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: "Public health"
GAO-20-701, Sep 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
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 Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
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 Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
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
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
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
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.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
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 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 Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
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: 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.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-534, Jun 12, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-337, May 21, 2020
Phone: (617) 788-0580
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation. ETA anticipates providing information and technical assistance to help workforce system grantees understand how they can address the impacts of SUD on the workforce. The agency also plans to issue guidance by the end of 2020 to share promising practices and describe how WIOA funds can be used to support job seekers in recovery and employers.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation, noting that ETA has created resources that are available to all states based on its experience administering some of the targeted grants. ETA officials cited the recently published literature review and companion resource guide, and said they also plan to share the evaluation of the Phase 1 grants widely when it is available, including any resources or tools developed by states that were awarded Phase 1 grants. In addition, ETA plans to host at least one webinar to share additional promising practices from the targeted grants that could be useful to local workforce boards around the country.
GAO-20-372, May 13, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-6888
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation and stated that it is developing a process whereby it will coordinate its efforts in infectious disease modeling across its components, including efforts to monitor, evaluate and report on its coordination. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-307, Feb 5, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, USIBWC stated that two teams have been established with members, one in the Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora region and one in the San Diego and Tijuana region. IBWC continues to take actions to formalize the binational rapid response teams. We will review the final documents for each team when they are completed and available.
Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2020, the U.S. Commissioner of the IBWC stated that it had conducted long-term capital planning for the facilities for which it is responsible. They noted the 5-year plan that USIBWC had developed for the South Bay plant and the 10-year plan that it had developed for the Nogales plant. We noted these plans in our original report and stated that they needed to be broadened to identify needs in the Santa Cruz River Basin and Tijuana River Valley watersheds. The agency only partially concurred with our recommendation in the report and noted that to the extent our report envisions USIBWC undertaking long-term capital planning for (1) nonfederal infrastructure; (2) infrastructure that does not yet exist; and/or (3) infrastructure that the USIBWC is not yet authorized to construct or maintain, it does not concur. The agency is a key player in managing water quality on the border and has the infrastructure and organization that will be part of the solution. Without the information that USIBWC would generate by comprehensively assessing its long-term needs, such as through long-term capital planning efforts, Congress cannot authorize specific work that needs to be done. We recommended that the agency conduct long-term planning, including for infrastructure that does not exist and for infrastructure that is not yet authorized specifically to address this problem. We continue to believe that USIBWC should recognize its role along the border and start planning for it, including by undertaking long-term capital planning for existing and potential future infrastructure and identifying alternatives to address the long-standing water quality problems.
GAO-20-167, Oct 16, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Transportation: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of February 2020, the Department of Transportation (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is collaborating with an organization of state government oil and gas oversight officials to assess the factors affecting their participation in its underground natural gas storage inspections, according to DOT. PHMSA plans to use this information by December 2020 to assess whether additional measures can be undertaken to increase state participation for its use starting in Fiscal Year 2022.
GAO-19-592, Sep 20, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
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 Health and Human Services: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-18-459, May 31, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open
Comments: According to APHIS officials, the agency developed a timeline and a work plan for an Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM) to define "bred for use in research" as it applies to birds (as well as to rats and mice) under the Animal Welfare Act and submitted it to USDA officials on July 18, 2019. However, as of October 2019, USDA had not established a date to publish the ANPRM and had instead placed it on the department's long-term regulatory agenda. We will continue to monitor USDA's efforts and provide updated information when it becomes available.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open
Comments: USDA disagreed with this recommendation for several reasons. For example, USDA stated that the absence of an exclusion to the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act or its regulations for federal research located outside of the United States does not create a requirement to collect information about such facilities' use of animals. In October 2019, APHIS officials said the agency continues to disagree with the recommendation. However, we have no reason to believe that such facilities should be excluded under the Act, and we continue to believe that the Administrator of APHIS should instruct federal agencies to report their use of animals in activities covered by the Animal Welfare Act in federal facilities located outside of the United States. We will continue to monitor any actions taken by APHIS to address this recommendation and provide updated information when it becomes available.
Agency: Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments on our draft report, USDA stated that APHIS agreed to issue a guidance document by December 31, 2018. According to APHIS officials, the agency prepared a draft guidance document entitled "Research Involving Free-Living Wild Species" for departmental review in April 2019. As of October 2019, APHIS was in the process of reviewing comments from the department. We will continue to monitor APHIS and USDA's actions to implement the recommendation.
GAO-18-205, Mar 29, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 3 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials noted a number of federal initiatives underway to evaluate the timeliness, accuracy, and accessibility of overdose data. For example, ONDCP discussed its participation in a new Interagency Working Group led by the National Security Council to consider the implementation of overdose tracking and analytic capability, such as the expansion of ODMAP, as well as evaluating the appropriate federal role to engage in this initiative. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that it had suspended its ODMAP working group in the summer of 2018, after determining that this effort would be more effective for the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to work together through the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program Initiative. Nevertheless, as of April 2019, ONDCP officials reported that they continue to provide grant funding and training and technical assistance towards the expansion and use of ODMAP by state and local jurisdictions. Further, ONDCP reported supporting other federal data initiatives, such as providing funding to develop software for the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Data that could better read narrative fields in death certificates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of the data. While ONDCP's efforts are directed towards supporting and improving existing data sources, the recommendation asks ONDCP to lead a review which it has not done. Further, ONDCP's initiatives to date have not addressed issues raised in our report related to balancing law enforcement's access to restricted health data while protecting patient privacy. We will continue to monitor ONDCP's efforts towards implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
Status: Open
Comments: In the 60-day letter, dated June 28, 2018, ONDCP officials stated that they had engaged with leaders from HIDTA participating in the Heroin Response Strategy to develop performance measures. According to ONDCP, as of early May 2018, eleven performance measures had been established--nine mandatory measures and two optional measures--and four of these measures constitute outcome-oriented measures. The June letter also noted that the HIDTA Performance Management Process database was being updated to reflect the new measures and ONDCP expected the system to be fully operational by the end of September 2018. In March 2019, ONDCP reported that, throughout the summer of 2018, it had revisited the performance measures it had developed and settled on ten revised performance measures (eight mandatory measures and two optional measures) for the newly branded Opioid Response Strategy (formerly known as the Heroin Response Strategy). According to ONDCP, these measures were implemented in HIDTA's Performance Management Process as of February 1, 2019. We will continue to coordinate with ONDCP to obtain documentation of these new measures. Once we obtain them, we will review and work toward closing the recommendation, as appropriate.
Agency: Department of Justice: Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, officials from the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) noted the output metrics and statistics that OCDETF is tracking as part of its National Heroin Initiative. For example, the letter states that OCDETF will track statistics on opioid overdose deaths, however it is unclear how this tracking effort is being incorporated into the National Heroin Initiative. While our report noted that statistics on overdose deaths have been used as outcome-oriented measures by agencies like the Office of National Drug Control Policy to assess its efforts, it is unclear how OCDETF is using these statistics to assess its performance and inform its efforts under the National Heroin Initiative. In October 2018, OCDETFs National Heroin Initiative Coordinator told us that the OCDETF Regional Directors were in the process of establishing and tracking region-specific metrics, such as local data on drug overdoses. In January 2020, we reached out to OCEDTF officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. In August 2020, OCDETF officials told us that the National Heroin Initiative had evolved and they are no longer positioned to collect and report on drug overdoses as a performance measure for the initiative. However, officials stated that the initiative is measuring the number of OCDETF cases that are produced that result in the disruption or dismantlement of criminal networks involved in heroin and opioid trafficking. We asked OCDETF to provide documentation of the current state of the initiative and its related goals and performance measures. Once received, we will review and follow-up with OCDETF, if needed, to work towards the closure of the recommendation as implemented.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60 Day-letter, dated June 26, 2018, DOJ officials reported a number of output measures, such as conviction rates, that they will use to assess the effectiveness of the department's efforts to respond to the opioid epidemic. However, it is unclear how, if all, these measures have been incorporated into the department-wide strategy or if additional outcome-oriented metrics are being developed. In October 2018, DOJ officials reported that while they have not updated the strategy, then-Attorney General Sessions had issued a memo to the U.S. Attorneys that communicated some goals for their efforts, such as reductions in overdose deaths, and called for the U.S. Attorneys Office's Regional Opioid Coordinators to develop metrics specific to their regions. In October 2019, DOJ officials reported that the department is currently working on finalizing its Annual Priority Goals and related performance measures with respect to opioids, however they could not provide additional details nor a timeline for when these efforts are to be completed. We reached out in January 2020 to receive additional details and the Department did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to coordinate with DOJ to learn more about these efforts and when officials expect them to be implemented.
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In its 60-Day Letter, dated June 26, 2018, DEA officials noted the steps they had taken to develop performance metrics for its enforcement and diversion control activities under the 360 Strategy and reported that DEA had implemented outcome-oriented performance metrics for the 360 Strategy's community engagement activities for fiscal year 2019. Further, DEA officials noted applying DEA's Threat Enforcement Planning Process (TEPP) specifically to the 360 Strategy to develop outcome-oriented metrics. Further, according to DEA officials, the TEPP includes an impact report that assesses the outcomes of the activities undertaken under 360. In October 2018, DEA told us that TEPP was still in development and they did not give a date for projected completion. In January 2020, we reached out to DEA officials for an update, and they did not have any further information to provide. We will continue to follow up with DEA officials on their progress.
GAO-18-211, Feb 15, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-9342
including 7 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In written comments, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation in our report, but stated that it would attempt to develop a measurement mechanism as part of its annual data calls to the Food and Agriculture Sector. Specifically, officials stated that the diversity of the sector makes it difficult to develop a method for determining the level and type of framework adoption across the sector that would apply to all members. USDA officials added, however, that the sector coordinating council frequently invites the Department of Homeland Security to semi-annual meetings to present on both the threat to cybersecurity and resources available to support the needs of the sector. However, as of January 2020, USDA officials had yet to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption. Implementing our recommendations to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by critical infrastructure sectors is essential to the success of protection efforts.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Energy (DOE) stated that it worked with stakeholders to better align the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (C2M2) with the updated NIST Cybersecurity Framework but did not provide specific information regarding the adoption or use of the framework. To fully address the recommendation, DOE should have a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by sector entities if DOE, along with other entities, want to ensure that its facilitation efforts are successful and determine whether organizations are realizing positive results by adopting the framework. We will continue to monitor DOE actions in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In written comments, EPA did not explicitly state whether it agreed or disagreed with our recommendation, but said that several factors constrain the agency from implementing the recommendation. EPA also said it agrees that a comprehensive assessment of framework adoption within the water sector would assist with evaluating and tailoring efforts to promote its use. Further, the agency stated that it will continue to work with the Water Sector Coordinating Council and sector partners to promote and facilitate adoption of the cybersecurity framework. The agency also suggested options related to developing cross-sector metrics and survey methods and stated that it will collect available data that may be characterized as cybersecurity framework "awareness," such as downloads of guidance materials and participation in classroom trainings and webinars. However, as of February 2020, EPA had yet to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption. Officials identified steps the department is taking to facilitate framework use. Specifically, EPA officials told us that the agency will coordinate with its Sector Coordinating Council to identify appropriate means to collect and report information, including a survey, to determine the level and type of framework adoption. They explained that, in the past, the water sector expressed concerns with sharing sensitive cybersecurity information and in developing metrics to evaluate cybersecurity practices. . However, EPA officials stated that they have conducted training, webcasts, and outreach related to cybersecurity, including using the framework and tailoring its efforts to sector needs. According to EPA officials, the agency's goal in doing so was to ensure that sector organizations understood the importance of the framework. While the agency has some ongoing initiatives, implementing our recommendation to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by its critical infrastructure sector is essential to the success of protection efforts.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In written comments, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with the recommendation in our report and stated that it would work with appropriate entities to assist in sector adoption. HHS officials, in collaboration with NIST and a joint Cybersecurity Working Group, developed 10 best practices in May 2017 (Health Industry Cybersecurity Practices) for the Healthcare and Public Health Services sector based on the framework. These practices allowed stakeholders to identify how to use the framework with existing sector resources by raising awareness and providing vetted cybersecurity practices to enable the organizations to mitigate cybersecurity threats to the sector. In addition, officials from HHS's Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) stated that the working group discussed the challenges associated with measuring the use and impact of the NIST framework, and approved the establishment of a task group to further investigate the issue. ASPR officials added that some of the ideas discussed included the use of surveys and identification of a set of voluntary reporting indicators. In its fiscal year 2021 budget justification, HHS noted that it participated in a Health Care SCC Cybersecurity Working Group survey that was sent to group members in June 2019. However, while the survey included a question on the extent a working group member used the framework, SCC officials stated that the survey results were not statistically meaningful. While the department has ongoing initiatives, it had yet to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption. Implementing our recommendations to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by critical infrastructure sectors is essential to the success of protection efforts.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In written comments, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with the recommendation in our report and stated that its National Protection and Programs Directorate, as the sector-specific agency for 9 of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors, will continue to work closely with its private sector partners to ensure framework adoption is a priority. Additionally, the department stated that the directorate will work closely with its private sector partners to better understand the extent of framework adoption and barriers to adoption by entities across their respective sectors. As of January 2020, the department had begun taking steps to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption in the respective sectors. Specifically, in October 2019, DHS, in coordination with its Information Technology (IT) sector partner, administered a survey to all small and midsized IT sector organizations to gather information on, among other things, framework use and plans to report on the results in 2020. DHS officials stated that any small or mid-sized business across all critical infrastructure sectors could complete the survey and that the department had promoted the survey to all sectors.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of January 2020, the department had begun taking steps to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption in the respective sectors. Specifically, officials in the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response, in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), told us that they planned to develop and distribute a survey to the Transportation Systems sector to determine the level and type of framework adoption. DOT officials stated that the draft survey was undergoing DHS legal review and that the completion of the review and subsequent Office of Management and Budget review would determine when the survey is approved for distribution.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of the Treasury neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation in our report. The department stated that it will assess using the identified initiatives and their viability for collecting and reporting sector-wide improvements from use of the framework with input from the sector coordinating council (SCC) and financial regulators. However, as of January 2020, the department had yet to develop methods to determine the level and type of framework adoption. Treasury officials stated that the department, in coordination with the Financial and Banking Information Infrastructure Committee, and in consultation with NIST, developed the Cybersecurity Lexicon in March 2018. The lexicon addressed, among other things, common terminology for cyber terms used in the framework. Additionally, the Financial Services sector, in consultation with NIST, created the Financial Service Sector Cybersecurity Profile (profile) in October 2018, which mapped the framework core to existing regulations and guidance, such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission System Safeguards Testing Requirements. Officials stated that these efforts will facilitate the use of the framework. However, while the department has ongoing initiatives, implementing our recommendations to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the framework's use by critical infrastructure sectors is essential to the success of protection efforts.
GAO-17-377, Sep 6, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6304
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: Officials have previously acknowledged that a public health situational awareness network capability is important for identifying, processing, and comprehending data in real-time and stated that such a capability requires coordination and participation from numerous federal entities, including numerous HHS's operating divisions. However, as of January 2020, GAO has not received any information demonstrating progress made to implement our recommendation. Further, HHS has not provided us with a plan of action describing how they would implement the recommendation. Until steps are taken to implement our recommendation, HHS may not make the progress needed to establish an electronic public health situational awareness network capability mandated by PAHPRA in 2013 and the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: Officials have previously acknowledged that a public health situational awareness network capability is important for identifying, processing, and comprehending data in real-time and stated that such a capability requires coordination and participation from numerous federal entities, including numerous HHS's operating divisions. However, as of February 2020 agency officials have not indicated whether or not they concur with the recommendation, nor have they taken any action or provided a plan of action describing how they would implement the recommendation. Until steps are taken to implement our recommendation, HHS may not make progress toward establishing an electronic public health situational awareness network capability mandated by PAHPRA in 2013 and in the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019 .
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In HHS' Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund's fiscal year 2021 budget justification-which includes the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response-the agency stated it "concurred" with this recommendation. However, as of February 2020, GAO has not received any information demonstrating progress made to implement our recommendation. Until then, HHS may continue to lack the necessary progress needed in order to establish an electronic public health situational awareness network capability mandated by PAHPRA. To address this recommendation, HHS needs to direct the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response to conduct all IT management and oversight processes related to the establishment of the network in accordance with Enterprise Performance Life Cycle Framework guidance.
GAO-17-445, May 23, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6412
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, officials from the Department of Health and Human Services told us that the Food and Drug Administration plans to recommend to sponsors of Zika virus diagnostic tests that they provide a description of the comparator assay. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-187, Jan 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS provided us with information on its efforts to share information about the temporary reassignment authority throughout the department. However, it is not clear that HHS has routed the temporary reassignment standard operation procedures, which provides instructions on how to request use of the authority and documentation and reporting requirements, with the HHS agencies that are likely to be primarily affected.
GAO-16-127, Dec 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2834
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Transportation (DOT) has not developed a national aviation-preparedness plan to respond to communicable disease threats from abroad. In June 2020, we urged Congress to take legislative action to require the Secretary of Transportation to work with relevant agencies and stakeholders to develop a national aviation-preparedness plan to limit the spread of communicable disease threats, and minimize travel and trade impacts (see GAO-20-625). GAO's periodic updates on the CARES Act of 2020 provide information about actions taken by Congress to address this matter. DOT partially concurs with our recommendation and agrees that an aviation preparedness plan is needed, but continues to suggest that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have responsibility for communicable disease response and preparedness planning, respectively, and that these departments should lead any efforts to address planning for communicable disease outbreaks, including for transportation. In the absence of a national aviation-preparedness plan, DOT officials point to ongoing efforts to engage with interagency partners at DHS and HHS, as well as industry stakeholders, to better collaborate on communicable disease response and preparedness as they relate to civil aviation. For example, in July 2020, DOT, HHS, and DHS issued guidance to airports and airlines for implementing measures to mitigate public health risks associated with COVID-19. While this guidance is a positive step, DOT has not yet taken action to develop an aviation preparedness plan for future communicable disease threats that incorporate such things as protocols for responding to the threat and coordination among stakeholders.
GAO-15-487, May 22, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2016, DOD officials told us that a new DOEHRS version was released that contained several system enhancements and defect corrections to improve overall data quality in the system. However, as of July 2020, DOD had not provided specific information on these system enhancements, which would allow us to determine whether our recommendation has been fully addressed.
GAO-15-180, Dec 18, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress had not acted on this matter. OMB informed GAO in January 2020 that they had no plans to develop a government-wide performance plan for food safety. We continue to believe that such a plan is necessary for effective federal oversight of food safety.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress had not acted on this matter.
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-14-103, Jan 9, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, Congress has not taken action to address this matter; we will continue to monitor actions and provide updated information when it becomes available.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020, Congress has not taken action to address this matter; we will continue to monitor actions and provide updated information when it becomes available.
GAO-13-278, Mar 22, 2013
Phone: (202)512-3407
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: Since we examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR had developed few targets for the HPP program measures or their corresponding indicators that were contained in the HPP performance measurement guidance documents issued for Budget Periods (BP) 2-5, ending June 30, 2017. Additionally, the new HPP performance measure implementation guidance for the 5-year project cycle from 2017-2022 introduces 28 performance measures, with few having targets; the guidance notes that corresponding goals or targets may be set at a later date after data from the first budget period of this new project cycle has been reviewed. Regarding PHEP, CDC had developed performance targets for about half of the performance measures as of the PHEP BP5 performance measurement guidance (BP5 ended June 30, 2017). These performance measures generally remain the same, with existing targets, for BP1 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018) of the new 5-year budget cycle. GAO recognizes that it may not be appropriate to develop performance targets for every performance measure depending on the desired process or outcome; however, both agencies still have work to do in this area. In November 2017, both ASPR and CDC officials noted that they could not commit to setting consistent targets with incremental milestones over a budget cycle and therefore could not implement the recommendation. As of August 2018, there was no change from the agencies' position that they do not have plans to fully implement the recommendation at this time.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: Since we first examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR and CDC had made efforts to maintain consistency in their performance measures, particularly in the last 3 years of the prior project cycle which ended June 30, 2017. However, because part of the recommendation includes consistency of performance measures into future project cycles, we also examined whether both cooperative agreements continued to use basically the same performance measures into the current 5-year cycle, which began July 1, 2017. ASPR's HPP has made a significant change in its performance measures, introducing a new set of 28 performance measures for this new 5-year cycle. CDC's PHEP performance measures generally remained consistent in the last two budget periods of the prior 5-year cycle, and remained generally the same for the first year of the new 5-year cycle (some measures were "retired," though key components from a measure may continue to be used by CDC in other types of reviews). Additionally, in November 2017, both CDC and ASPR officials noted that they may need to continue to adjust the performance measures during the new 5-year cycle. As of August 2018, as a result of the change to HPP's measures and the agency statements in November 2017, GAO anticipates keeping this recommendation open at least for the next few budget periods, in order to determine whether the agencies maintain consistency with the performance measures during the new project cycle.
GAO-13-150, Dec 19, 2012
Phone: (202)512-7022
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 15, 2020, Section 29 of CPSA had not been amended since 2008. In 2013, a bill was introduced (S.1887) but not passed. That bill would have allowed "the Commission, when sharing information under the federal-state cooperation program with a foreign government agency for official law enforcement or consumer protection purposes, to authorize a foreign government agency to make that information available to another agency of the same foreign government (including a political subdivision of that foreign government that is located within the same territory or administrative area as the agency disclosing the information) if an appropriate official of the foreign government agency disclosing the information certifies (by prior agreement, memorandum of understanding with the CPSC, or other written certification) that it will establish and apply specified confidentiality restrictions under the Consumer Product Safety Act."
GAO-12-475, Apr 18, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3149
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not passed legislation to eliminate tax differentials between roll-your-own and pipe tobacco or between small and large cigars. In the 116th Congress, five bills have been introduced to create tax equity between roll-your-own and pipe tobacco, as GAO suggested in its April 2012 report. However, these bills have not been enacted. In addition, the 116th Congress has not passed legislation to address tax differentials between small and large cigars. Modifying tax rates to eliminate the tax differentials between similar tobacco products could address potential future revenue losses stemming from the substitution of higher-taxed products with lower-taxed products.
GAO-12-42, Dec 9, 2011
Phone: 202-512-9338
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of March 2020, we have not seen a formal written memo from the IRIS program laying out this information - in detail - publicly, or how timelines for assessments are influenced by various criteria. While IRIS program staff have discussed this issue, no written guidance has been created. Such communication from the IRIS Program, as well as more frequent updates of the timelines for chemicals currently in assessment and projected starting dates for every chemical listed as "under assessment" is needed.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program has established the priority chemicals it is working on, and has published some timelines via the IRIS Program Outlook document. However, this information has not been published as an agenda in the Federal Register.
GAO-08-440, Mar 7, 2008
Phone: (202)512-6225
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of February 2020, EPA officials indicated that the IRIS Program had almost completed internal review of a "Handbook for Developing IRIS Assessments," intended to guide staff through the sequential stages of the IRIS assessment process and ensure consistency across assessments. The Handbook, when finalized and used by staff, codifies the agency's effort to reevaluate their assessment process, but doesn't address the resources that should be dedicated to the IRIS Program. A workforce plan that includes both staff and budget resources consistent with user needs is necessary. As we reported in March 2019, the program has made strides utilizing project management software and project management techniques that enable the IRIS Program to better plan assessment schedules and utilize staff. However, we also reported in March 2019 that the President's budget requests since fiscal year 2018 have repeatedly cut the budget by as much as 40 percent for the Health and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) area, of which IRIS is a part. While these cuts were not enacted by Congress, the President's fiscal year 2021 budget request again cuts the HERA program by 34 percent, or approximately $12.7 million dollars. These cuts could have an impact on the IRIS program's ability to meet EPA program and regional office needs, if enacted by Congress.