determined that the actions taken were not sufficient to close the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Air Force concurred with this recommendation. In January 2018, the Air Force stated that its Air Force Deficiency Remediation Tracking processes and guides were being refined. In December 2019, Air Force provided a document titled "NFR Prioritization Process." We found that this document included Air Force's priority categories. However, the document does not include information on determining the priority level or applying the priority levels when addressing the deficiencies. We also received a copy of Air Force's guide for the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) process dated July 2019. We found that this guide does not fully incorporate CAP development for deficiencies from all sources. Additionally, the guide does not provide information on the process for (1) determining resources and other requirements for remediating the deficiency, (2) conducting a cost benefit analysis, and (3) developing criteria for validating that the deficiency has been remediated. The guide also includes a template for conducting a root cause analysis. However, the instructions for conducting a root cause analysis are somewhat limited for determining the initial cause or underlying reason for the deficiency. Per the guide, the Air Force uses the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) database to monitor and report on Air Force's deficiencies and remediation CAP status. We obtained a listing of the NFRs and related CAPS in the database as of December 2019. We found that deficiencies from all audit sources were not included in the listing, only the independent public accountant's NFRs. The results of our review of a limited number of CAPs indicate that Air Force staff does not always comply with the Air Force's CAP requirements. As a result of our assessment of the Air Force documentation, we determined that the actions taken were not sufficient to close the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. DOD stated that it solicits input on a bi-monthly basis, on critical capability corrective action plans (CAPs) at a summary level. This information is provided routinely at regularly scheduled FIAR Governance Board meetings. DOD also stated that an updated notice of finding and recommendation (NFR) form template is being developed and will be provided to the military services to use for reporting this information so that it will include the recommended standard data elements outlined in OMB Circular A-123 to provide greater transparency into the nature of remediation plans. DOD also stated that FIAR Guidance will be updated to explicitly state that military services should include the OMB recommended standard data elements in CAPs. To implement this recommendation, DOD needs to provide documentation that shows that the military services are able to provide a summary of key information in the corrective action plans that at a minimum contains data elements recommended by the Implementation Guide for OMB Circular A-123. .
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD, the military services already provide summary-level updates on their critical capability corrective action plans (CAPs) at FIAR Governance Board meetings. It also stated that the template that is used to present CAPs to the FIAR Governance Board meetings at the summary level has been updated to align CAPs to critical capabilities. DOD still needs to address how all of the data elements from the Implementation Guide for OMB Circular A-123 will be summarized or otherwise reported for all CAPs pertaining to critical capabilities across the Department. In addition, DOD stated that because the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) takes responsibility for maintaining, monitoring, and reporting on the status of CAPs for the service providers and other defense organizations and of DOD-wide issues, the Comptroller will also summarize this information. However, DOD has not clarified what information from the military services will be summarized. To implement this recommendation, DOD needs to provide documentation that shows the Comptroller has prepared a consolidated CAP management summary on a bimonthly basis.
GAO-17-145, Jan 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
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.
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.
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.
GAO-17-52, Dec 2, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2018, VA has taken some actions to address this recommendation, but additional actions are needed to fully implement it. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information from VA.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of June 2017, VHA still lacks data and performance measures for the availability under Choice of sex-specific care, such as mammograms, maternity care, or gynecology. In contrast, for another VA care in the community program, PC3 (a program that the Choice third party administrators also administer) VHA collects data and has performance measures to evaluate women veterans' access to mammography and maternity care. To fully implement this recommendation, VHA needs to extend the collection of data to include care delivered through the Choice Program and other community care programs and establish related performance measures. VA is in the process of letting contracts for its new community care program and is expected to have contracts in place for all regions of the country in fiscal year 2019
GAO-17-28, Nov 23, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) concurred with GAO's recommendation. On December 30, 2016, the agency issued guidance on the Community First Choice program to assist states in submitting information to CMS on the health and welfare of beneficiaries. In March 2019, CMS officials stated that the agency is currently developing the process for states to report this information to CMS. Agency officials also stated they are exploring the value of collecting this information for the Participant-Directed Option program given the limited number of states currently operating under this authority. In February 2020, CMS officials stated that the agency continues to develop policy related to this recommendation.
GAO-17-15, Oct 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2623
including 1 priority recommendation
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. .
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.
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.
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.
GAO-17-127, Oct 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2700
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM agreed with the recommendation. In December 2018, OPM told us it will establish a plan to make payroll data available through analytical tools such as FedScope no later than the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM will need to improve the availability of payroll data-either from the existing EHRI system or the new employee digital record-by ensuring the data are prepared and made available for analytics research.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM agreed with the recommendation. In December 2018, OPM reported that it plans to begin follow-up efforts with agencies and shared service providers on payroll data errors and anomalies and to notify data providers of problems. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM will need to follow up with shared services centers and agencies regarding issues identified with the payroll data they submit to EHRI. These steps will help ensure the quality of historical and current payroll data. They will also ensure that system detected errors are resolved and do not compound over time.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: OPM concurred with our recommendation, but has not yet developed a plan for integrating payroll into the larger suite of EHRI databases.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: While OPM concurred with our recommendation, the agency has not evaluated or implemented, for Payroll data, the control activities and edit checks that are currently used to support the reliability of the other EHRI datasets.
GAO-16-787, Sep 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions being taken to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was chosen as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. Since program and case selection objectives are necessary before appropriate risk management systems can be established, in September 2020, IRS officials said they expected to complete actions to implement program and case selection objectives in Fall 2020 but provided no anticipated completion date for actions to identify and analyze potential risks to those objectives and related risk management actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions it will take to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative which would include actions to address this recommendation. In September 2020, IRS officials said they had revised the Internal Revenue Manual to guide group managers on elements to consider in selecting cases. We will update the status of IRS's actions to implement the recommendation after review of any documentation IRS provides.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. According to IRS officials, this pilot effort is ongoing and includes consideration of how the agency will address this recommendation. In September 2020, we met with IRS officials to discuss the status of actions to implement this recommendation but no anticipated completion date was provided.
GAO-16-616, Sep 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2623
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health: Office of Management: Office of Acquisition and Logistics Management: Office of Acquisition Management and Policy: Division of Financial Advisory Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendations. In response, HHS stated that National Institute of Health's Division of Financial Advisory Services (DFAS) will establish a mechanism for tracking key milestones in the indirect cost rate-setting process. NIH-DFAS has initiatives underway that include moving from paper to electronic submissions of indirect cost proposals and developing a replacement to its Commercial Rate Agreement Distribution Services website. DFAS is looking into the feasibility of incorporating key milestones into these two major initiatives. NIH-DFAS is currently working with a contractor to develop a web based system that will establish a tracking system to account for when indirect cost proposal are due from organizations. The original initiative to enable the electronic submission of indirect cost proposals was modified to incorporate this new requirement. NIH-DFAS anticipates the planned date for implementation of this system to be October 1, 2017. As of February 4, 2020, this recommendation is still open because DFAS does not have the "proposal due date" and "extension due date" data fields activated in eFLow. DFAS is looking into adding those enhancements and hope to have these updates implemented by June 30, 2020. On July 8th, 2020, NIH-DFAS notified us that they plan to update us with the status of this recommendation by October 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
GAO-16-758, Sep 1, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2018, HUD noted that it is in the process of finalizing written guidance which will document the agency's expectations regarding the supportive services requirement for Section 202 properties. HUD plans to finalize the guidance and post it on its website by May 2018. In July 2019, HUD noted that it posted guidance related to service coordinators on its website in 2018. The guidance describes the roles and responsibilities of service coordinators as well is reporting policies related to budget-based service coordinators. As of October 2019, HUD noted that it is drafting guidance that includes information on identifying and monitoring stand-alone Section 202 properties. This recommendation will remain open until HUD can demonstrate providing guidance to HUD staff on (1) identifying stand-alone Section 202 properties, and (2) monitoring the supportive services requirement for various types of Section 202 properties, including properties without service coordinators and stand-alone Section 202 properties. In December 2019, we requested further information from HUD and will continue to follow up on the agency's progress toward implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2018, HUD noted that it had implemented a pilot program in 2017 which connected the information systems that some Section 202 properties use to record information on their service coordinator programs to a "grant reporting framework." In February 2018, HUD staff told us that all Section 202 properties with Service Coordinators would be required to use the new grant reporting framework in 2018, and that the new framework included edit checks and other mechanisms designed to improve the reliability of the data reported. In July 2019, HUD noted that they are continuing work on the pilot program and have not analyzed the data yet. They also stated that the pilot includes processes to help ensure the reliability of the data. In October 2019, HUD stated that the pilot ended in FY 2018 and the new grant reporting framework became a national reporting requirement for all Multifamily service coordinator programs (grant-funded and budget-based) in FY 2019. This recommendation will remain open until HUD develops and implements policies and procedures for (1) verifying the accuracy of a sample of performance information, and (2) analyzing the performance information collected. In December 2019, we requested further information from HUD and will continue to follow up on the agency's progress toward implementing this recommendation.
GAO-16-497, Jul 20, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating human capital, workforce, and succession plans.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating policies and procedures for key management functions.
GAO-16-516, Jun 23, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Justice: Bureau of Prisons
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2017, BOP reported that it developed a revised Statement of Work (SOW) for use with its RRC contractors that requires the contractors to track and report to BOP on, among other things, the number of placements into and releases from RRCs and home confinement; revocations from RRCs or home confinement; and RRC and home confinement residents that have secured full, part-time, or temporary employment. In a March 2019 update, BOP stated that it awarded nine contracts under the 2017 SOW and plans to use the data required under the SOW to conduct annual performance appraisals for RRCs after each performance period and intends to use this information in the future to track outcomes of the programs (e.g., employment, housing, individualized goals of offender). In a May 2020 update, BOP stated that that it had just received the first quarter of data from many of its RRC providers and that it continues to work with the providers to refine the data to determine if it can be utilized to develop performance measures. BOP stated that it anticipates being able to provide an update on this phase of their effort in September 2020. While the collection of this data is an important step, to fully implement this recommendation, BOP also needs to define and develop performance measures by which it can use such data to report and assess outcomes program-wide. We will continue to monitor BOP's ongoing efforts.
GAO-16-331, Apr 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7215
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, SSA reported taking a number of steps to address this recommendation. According to SSA, it updated its guidance in 2017 to help ensure that staff consistently process various requests from overpaid individuals. SSA also reported that it is taking additional steps to update instructions on how staff should consider whether expenses reported by individuals are reasonable when approving withholding plans. The agency expects these instructions to be complete by the end of fiscal year 2021. We will close this recommendation once SSA releases additional guidance on assessing the reasonableness of expenses.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and in 2017 estimated that this change would result in an additional $213 million in collections over a 5-year period. The fiscal year 2021 President's budget submission contained a legislative proposal to make this change, and budgets since 2017 have contained similar proposals. As of June 2020, SSA reported that it plans to continue to submit similar legislative proposals. SSA also included the proposal in its regulatory agenda, noting that the change can also be implemented via regulatory change. We will close this recommendation once SSA achieves resolution from Congress on its legislative proposal or from its own regulatory efforts.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: Although SSA initially disagreed with this recommendation, the agency reassessed its response in June 2019 and decided to take additional actions. As of June 2020, SSA is developing a system to track debts (the Debt Management Product) which will have the ability to store, track, and apply interest and penalties to overpayment debts. SSA also reports that it is seeking a regulatory change to clarify procedures to charge interest on debts. While SSA is pursuing these measures to position itself to charge interest on debts, the agency has not yet decided whether it will ultimately do so. We will close this recommendation once SSA makes a decision on how to proceed with charging interest on overpayment debts.
GAO-16-193, Mar 31, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said that implementing the recommendation would require a rule change and that it anticipated publishing a proposed rule by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it anticipated publishing a proposed rule to implement this recommendation by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it anticipated publishing a proposed rule to implement this recommendation by December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said it was working with a contractor to establish more meaningful performance measures and estimated a completion date of December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: Rural Development hired a contractor to help establish risk thresholds for the guarantee program. The contractor's October 2016 report developed and recommended portfolio-level and loan-level risk thresholds (values that trigger consideration of policy adjustments) and also recommended that program officials conduct stress tests to validate that each recommended risk threshold was appropriate for the program's overall risk appetite. As of August 2020, Rural Development said it was continuing to work with the contractor to stress test the risk thresholds and estimated a completion date of December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, Rural Development said that its Chief Risk Officer was working with the agency on establishing procedures for selecting Rural Development credit programs for review based on risk, including a prioritized schedule. Rural Development estimated a completion date of June 30, 2021.
GAO-16-398, Mar 28, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6244
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During GAO's audit of IRS' FY 2019 financial statements, IRS indicated that it had not yet implemented this recommendation. When the agency indicates that it has implemented this recommendation, we will review its actions.
GAO-16-305, Mar 21, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) stated that its Joint Committee on Biorisk Management Policy (JCBMP) would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include department-wide incident reporting requirements and time frames. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing outdated departmental policies. In addition, officials stated that APHIS reviews and updates agency policies every 3-5 years, and that this schedule will be reflected in the updated departmental policy. In October 2019, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) updated its agency policy for its institutional biological safety committee, the entity responsible for ensuring biosafety in its laboratories. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to the departmental, APHIS, and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) policies should be completed by December 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee efforts to collect and analyze laboratory inspection results and incident reports and share these reports and critical analyses with USDA senior leadership on an annual basis. As of July 2020, USDA estimated that revisions to its departmental policy-which would reflect the JCBMP's role in analyzing inspection results and incident reports, identifying potential trends, and sharing lessons learned-should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of inspection results to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2016, USDA stated that the JCBMP would oversee the revisions of existing policies to include requirements for routine reporting of laboratory incidents to senior USDA officials. In July 2020, USDA estimated that these revisions should be completed by October 2020. Officials stated that updates to component agency policies would be completed shortly after issuance of the departmental policy. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In June 2018, DOD stated that it had completed evaluation of existing DOD and service level guidance related to inventory control. DOD also stated that it will continue to analyze the adequacy of existing policy and the need to expand that policy across the DOD Lab Enterprise as the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 is finalized for publication. As of August 2019, DoD said the draft DoDM 6055.18 was still in review and the agency estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. DOD stated that it had updated the Air Force policy (AF Instruction 10-2611-0) as of January 19, 2017; this document updates the biological safety standards used in AF labs and implements the draft update to Department of Defense Manual 6055.18M: Safety Standards for Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. As of July 2019, DOD provided GAO with the updated Army policy AR 190-17; however DOD officials stated that as the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, this recommendation should remain open. DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2019, DOD reported that the Air Force is planning to close its BSAT program by the summer of 2019 and planning was underway to move the Air Force BSAT inventory to another DOD BSAT facility. Additionally, the Army was revising its AR 385-10, which contains biosafety criteria unique to the Army, and estimated the revision would be completed by December 2019. Finally, the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, and DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2019, DOD reported that the Air Force is planning to close its BSAT program by the summer of 2019 and planning was underway to move the Air Force BSAT inventory to another DOD BSAT facility. Additionally, the Army was revising its AR 385-10, which contains biosafety criteria unique to the Army, to include a new mishap classification for biosafety mishaps to effect better reporting and analysis of these mishaps, and estimated the revision would be completed by December 2019. Finally, the draft Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 6055.18 was still undergoing review, and DOD estimated it would complete work to respond to this recommendation in February 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of June 2018, DOD stated that the draft directive DODD 5101.XXE, which is expected to be published in October 2018, formally designates the Executive Agent Responsible Official for Biosafety and Biosecurity and will establish roles and responsibilities including a role for reporting inspection results. Further, DOD stated that all inspection results of a joint inspection team are provided to the Executive Agent Responsible Official, and that the joint inspection team was established in September 2016. As of September 2019, DOD officials had provided updated documentation regarding this recommendation, and GAO was reviewing these updates.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that both CDC and FDA were working to incorporate incident reporting requirements and time frames into formal agency policies and practices but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In summer 2017, CDC and FDA reported that they were continuing to incorporate incident reporting, which includes all laboratory incidents, accidents, injuries, infections, and near-misses, into formal agency policies. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019 we had not received an update from HHS on the status of CDC's implementation of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that CDC plans to revise its policies to include training and inspection requirements for inspections for all high-containment laboratories but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In June 2017, HHS reported that CDC was in the process of revising its formal policies to ensure they included requirements for training and inspections for all of the agency's high-containment laboratories but did not provide an anticipated completion date. In December 2017, HHS reported that CDC's policies were in the initial stages of the clearance process and anticipated they would be finalized in fall 2018. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status of these policies.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that CDC was working with FDA and NIH to establish a process for notifying HHS leadership of inspection results through the department's Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council. HHS did not provide us with an anticipated time frame for implementing this notification practice or when the agencies plan to begin notifying HHS of inspection results. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status NIH's actions.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that NIH's ongoing practice is to report the results of external inspections to senior agency officials and, in May 2016, developed a standard operating procedure that outlines this reporting process. In March 2017, NIH officials provided assurance that its Division of Occupational Safety and Health provides NIH's intramural governing body with information about NIH's safety performance at least annually; officials further assured that this information includes the overall results of annual inspections (or audits, as NIH calls them) of all NIH laboratories and discussion of the top 10 most report safety infractions for the year. GAO considers NIH to have implemented the recommended action. GAO will close the overall recommendation once FDA has taken equivalent, appropriate action. As of August 2019, FDA reported that the agency began piloting a standardized agency-wide laboratory safety inspection checklist to ensure that all laboratories are inspected rigorously and consistently. As part of the pilot, all laboratories were to be inspected during the first 3 quarters of the calendar year. The agency said it planned to aggregate the results of the inspections, and trends and significant findings would be reported to FDA senior leadership in the fourth quarter of 2019. GAO will continue to monitor FDA's actions to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2016, HHS reported that its Biosafety and Biosecurity Council was working to establish incident reporting requirements for CDC, FDA, and NIH but did not provide an anticipated completion date. HHS noted that NIH formally adopted a standard operating procedure that lays out the agency's requirements for reporting incidents to senior officials. In August 2019, FDA reported that it continues to work with the Biosafety and Biosecurity Coordinating Council to establish a process for the routine reporting of these results but had not yet completed its actions. As of September 2019, HHS had not provided an update on the status of NIH or CDC actions.
GAO-16-202, Feb 16, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the Army is undergoing a financial audit of all munitions processes that affect the financial voucher, including the Material-In-Transit between locations, both wholesale and retail. The Army gained a consensus that until a unified record for both wholesale and retail is adopted, the shipping and receipt process will remain the same as that currently in use. An effort is underway to determine the best Army Enterprise Ammunition Supply Chain via an Other Transaction Agreement solution intended to provide a seamless supply chain from wholesale to the end user. The estimated completion date is September 2023.
GAO-16-245, Feb 10, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to BSEE documentation, the Safety and Incident Investigations Division (SIID) is working closely with the Office of Policy and Analysis and the Records, Delegations, and Directives Team to implement the requirements specified in the BSEE Directives System Manual Chapter and to convert a number of Bureau Interim Directives into Bureau Manual Chapters. In May 2018, BSEE provided the results of an internal control review it had conducted to assess compliance with the tiering process outlined in the National Investigations Handbook. In particular, the Internal Control Review recommended that BSEE (1) continue revision of its National Investigations Handbook, (2) evaluate investigation tier designation, and (3) develop additional investigative training. In July 2019, BSEE provided documentation that it had converted four Bureau Interim Directives into Bureau Manual Chapters and that, in response to the Internal Control Review, it had (1) revised its National Investigations Handbook, (2) evaluated investigative tier designation, and (3) implemented additional training. As of August 2020, BSEE leadership and SIID personnel are considering changes to improve the quality and consistency of its investigative tier designation with a planned completion date of December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: According to BSEE documentation, the BSEE Director has ordered an assessment. In the meantime, inspectors are being trained to assist with environmental oversight responsibilities as appropriate. BSEE informed us during the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 that it expected to develop a plan to address documented environmental oversight staffing needs by 2020. Officials said that the timeline was pushed out to allow time to finish policy and complete a work risk assessment. In September 2019, BSEE indicated that it had identified three corrective actions based on its evaluation of risks associated with the organizational structure of the bureau's environmental compliance program that will address this recommendation. As of August 2020, BSEE anticipates implementing these actions by the end of fiscal year 2021.
GAO-16-61, Nov 4, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD issued a Prevention Plan of Action (PPoA) that will serve as a framework for preventing sexual assault. The PPoA contains 29 actions DOD will take to implement the prevention strategy. In March 2020, DOD officials stated that they had chartered a Prevention Collaboration Forum, which consists of subject matter experts, to address destructive behaviors which may share the same risk and protective factors as sexual assault. Additionally, DOD officials stated that research had begun on identifying the department's risk and protective factors. The officials expected the completed risk studies to be published internally in April 2020 and June 2020. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts and update the recommendation's status when more information becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD issued a Prevention Plan of Action (PPoA) that will serve as a framework for a strategic approach to preventing sexual assault. The PPoA contains 29 actions DOD plans to take to implement the prevention strategy, and instructs DOD to continuously evaluate sexual assault prevention activities. In December 2019, DOD officials stated that they were in the process of conducting an assessment of each of the services' efforts to implement the prevention strategy. Additionally, DOD officials stated that they are developing a milestone report to be issued by the end of fiscal year 2020 that will include updates on all of the department's efforts to prevent sexual assault. DOD is also planning to issue a report in fiscal year 2023 that will include a complete evaluation of the department's efforts to prevent sexual assault. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts and update the recommendation's status when more information becomes available.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In April 2019, DOD issued a Prevention Plan of Action (PPoA) that will serve as a framework for a strategic approach to preventing sexual assault. The PPoA contains 29 actions DOD will take to implement the prevention strategy. The PPoA also directs the military services to review and revise their policies to reduce sexual assault and execute prevention activities. According to DOD officials, these efforts are currently underway. We will update the status of this recommendation when more information becomes available.
GAO-16-125, Oct 15, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, CMS has not implemented this recommendation. HHS agreed with this recommendation and stated in February 2020 that CMS was exploring ways to clarify the cost report instructions in an effort to improve the accuracy of the information submitted. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, CMS has not implemented this recommendation. HHS did not agree with this recommendation and stated in June 2016 that CMS continuously works to pay appropriately for ESRD services and must prioritize its activities to improve care for dialysis patients. While we acknowledge the need for CMS to prioritize its activities to improve dialysis care, it is important for CMS to help ensure that Medicare patients with chronic kidney disease understand their condition, how to manage it, and the implications of the various treatment options available, particularly given the central role of patient choice in dialysis care. The limited use of the Kidney Disease Education benefit that we noted in our report suggests that it may be difficult for Medicare patients to receive this education and underscores the need for CMS to examine and potentially revise the benefit. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-15-562, Jul 23, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2623
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Interior's (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agreed with our recommendation. In support of closing this recommendation, officials from BLM re-iterated their policy about sending updates regarding guidance changes, which is included in its directives handbook. They also provided us with an example of its timely communication to BLM employees to announce the issuance of its revised Fund Code Handbook. We reviewed the directives handbook and verified that it contains guidance for communicating policy and procedural changes affecting the mining law program's expenditure-related processes. While the guidance in the directives handbook is a good start towards meeting the intent of our recommendation, we communicated to BLM in fiscal year 2019 that the findings in the report were caused in part by inadequate communication processes and the accessibility of the guidance to staff. To address the recommendation, we would like to see evidence that BLM has established procedures to ensure proper communication of changes or policies to the staff using BLM guidance, which includes having written procedures on how BLM publishes updates or communicates policy information, where guidance should be published in BLM's internal page, and the BLM officials who are in charge of that process. In fiscal year 2020, we have sent additional follow-up questions to the agency and are currently waiting for a response. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-15-521, Jul 14, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Since our 2015 report, DHS and HHS developed two documents to guide interagency procedures related to the processing of UAC. Specifically, in April 2018, HHS and DHS established a memorandum of agreement regarding information sharing for UAC. Subsequently, on July 31, 2018, DHS and HHS issued a Joint Concept of Operations to memorialize interagency policies, procedures, and guidelines related to the processing of UAC. However, in February 2020, we reported that DHS and HHS officials' indicated that, in practice, the agencies have not resolved long-standing differences in opinion about whether and how agencies are to share information, and what type of information is needed to inform decisions about the care and placement of UAC. In commenting on our draft report, DHS stated that its components are working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, to validate remaining information sharing gaps, and to draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS to ensure that HHS receives information needed to make decisions for UAC. In their comments, HHS officials stated that they intend to reach out to counterparts at DHS in June 2020 to discuss potential periodic updates to the Joint Concept of Operations. In August 2020, DHS informed us that the department is working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, validate gaps, and draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS, among other actions. DHS estimates that it will complete these actions by March 31, 2021. To fully address the recommendation, DHS and HHS should ensure that they have implemented procedures aimed at improving the efficiency and accuracy of the interagency UAC referral and placement process.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Since our 2015 report, DHS and HHS developed two documents to guide interagency procedures related to the processing of UAC. Specifically, in April 2018, HHS and DHS established a memorandum of agreement regarding information sharing for UAC. Subsequently, on July 31, 2018, DHS and HHS issued a Joint Concept of Operations to memorialize interagency policies, procedures, and guidelines related to the processing of UAC. However, in February 2020, we reported that DHS and HHS officials' indicated that, in practice, the agencies have not resolved long-standing differences in opinion about whether and how agencies are to share information, and what type of information is needed to inform decisions about the care and placement of UAC. In commenting on our draft report, DHS stated that its components are working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, to validate remaining information sharing gaps, and to draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS to ensure that HHS receives information needed to make decisions for UAC. In their comments, HHS officials stated that they intend to reach out to counterparts at DHS in June 2020 to discuss potential periodic updates to the Joint Concept of Operations. In August 2020, DHS informed us that the department is working with HHS to document current information sharing practices, validate gaps, and draft a joint plan between DHS and HHS, among other actions. DHS estimates that it will complete these actions by March 31, 2021. To fully address the recommendation, DHS and HHS should ensure that they have implemented procedures aimed at improving the efficiency and accuracy of the interagency UAC referral and placement process.
GAO-15-588, Jul 9, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify the policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. According to IHS officials, the timeline for completion of the new regulation is December 31, 2020.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. The Indian Health Service (IHS) informed GAO that in order to clarify and codify policies related to priority for use of the Buy Indian Act, formal rulemaking was required. IHS published the intent to promulgate the regulation in the Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Unified Agendas. Further, the officials stated that once the new Buy Indian regulation is promulgated, IHS plans to identify a plan to collect data on area office implementation of key policy requirements, including monitoring authentication of contractor credentials. According to IHS officials, due to limitations within the Federal Procurement Data System- Next Generation IHS is unable to collect the necessary data until the rule is promulgated.
GAO-15-511, Jun 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-5741
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this action, and as of December 2019, had taken steps to improve oversight of LQA determinations by DOD components; however, it had not issued guidance that requires the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy or DCPAS to monitor reviews of LQA eligibility determinations by DOD components. At the direction of DCPAS, DOD components completed reviews and submitted reports of overseas allowances paid to a sampling of overseas employees for calendar years 2015, 2016, and 2017. According to DCPAS officials, in DOD's 2017 review of overseas allowances, one employee was identified as having erroneously received LQA. This number is lower than the three employees identified during the 2016 review and lower than the 11 employees identified in the 2015 review. Additionally, in September 2019, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy issued a memorandum requesting DOD components to complete a review of overseas allowances and differentials, including LQA, paid to overseas employees during calendar year 2018. In January 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued a memorandum that clarified LQA eligibility requirements as applied and interpreted in recent Office of Personnel Management compensation claim decisions and the Department of State Standardized Regulations. The memorandum also required components to screen relevant records and determine if there are any employees who are no longer eligible to receive LQA based on the compensation claim decisions and Department of State Standardized Regulations. Finally, according to DCPAS officials, in December 2019, DOD was revising DOD's LQA instruction to incorporate the new LQA guidance from the January 2018 memorandum. However, it is unclear whether the revised instruction once issued will require the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary or DCPAS to monitor the reviews conducted by DOD components to identify any potentially inconsistent eligibility determinations and ensure corrective action is taken, as was the intent of GAO's recommendation.
GAO-15-434, May 21, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS better document the process, including the methods used to review recommendations from the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) and the rationale for final relative value decisions. CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that CMS establishes relative values for new, revised, and potentially misvalued physicians' services based on its review of a variety of sources of information, including the RUC. At that time, CMS officials told us the agency was working to improve the transparency of its process by proposing and finalizing changes to the process in the annual rule for the Physician Fee Schedule. Officials estimated that this process would take several years to complete. In order to close this recommendation as implemented, CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation of its process for establishing relative values. As of June 2020, GAO was still waiting on confirmation from CMS that it had completed its enhancement process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services in a way that would allow for greater transparency and documentation. CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation for establishing relative values in order for GAO to close the recommendation. CMS officials agreed the recommendation should remain open as progress continues.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS develop a process for informing the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC), as CMS already does for potentially misvalued services identified by CMS or other stakeholders. CMS did not concur with this recommendation, asserting that the RUC is completely independent of CMS, and as such CMS has no authority to set the RUC's agenda for which services are reviewed. As of June 2020, CMS had not changed its position on the recommendation. We continue to believe that CMS needs to inform the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC, as it does for potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders. We acknowledge that in 2017 CMS changed its process for establishing relative values by including proposed values for almost all services in the annual proposed rulemaking for the Physician Fee Schedule, which means that the changes in values for potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC are open for public comment before they become effective. However, we continue to believe CMS should inform stakeholders of these potentially misvalued services before CMS receives RUC recommendations for them and subsequently publishes the values in the proposed rule. Doing so would give stakeholders the same amount of time they have to provide input on potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS incorporate data and expertise from physicians and other relevant stakeholders into the process, as well as develop a timeline and plan for using the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA). CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that stakeholders have the opportunity each year to nominate potentially misvalued services for review through a public nomination process. In August 2017, CMS officials reported that the final rulemaking for the 2017 Physician Fee Schedule included a data collection effort using PAMA funds and other authorities that will help furnish data to help in valuations for more than half of physician services. However, this effort pertains to global services, which are a specific type of service under the Physician Fee Schedule that include global, professional, and technical components, and does not apply to non-global services, which encompass almost half of physician services. Officials also reported that they had awarded a contract to explore data collection on practice expense and methodologies for using such data when valuing services in the Physician Fee Schedule. However, CMS did not indicate a specific timeline and plan for using the PAMA funds, just that the agency would continue to use these funds to explore more ways to gain improved data. In March 2018, CMS reported that it now incorporates data and expertise from relevant stakeholders-apart from the RUC-into its process for establishing relative values by including any new, revised, or potentially misvalued values in the annual proposed rulemaking, instead of establishing them on an interim final basis in the final rule. This means that the changes in values for services will be open for public comment prior to the implementation of changes to payment. We acknowledge that CMS has made progress towards meeting our recommendation by changing its process to allow for public comments on proposed changes to relative values before they go into effect. CMS has also made progress by beginning to use PAMA funds to assist with valuing global services and exploring avenues for collecting practice expense data. To close this recommendation, we need documentation that CMS has started to incorporate data more broadly into its process for establishing relative values and that it has a documented timeline and plan for how it will use the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014. As of June 2020, we had not received this documentation.
GAO-15-409, Apr 29, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: FCC indicated that a draft document was under review to implement this recommendation and would be approved before the end of FY-19. However, in September 2019, when we asked FCC for an update, we did not receive one. We will continue to communicate with FCC about the status of this recommendation.
GAO-15-322, Apr 10, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen the fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. Among other things, the proposed rule would require states to report supplemental payments made to individual providers; furthermore, it would require states to include the National Provider Identifier (NPI) number-a unique 10-digit identification number assigned to health care providers. GAO will continue to monitor the status of the proposed rule and will review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent it addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would require states to demonstrate to CMS that supplemental payments to individual providers are economical and efficient and also require states to end and then seek CMS approval to renew supplemental payments every three years. GAO will monitor the status of the proposed rule and will review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would require states to demonstrate to CMS that supplemental payments to individual providers are economical and efficient and also require states to end and then seek CMS approval to renew supplemental payments every three years. GAO will monitor the status of the proposed rule and will review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation.
GAO-15-315, Mar 31, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6253
Agency: Library of Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Library of Congress generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in January 2017 the Library established a centralized Library-wide Project Management Office, located within the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO). Additionally, in June 2017 the Library updated its regulations to give the Project Management Office the authority to establish organization-wide policy for developing cost estimates. Further, in August 2017 the Project Management Office finalized guidance for developing cost estimates that generally includes the key practices discussed in our report. However, none of the cost estimates for three key investments fully met the practices associated with a comprehensive estimate. In October 2019, the Library provided evidence of its Monte-Carlo risk assessment process. We are currently assessing whether this process is consistent with the practices found in our Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide. We will continue to evaluate the Library's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Library of Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Library of Congress generally agreed with, and has begun to take steps to implement, this recommendation. Specifically, in January 2017 the Library established a Project Management Office within the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) and tasked the office with communicating and enforcing Library requirements for project management and systems development. Additionally, in June 2017 the Library updated its regulations to give the Project Management Office the authority to establish organization-wide policy for developing and maintaining schedules. Further, in August 2017 the Project Management Offices finalized guidance for developing schedules that generally includes the key practices discussed in our report. However, none of the schedules for three key investments fully met the practices associated with a well-constructed schedule. In October 2019, the Library provided the schedules that it uses to manage select projects. We are currently reviewing this scheduling documentation to determine the extent to which the Library is implementing its scheduling guidance.
GAO-15-243, Mar 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of September 2020, DOD has taken steps to focus OCS training to all planners, including those outside the logistics directorate. In December 2015, the Joint Staff J7 certified the Joint OCS Planning and Execution (JOPEC) course of instruction for Joint training. The Joint Staff, per this training certification, is working with the Joint Deployment Training Center and the Joint Force Staff College to provide student administrative and course catalog support for future JOPEC training. In August 2020, OSD officials stated that they have secured funding for development of a new, online strategic-level OCS course, which they plan to develop, test, and field in 2021. Finally, OSD officials said that the updated OCS instruction will also address training for planners beyond the logistics directorate; officials anticipate the instruction being issued in late 2020. We will continue to monitor these efforts and this recommendation will remain open at this time.
GAO-15-200, Dec 22, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's recommendation. Following a May 2015 Federal Acquisition Regulation update to reflect the requirements of Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Office of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy drafted supplementary information for an update of the agency's Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) that was considered and rejected by Defense Acquisition Regulation Council. In July 2019, the Office of Defense Pricing and Contracting reported that new PGI guidance would be drafted that will require management reviews to consider compliance with Section 802 requirements included in the Federal Acquisition Regulation. As of August 2020, we have been unable to determine the status of this guidance.
GAO-15-11, Oct 20, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-15-79, Oct 17, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-2717
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the other new categories of paid leave, and (2) the proper recording and reporting of these types of paid leave. In July 2017, OPM proposed new rules to regulate paid administrative leave, but has not finalized all these rules. In April 2018, OPM issued final regulations for "weather and safety leave" and announced that it would issue separate final regulations for "administrative leave," "investigative leave," and "notice leave" at a later date. In July 2019, OPM officials told us that they have not finalized the remaining regulations due to legal and practical concerns related to employees serving overseas. For example, the proposed rules could conflict with overseas personnel observing local holidays for security, diplomatic, and practical reasons. OPM also announced that it is reconvening its interagency working group for dismissal and closure procedures to update its "DC Dismissal and Closure Procedures" guidance to reflect the new "weather and safety leave" procedures. In addition, in response to our recommendation, in May 2015, OPM issued a fact sheet on administrative leave, which discusses the appropriate use of an agency's administrative leave authority, including a definition of administrative leave as well as applicable government-wide, individual agency, and emergency policies on the use of administrative leave. However, this fact sheet will need to be revised to reflect the newly issued regulations for "weather and safety leave" in addition to the regulations for the other categories of paid leave when they are in effect. Once all regulations are finalized, the proposed rules, along with updated fact sheet guidance, should help agencies and federal employees appropriately use, record, and report administrative leave. We will be contacting OPM to receive an update on the status of this recommendation once all the regulations are finalized and the fact sheet guidance is revised.
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Comments: To address agency use of paid administrative leave that may exceed reasonable amounts as well as discrepancies in recording and reporting paid administrative leave, in December 2016, Congress passed the "Administrative Leave Act of 2016." The act mandates new categories of paid leave, including "investigative leave," "notice leave," and "weather and safety leave" and sets limitations on the duration of paid administrative leave as well as the new categories of investigative and notice leave. The Act also requires OPM to establish regulations on (1) when to grant administrative leave and the other new categories of paid leave, and (2) the proper recording and reporting of these types of paid leave. In July 2017, OPM proposed new rules to regulate paid administrative leave, but has not finalized all these rules. In April 2018, OPM issued final regulations for "weather and safety leave" and announced that it would issue separate final regulations for "administrative leave," "investigative leave," and "notice leave" at a later date. To accompany the final regulations for "weather and safety leave," OPM issued two new data standards for agencies to report Paid Holiday Time Off and Weather and Safety Leave Hours Used that became effective in May 2018. Also, in November 2018, OPM released an update to its "DC Dismissal and Closure Procedures" guidance to reflect the new "weather and safety leave" procedures. Once all regulations are finalized, the proposed rules, along with updated guidance to payroll providers for reporting paid administrative leave and the new leave categories, should help agencies report comparable and reliable data to EHRI. We will be contacting OPM to receive an update on the status of this recommendation once the regulations are finalized and the guidance is revised.
GAO-14-640, Sep 8, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, DOD requested to close this recommendation per a closure memo signed by Ms. Nancy Spaulding. We are awaiting further documentation supporting the closure of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. DOD agreed with us to review legal or other impediments to consolidation, and stated that the DOD Office of General Counsel will address any unresolved disagreements about legal authority for consolidation of PSABs. DOD further commented that the DOD Office of General Counsel will work closely with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence to address other issues concerning consolidation of PSABs. However, DOD commented that some DOD components disagreed with PSAB consolidation. Specifically, DOD stated that of the eleven components that provided responses to the draft report, eight concurred or had no issues or comments, while the remaining three components noted that the PSABs should remain at the component level and not be consolidated. As of July 2018, DOD stated that the DOD Office of General Counsel is conducting an ongoing review, with all legal opinions contingent upon a USD(I) funded PERSEREC study to determine the feasibility of PSAB consolidation. USD(I) is coordination with OGC in order to provide the results of the study upon completion. DOD estimates this study will be completed in the third or fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 2019. As of November 2019, DOD stated that the PERSEREC study is still ongoing. GAO will continue to monitor the completion of the study.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, DOD stated that Navy Instruction 5510.30C and concomitant manual M-5510.30 have been revised and are being coordinated throughout the Department of the Navy at every level--to include the Action Officer level. DOD stated the estimated completion date is the third quarter of FY 2019. We have no updates on whether this instruction and the manual are complete. This recommendation will remain open pending further updates from DOD.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. DOD stated that some DOD components disagreed with PSAB consolidation. Specifically, DOD stated that of the eleven components that provided responses to the draft report, eight concurred or had no issues or comments, while the remaining three components noted that the PSABs should remain at the component level and not be consolidated. One of these three components also commented that the perceived efficiencies from consolidation described in our report should be validated and that all models for consolidation should be evaluated before a decision is made that would consolidate the PSABs. DOD's comments reflect internal disagreement, which corroborates our finding that there is disagreement within DOD on the legal authority, risks, and benefits of consolidating the department's multiple appeals boards. As we also note in our report, the Secretary of Defense has already directed this consolidation. As of November 2019, DOD stated that the Office of General Counsel's determination on the legal impediments to consolidation is contingent upon the results of the PERSEREC study, which will assess the feasibility of PSAB consolidation. The study results will inform the OGC decision. DOD estimates this study will be completed in the third or fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 2019. However, the study has not been released yet. This recommendation will remain open until DOD takes steps to consolidate the PSABs.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2018, DOD stated that the Army updated its PSAB guidance in 2016 to include the GAO-recommended verbiage regarding new information. Similar language will also be incorporated in Army Regulation 380-67, which is currently under revision. DOD estimates the revision will be completed in the fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 2019. As of November 2019, no further updates were provided by DOD. GAO will monitor the status of this regulation and assess whether the revised regulation meets the intent of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2018, the Commandant of the Coast Guard issued a policy message stating that individuals may have counsel or other representatives present at the service member's own expense. According to a Coast Guard official, this message serves as interim guidance until the personnel security manual can be finalized. Coast Guard officials stated that the manual will be undergoing revision, and is expected to be updated at the end of March 2019 . We are awaiting documentation from the Coast Guard that this manual is complete. This recommendation will remain open until the Coast Guard finalizes the update to its manual in accordance with our recommendation.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open
Comments: ODNI concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI stated that review proceedings considerations have been a focus of the ongoing Trusted Workforce 2.0 discussions with a view toward whether policy changes were necessary. ODNI further stated that one key to further examination of this issue is to gather metrics which can inform any subsequent adjustment to the current Executive Branch revocation and review proceedings area. They stated that metrics collection has begun with a January 2019 data call which includes the capture of metrics on denials, revocations, and national security adjudications resulting in an adverse adjudication of eligibility for access to classified information or eligibility to hold a sensitive position. Metrics collected is expected to be completed in 2020. When we confirm what data fields are included in the metrics collection and whether this meets the intent of our recommendation, we will provide further updates.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, DOD stated that USD(I) has formed a working group to develop a new DOD manual that would respond to this recommendation. DOD further stated that this working group has completed the first half of the manual and will finish the initial review by the fourth quarter of FY 2019. Estimated completion date for the manual is the first quarter of FY 2020. This recommendation remains open pending the department's issuance of this manual.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD stated that this recommendation is tied to recommendation 2 regarding updating information in JPAS and DISS. Officials from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USD(I) is facilitating Data Quality Initiatives to identify where gaps may exist and ensure all pertinent data is recorded and updated in JPAS and its successor system, DISS. Officials stated that there is an annual or quarterly service specific personnel center synchronization effort to match the data in JPAS and the personnel centers. Since publication of our report through December 2017, DMDC has conducted 413 DQIs to evaluate and correct data anomalies in JPAS. Further, on a monthly basis, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSD(I)), the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), DOD components, and industry participate in a meeting which addresses actions to improve the accuracy of information in JPAS. GAO will monitor fielding of the new system and in the process of validating DOD officials' statements that discrepancies have been substantially resolved. As of November 2019, DOD requested to close this recommendation per a closure memo signed by Ms. Nancy Spaulding. We are awaiting further documentation supporting the closure of this recommendation.
Agency: Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Status: Open
Comments: ODNI concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, ODNI stated that there is not currently an ongoing effort to review the security clearance revocation process across all executive branch agencies and workforces. Instead, the Trusted Workforce 2.0 efforts is conducting an end-to-end review of the current security clearance process for the executive branch and ODNI is currently gathering metrics on adverse security actions which can inform any subsequent determination on whether the revocation process requires policy adjustment by the DNI. When we confirm what actions DNI has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-14-288, Mar 31, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the Department of Agriculture has not taken action to implement this recommendation.
GAO-14-194, Feb 10, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, FDA told us that it was using its drug shortage data system, the "Shortage Tracker," to summarize information reported by manufacturers as the reasons for existing shortages. The agency indicated that it was developing a model that would factor in drug shortage data, warning signs identified through social media, and other factors to help identify early indicators that may predict future shortages. In July 2019, the agency indicated it could conduct periodic analyses of the causes of drug shortages. However, FDA had not yet proactively conducted any rigorous analyses of predictors of drug shortages to help recognize trends, clarify causes, and resolve problems before drugs go into short supply. In an August 2020 written response, FDA reported that it was undertaking modeling efforts to explore the feasibility of predicting future drug shortages using machine learning approaches. FDA planned to complete the initial modeling by fall 2020, at which time it would identify next steps. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.
GAO-11-809, Sep 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-3604
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that leadership accountability is essential to the success of the department's efforts to prevent sexual harassment. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and released an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO), to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate, at a minimum, compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing polices, plans, and programs. The updated instruction also directs the Commandant, Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), to tailor training materials to servicemember professional development levels and associated leadership duties and responsibilities. As of February 2020, DOD had not completed development of the compliance standards or training materials. We will monitor DOD actions on this issue.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD has updated its guidance on sexual harassment, including a requirement for sharing the results of command climate assessments with the next higher level of command, but has not yet implemented an oversight mechanism to verify and track commanders' compliance with requirements to conduct such assessments. DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would implement the recommendation through revisions to its guidance. According to DOD, a 2013 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense on sexual assault prevention and response outlined requirements addressing leadership accountability for preventing sexual harassment. The memorandum included a requirement that the results of command climate surveys be provided to the next level up in the chain of command, and it directed service chiefs, through their respective military department secretaries, to develop methods to assess the performance of commanders in establishing command climates of dignity and respect. The Secretary of Defense also issued a memorandum addressing prevention and response of sexual harassment in 2014, and DOD updated its guidance on sexual harassment in 2015. In 2016, DOD stated that further revisions to guidance were forthcoming to provide a framework for oversight of sexual harassment. This framework, among other things, would address standards for holding leaders accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing sexual harassment policies. DOD issued a new DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, in February 2018 but has not implemented an oversight framework as of February 2020. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that as part of its revised guidance it proposed to strengthen and institutionalize the responsibilities and authorities needed for successful implementation of the department's sexual harassment policies. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and issued an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate , at a minimum, (1) long-term goals, objectives, and milestones; (2) results-oriented performance measures to assess effectiveness; and (3) compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing policies, plans, and programs. As of February 2020, DOD has not developed and aggressively implemented an oversight framework, as we recommended. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
GAO-11-587, Jul 20, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9286
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In March, 2017, IRS issued its Portfolio Investment Plan Process Description Manual for selecting and prioritizing new and ongoing operations support activities. The manual includes criteria for prioritizing selections; and provides for comparing assets against one another to create a prioritized portfolio; and ensuring executives' funding decisions are based upon the process for selecting and prioritizing activities. In March 2018, IRS updated the manual and also issued related detailed procedures. In May 2019, IRS stated that its Information Technology/Strategy and Planning group had developed a prioritization process and associated scoring criteria to help facilitate decision making for business systems modernization programs, projects, and capabilities. The agency noted that improvements were being made to the process and full implementation was anticipated for June 2019.In April 2020, IRS informed us that it had moved its target for fully implementing the recommendation to November 2020. We will continue to monitor IRS's efforts to implement the recommendation.
GAO-11-494R, Jun 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9521
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, Facilities Management and Security Services (FMSS) will update the Internal Revenue Manual to reflect the necessary guidance for service center guards and FMSS physical security specialists to know (1) whom the guards are to contact to report lighting outages and (2) how lighting outages are to be documented and tracked until resolved.
GAO-11-219, Feb 28, 2011
Phone: (206)287-4860
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-11-171R, Dec 16, 2010
Phone: (202)512-8246
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2015, DOD had not documented program-specific recommendations from the corrosion study for the other weapon systems identified in its report. However, DOD updated its Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook in 2014 and, according to officials, is working to update DOD Instruction 5000.67, Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure. These actions may improve the corrosion prevention and control planning for the weapon systems identified in DOD's study. DOD partially concurred with this recommendation at the time of our report but as of March 2019, has since decided to take action to implement it. According to Corrosion Office officials, they interacted with two of five weapon-systems programs on corrosion-related matters. One of these weapon-system programs, per Corrosion Office officials, was eventually canceled. In addition to updating the Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook for Military Systems and Equipment in 2014, officials stated that they are planning to further update DOD Instruction 5000.67 (Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure). Also, according to Corrosion Office officials, procedures for evaluating acquisition programs will be included in the new DOD manual on corrosion. The Corrosion Office's goal of completing this instruction update and creating the new manual is by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2015, DOD had not documented Air Force- and Navy-specific recommendations flowing from the corrosion study. However, DOD updated its Corrosion Prevention and Control Planning Guidebook in 2014 and, according to officials, is working to update DOD Instruction 5000.67, Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure. Further, the Air Force and the Navy have both taken actions to address the DOD-wide recommendations from the corrosion study. These actions may improve corrosion prevention and control planning for Air Force and Navy programs. As of March 2019, Corrosion Office officials stated that they are planning to further update DOD Instruction 5000.67 (Prevention and Mitigation of Corrosion on DOD Military Equipment and Infrastructure) or other appropriate guidance related to the process or procedures for monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of Corrosion Prevention Control planning for weapon systems, particularly related to how the military services will accomplish this within their increased weapon system oversight role. In addition, per Corrosion Office officials, this information will be addressed in the new DOD manual on corrosion. The Corrosion Office's goal to complete this instruction update and create the new manual by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.
GAO-10-56, Nov 19, 2009
Phone: (206)287-4860
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.
GAO-09-976, Sep 30, 2009
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically share with appropriate staff business rules information, along with related results of periodic evaluations of the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of time frames for regularly sharing business rules information. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically evaluate the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices and share evaluation results with appropriate staff. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of any evaluation results or a date when IRS expects to complete the first such evaluation. Nor had IRS provided time frames for regularly conducting and sharing business rules evaluation results. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
GAO-09-815, Sep 10, 2009
Phone: (202)512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed to research sole proprietor noncompliance, as GAO recommended in September 2009. It is focusing on those who improperly claim business losses (i.e., not profits). IRS's Office of Research, Analysis and Statistics is using the reporting compliance study of Form 1040 filers to gather the data on such noncompliant business losses. This research covered sampled tax returns filed for tax years 2009, 2010, and 2011 and used audits of the sampled tax returns that are filed for each tax year. In November 2016, IRS research officials provided the initial rough estimates of the percentage of disallowed losses and associated dollar amounts for all 3 tax years but as of December 2019, they had not yet indicated how these estimates helped IRS to understand the nature of the tax noncompliance. The officials cautioned that their ability to develop the estimates depends on the number of observations that can be applied from each tax year. This research, when completed, could help IRS to identify noncompliant sole proprietor issues and take action to reduce losses.
GAO-09-871, Sep 9, 2009
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.
Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open
Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.
GAO-09-455, Aug 21, 2009
Phone: (202) 512-3000
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA's current payment rates do not explicitly consider WYO insurers' actual expenses and profit. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. However, GAO has reported that an annual analysis of the WYO insurers' actual expenses and profit could be regularly performed in relation to FEMA's existing payment methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they would complete an annual analysis of WYO data by the end of fiscal year 2020 and that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA can also take actions, in addition to any actions related to the rule, to develop method(s) for obtaining reasonable assurance that NAIC data is accurate and usable for setting payment rates before implementation of a new compensation methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA can also take actions, in addition to any actions related to the rule, to develop and implement data analysis strategies to annually test the quality of flood insurance data WYO insurers report to NAIC before implementation of a new compensation methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
GAO-09-483, May 12, 2009
Phone: (202)512-5837
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 4, 2019, the revised Prime Broker letter has not been finalized. Staff from the Reg SHO team in SEC's Trading and Markets division stated that they have regularly and continuously asked the industry for comments on the Prime Broker Letter without receiving any real progress. Their most recent request for comments was emailed to industry counsel on May 22, 2019. Industry counsel acknowledged the request but have yet to provide comments.
GAO-09-146, Dec 12, 2008
Phone: (202) 512-5594
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has expanded IRS's math error authority in certain circumstances, but not as broadly as GAO suggested in February 2010. Section 208 of division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 114-113 enacted in December 2015) gave IRS the authority to use math error authority if (1) a taxpayer claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, or the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) during the period in which a taxpayer is not permitted to claim such credit as a consequence of either having made a prior fraudulent or reckless claim; or (2) a taxpayer omitted information required to be reported because the taxpayer made prior improper claims of the Child Tax Credit or the AOTC. While expanding math error authority is consistent with what GAO suggested in February 2010, GAO maintains that a broader authorization of math error authority with appropriate controls would enable IRS to correct obvious noncompliance, would be less intrusive and burdensome to taxpayers than audits, and would potentially help taxpayers who underclaim tax benefits to which they are entitled. If Congress decides to extend broader math error authority to IRS, controls may be needed to ensure that this authority is used properly such as requiring IRS to report on its use of math error authority. The Administration also requested that Congress expand IRS's math error authority as part of the Service's Congressional Budget Justification and Annual Performance Report and Plan for fiscal year 2019. Specifically, the Administration requested authority to correct a taxpayer's return in the following circumstances: 1) the information provided by the taxpayer does not match the information contained in government databases; 2) the taxpayer has exceeded the lifetime limit for claiming a deduction or credit; or 3) the taxpayer has failed to include with his or her return certain documentation that is required by statute. As of April 2019, the Congress had not provided IRS with such authority.
GAO-08-400, Mar 6, 2008
Phone: (202)512-8984
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet acted on this recommendation. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), signed into law in December 2015, is due to be reauthorized in fiscal year 2021.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet acted on this recommendation. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), signed into law in December 2015, did not address the current imbalance between federal surface transportation revenues and spending. The Act is due to be reauthorized in fiscal year 2021.
GAO-07-245, Feb 23, 2007
Phone: (202)512-6570
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet taken action on this recommendation. The Emergency Relief Program is due to be reauthorized in 2020.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet taken action on this recommendation. The Emergency Relief Program is due to be reauthorized in 2020.
GAO-07-119, Dec 12, 2006
Phone: (202)512-9471
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: On May 24, 2017, the Department of Interior (DOI) sent out an email to its staff showing the dissemination of the new format required for completing trip reports by the staff of the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA). The new format requires staff to include travel justification (i.e., purpose/objective, location, and travel period) and trip report (i.e., meetings, site visits, results, and next steps, as applicable.) The intent of the recommendation is for DOI to have a framework that includes (1) status of required single audit reports; (2) the progress of actions to resolve reported internal control weaknesses; and (3) current needs for technical assistance, capacity building, and staff level expertise. Further, the intent of GAO's recommendation is that this information be integrated into a comprehensive monitoring process. We did not see these elements included in DOI's new format. At present, the agency has been unable to provide additional information that supports the development of a framework for conducting sites visits that incorporates procedures about how information will be shared and monitored. In August 2020, the agency informed us that it has taken additional corrective actions some time ago and is in the process of trying to locate the supporting documentation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
GAO-04-45, Oct 30, 2003
Phone: (202)512-8815
including 5 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of the completion of our fiscal year 2019 audit of the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government (CFS), this recommendation remained open. Treasury developed guidance and formed a working group along with State Department and other federal entity representatives in fiscal year 2019. The working group was established with the Chief Financial Officer Council (CFOC) for the purpose of developing a cost-effective solution to improve the accountability and ensure completeness in the reporting of treaties and other international agreements to address GAO's five long-standing open recommendations. We will follow-up on progress made by Treasury and OMB as part of our fiscal year 2020 CFS audit.