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: "Program costs"
GAO-19-193, Mar 29, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS partially agreed with recommendation. IRS said it would use consistent terms in developing measures that link to its PDC program objectives, but did not agree that program objectives are necessarily framed in terms of program risks. In December 2019, IRS provided new objectives linked with proposed measures to assess collection agencies. In February 2020, IRS said it intends to award new contracts in 2021 that will include performance measures linked to program objectives. To fully address GAO's recommendation, IRS also needs to identify targets for measures linked to program objectives.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS disagreed with the recommendation. In October 2019 IRS said that including TIGTA costs in reporting program costs would be inconsistent with legislative requirements that define program costs as IRS's costs and with IRS cost-accounting practices. However, we maintain that the FAST Act set minimum reporting requirements to which IRS can add more information. Also, the existing cost accounting standards and practices to which IRS refers govern IRS's accounting for and reporting of costs incurred by IRS, not to fuller reporting of the PDC program's costs to the federal government. We will continue to pursue this recommendation and update its status in response to any changes.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with our recommendation and in October 2019 said it plans to report PDC revenue amounts going to the Treasury and to IRS's retained funds by February 2020. As of March 2020, we had not received documentation from IRS to demonstrate it had done so.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS disagreed with the recommendation and said such analysis is unnecessary due to a legal requirement to assign all such cases to collection agencies and because there is very little cost in doing so. Our report noted that IRS has the authority and responsibility for efficient program operations to not assign uncollectible debt cases. In February 2020, IRS said that the assignment and recall of cases add nothing to the cost. We disagree, noting that IRS has not supported this assertion. IRS incurred some portion of its PDC costs from assigning and recalling cases that collected no revenue. Even if these costs are minor, they would be greater than the amount collected. We maintain the importance of this recommendation because IRS has incurred tens of millions of dollars in costs with little or no revenue collected for most of the PDC cases that IRS has closed.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed and noted that it already had the recommended analyses built into the PDC case identification process. IRS also provided documentation to GAO in December 2019 and its comments in February 2020 repeated its view that its process already identified other inactive cases that have not been assigned to PDC. IRS's documentation during the review and provided in December did not show how IRS analyzes its debt inventory and PDC results to identify inactive cases that are not being assigned to PDC but may be worth pursuing.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019, on actions taken to implement the recommendation. IRS actions included a risk register with related information on the analyses and response to the listed risks.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019, on actions taken to implement the recommendation. IRS actions included a risk register with related information on the analyses and response to the listed risks.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019, on actions taken to implement the recommendation. IRS actions included a risk register with related information on the analyses and response to the listed risks.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019 on actions taken to implement the recommendation, such as outreach to FTC on its system to record the complaints.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019 on actions taken to implement the recommendation, such as a system to record feedback received.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and said that by June 2020, it would conduct a fraud risk assessment based on the Fraud Reduction and Data Analytics Act of 2015 and OMB guidance. We will update the status when we complete review of any documentation IRS provides on actions taken to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation. We will update the status after completing review of documentation IRS provided in December 2019 on actions taken to implement the recommendation.
GAO-17-542, Jun 8, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of September 2019, DOD officials stated that the Armed Forces Sports Council approved performance measures for the Armed Forces Sports Program at a council meeting held in April 2018. Officials said the approved performance measures went into effect in January 2019 in conjunction with the Armed Forces Sports Program's 2019 calendar year. Officials said that the baseline year for the performance measures is 2019 which they are currently collecting data for. Officials plan to provide an update on the program once they have collected and reviewed the 2019 baseline year performance measures. Additionally, officials said that OSD is working to update DOD Instruction 1330.04 to require the Armed Forces Sports Council to develop and implement performance measures for the Armed Forces Sports Program and review and track performance metrics annually. The DOD Instruction language has been updated and is currently pending review prior to the start of formal coordination.
GAO-12-366, Mar 26, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
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: DOD compiled lessons learned during the source selection phase of the KC-46 program. As of August 2020, the Department has identified lessons learned during program implementation to evaluate cost, schedule and performance outcomes as we recommended. Program officials provided a copy of the report, which is with SAF/AQ for approval, and will then be distributed across the department.
GAO-09-385, Mar 2, 2009
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In past and ongoing work, GAO has identified areas where NNSA's modernization plans may not align with planned funding requests over the Future Years Nuclear Security Plan (FYNSP) and post-FYNSP periods. Based on the FY 2014 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan (SSMP), (GAO-14-45) NNSA plans to work on five life extension programs (LEP) or major alterations through 2038. The FY 2014 SSMP states that the LEP workload represents a resource and production throughput challenge that requires improvements in LEP planning and execution. GAO's analysis indicates there is limited contingency time built into the LEP schedules, all of which are technically ambitious. Any delays in schedules could lead to an increase in program costs or a reduction in the number built for any of the LEPs, both of which have occurred in prior and ongoing LEPs. While NNSA has acknowledged issues and identified some steps to improve the LEP process, this recommendation will remain open and unimplemented until NNSA demonstrates successful LEP and refurbishment execution. We reconfirmed this finding in GAO-17-341 where we found the following: In some cases, NNSA's FY 2017 nuclear security budget materials do not align with the agency's modernization plans, both within the 5-year FYNSP for fiscal years 2017 through 2021 and beyond, raising concerns about the affordability of NNSA's planned portfolio of modernization programs. As of June 2020, this situation has not been fully addressed as evidenced by cost increases and likely delays in the B61-12 and W88 ALTV programs; an aggressive schedule in the W80-4 program, and a large scope in the W87-1 warhead replacement. In addition, new programs contained in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review and the announcement of a new development effort, the W93, may further stress NNSA's program.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: A number of Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plans (SSMP) state that the life extension program (LEP) workload represents a resource and production throughput challenge that requires improvements in LEP planning and execution. The officials elaborated that the main area that will be strained is pit production. NNSA's plutonium strategy needs to be resourced fully and implemented successfully by 2030 to support the W87 warhead replacement. Additionally, the officials said that the UPF project and an arrange of associated programmatic efforts need to be operational by 2025 or there will be challenges in completing all of the planned LEPs. In addition, NNSA needs to re-establish depleted uranium operations, construct a new lithium facility and establish a domestic uranium enrichment function for tritium production by the late 2020s to meet stockpile needs. As such, this recommendation remains open and, given the aggressive warhead and bomb modernization efforts proceeding in parallel with infrastructure modernization efforts, will likely remain open for some time.
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA has generally improved its management of construction projects, to include requirements setting, Analysis of Alternatives, and independent cost estimates, among other items. However, it is too soon to tell if these positive developments will help--or hinder--LEPs that are underway or are being conducted. Key uranium activities, to include construction and operating funds will not be complete until 2025; key tritium and lithium programs and facilities will not complete until the 2030s; key plutonium activities are underway as well, but will not be complete until the late 2020s. As of June 2020, there are no significant changes related to this recommendation, and it will continue to remain open.
Phone: (202)512-5837
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In April 2018, FEMA officials told us they had begun to redesign NFIP's risk rating system to help ensure policy rates better reflect the risk of flooding. The redesign, known as Risk Rating 2.0, includes efforts to use catastrophe models, stochastic approaches, and updated map information to better reflect the variation in flood risk. These reforms are also intended to improve how FEMA's rating process accounts for general and specific factors that affect flood probabilities and damage. While FEMA initially announced that new rates for all single-family homes would go into effect nationwide on October 1, 2020, it announced in November 2019 that it would defer implementation to October 1, 2021. FEMA said this would allow it to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the proposed rating structure so as to protect policyholders and minimize any unintentional negative effects of the transition, and that the new implementation date would cover all NFIP policies.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, FEMA officials said they had finished identifying properties with grandfathered premium rates and that they planned to analyze their economic implications as part of their efforts to update their premium rate setting approach, known as Risk Rating 2.0. FEMA plans to implement this redesign on October 1, 2021.