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

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

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

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

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, conducts a comprehensive review of the F-35 supply chain to determine what additional actions are needed to close the gap between warfighter requirements for aircraft performance and the capabilities that the F-35 supply chain can deliver, in light of the U.S. services' affordability constraints. Potential actions could include adjustments to the quantities of parts DOD is planning to procure, or developing a mechanism for providing increased availability of parts to operational units, as a means to mitigate fleet-wide shortages. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is addressing the recommendation by completing the supply-chain related actions in its January 2019 Life Cycle Logistics Plan, which involved a comprehensive review of warfighter gaps and the detailed Program of Actions and Milestones required to close them. DOD also cited specific actions to increase the availability of parts, such as increasing funding for parts and allocating more parts to combat-coded units to enable them to meet the 80 percent mission capability goal. DOD's Plan of Action for the supply chain is in continuous development and GAO has not yet been provided with detailed documentation of these planning efforts and associated actions. We will continue to monitor DOD's ongoing planning efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, develops a process to modify the afloat and deployment spares packages, to include reviewing the parts within the packages to ensure that they match deploying aircraft and account for updated parts demand, and aligning any necessary funding needed for the parts updates. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it has developed a process for managing the configurations of the parts within the afloat and deployment spares packages, which has been approved by the F-35 Product Support Manager. According to DOD, it has established a working group to codify the details of the process and is working to correct the part configurations of already-delivered spares packages. These efforts are part of a broader ongoing DOD effort to execute a F-35 Configuration Management Plan for the global spares pool, which includes identifying all of the parts that may require an upgrade. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in these areas.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, completes a detailed plan for the establishment of the global network for moving F-35 parts that outlines clear requirements and milestones to reach full operational capability, and that includes mechanisms to identify and mitigate risks to the F-35 global spares pool. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that its draft program instruction for the establishment of the global network for moving parts is being coordinated with stakeholders. We will review the instruction when it is finalized and continue to monitor DOD's efforts to complete a detailed plan for the global network.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, issues a policy consistent with DOD guidance that clearly establishes how DOD will maintain accountability for F-35 parts within the supply chain, and identify the steps needed to implement the policy retrospectively and prospectively—for example, how DOD will obtain the necessary data from the contractor. This policy should provide clarity on how F-35 parts will be categorized, specify how the program will implement DOD regulations, and define prime contractor roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is developing guidance to address this recommendation. Specifically, it has developed a draft directive that is currently in coordination with stakeholders and it plans to develop a subsequent program instruction. We will review this guidance when it is completed and continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, develops a methodical approach to consistently obtain comprehensive cost information from the prime contractor for F-35 spare parts within the supply chain. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Joint Strike Fighter affordability strategy addresses price verification as a goal and DOD is in the process of implementing a price verification program, which will include verification for the prices of parts. Additionally the F-35 program office has developed a framework for the contractor to provide all data associated with supply chain assets to include cost and pricing. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to obtain comprehensive cost information for all F-35 parts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the Department of Defense Comptroller, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the F-35 Program Executive Officer, completes and formalizes a methodology for the U.S. services to use in recording on their financial statements the funds spent on F-35 parts within the global spares pool. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Department of Defense Comptroller, with collaboration from the Services and the F-35 Program developed the Transfer of Pooled Assets Methodology as a candidate accounting construct under which the F-35 Program would become the single financial reporting entity for F-35 pooled assets, thus removing the need to allocate "shares" of the pool to the Services and participants. Prior to endorsement and implementation of this methodology, the Department of Defense Comptroller is assessing whether the Department of Navy or the U.S. Air Force would provide more streamlined financial accountability of the F-35 spare parts in the global spares pool. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, together with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, the Secretaries of the Air Force and Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, clearly defines the strategy by which DOD will manage the F-35 supply chain in the future and update key strategy documents accordingly, to include any additional actions and investments necessary to support that strategy. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, DOD had not taken steps to address this recommendation. To implement this recommendation, DOD needs to clearly define the strategy by which DOD will manage the F-35 supply chain in the future and update key strategy documents accordingly. This should include determining the roles of both the prime contractor and DOD in managing the supply chain, and the investments in technical data needed to support DOD-led management.

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator or her designee should complete the design and implementation of a comprehensive evaluation of the Small Business Procurement Scorecard aligned with key attributes of effective program evaluations to assess the effectiveness of the revised scorecard in measuring agency performance and promoting small business procurement opportunities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The SBA Administrator or her designee should institute a process to review Small Business Procurement Scorecards for accuracy prior to publication and a mechanism for publicly identifying when issued scorecards have been revised. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: As MIBP moves forward with its plans to improve data collection and analysis, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense, Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy should determine a solution to make better use of existing lower-tier supplier information from program offices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics: Office of Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy: Deputy Assistant Secretary of Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, noting that it plans to takes steps to identify and incorporate available supplier data from across the department into its defense industrial base data system, but noted that they only planned to rely on one data system, DIBNow, instead of continuing to develop its second data system, the Defense Planning Guidance Input and Retrieval System. The Industrial Policy Office, formerly Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy, has taken some steps to improve sharing of industrial base analysis information across the Department, such as establishing a web repository of industrial base assessment information and subject matter expert contacts. However, these sharing tools continue to rely primarily on summary narratives and Industrial Policy has not incorporated program office lower-tier supplier data into this web repository or DIBnow. Industrial Policy has incorporated sub-tier supplier information into DIBnow from commercial industry sources, but these sources do not have the same level of insight into the supply chain as program offices. An Industrial Policy official said there are no plans to incorporate supply chain information from program offices because this information is proprietary and therefore cannot be incorporated into DIBnow, which is built and maintained by a contractor. DOD General Counsel has determined that contractors cannot have access to this proprietary information for the purposes of DIBnow. We continue to believe that program offices have the most complete insight into sub-tier suppliers, which is essential for DOD to achieve its goal of proactive industrial base risk analysis. Industrial Policy should continue to pursue risk reductions solutions, such as non-disclosure agreements and/or data masking, to make better use of existing lower-tier supplier information from program offices.

Recommendation: The F-35 Program Executive Officer should formally share or make available, through a new or existing communications mechanism, F-35 operational lessons learned across the services. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, the Air Force, the Marine Corps and the Navy all have robust systems for capturing and sharing F-35 operational lessons learned. However, although these systems are accessible by members of the other services, there is a general lack of awareness of how to access systems across military services. As of December 2019, DOD officials stated that they were developing a Lessons Learned Database, which they estimate will be completed during the third quarter of 2020. We are encouraged that the department is aware of the importance of sharing operational lessons learned across the services and that a solution is likely on the horizon. However, until the department implements the solution, this recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, should re-examine the metrics that it will use to hold the contractor accountable under the fixed-price, performance-based contracts to ensure that such metrics are objectively measurable, are fully reflective of processes over which the contractor has control, and drive desired behaviors by all stakeholders. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics contract. A DOD official said that this group is also working to identify appropriate metrics to hold the contractor accountable under a potential long-term performance-based contract. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to re-examine metrics to ensure that they are objectively measureable, fully reflective of processes over which the contractor has control, and drive desired behaviors by all stakeholders.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in coordination with the F-35 Program Executive Officer, should, prior to entering into multi-year, fixed-price, performance-based contracts, ensure that DOD has sufficient knowledge of the actual costs of sustainment and technical characteristics of the aircraft after baseline development is complete and the system reaches maturity. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics (PBL) contract. As a product of this assessment, DOD expects that the department will be able to outline what level of knowledge is required of the actual costs of sustainment and technical characteristics of the aircraft in order to enter into a PBL sustainment construct. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.

Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should establish mechanisms for department-wide oversight of defense agencies' compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should develop a standardized process for determining the level of evidence needed to report a part as suspect counterfeit in GIDEP, such as a tiered reporting structure in GIDEP that provides an indication of where the suspect part is in the process of being assessed.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should develop guidance for when access to GIDEP reports should be limited to only government users or made available to industry.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open

Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: To help ensure contracting officers carry out the requirements of Section 802, the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and Administrator of USAID should revise the processes and guidance governing management reviews of procurements to ensure that such reviews assess whether contracting officers are complying with the provisions of Section 802.

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.

Recommendation: To reduce the incentive for facilities to restrict their service provision to avoid reaching the LVPA treatment threshold, the Administrator of CMS should consider revisions such as changing the LVPA to a tiered adjustment.

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

Comments: As of February 2020, CMS had not implemented this recommendation. CMS stated in February 2020 that the agency had extensive discussions with the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission regarding the Commission's suggestions for modifying the LVPA. CMS also stated that the agency was analyzing the design of the LVPA as part of its evaluation of the ESRD Prospective Payment System. This recommendation remains open because CMS has not provided documentation of steps such as those described above that the agency has taken to consider revisions to the LVPA. We will update the status of this recommendation upon receipt of additional information from CMS.