Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Army Futures Command, in collaboration with the Army Contracting Command and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, to regularly analyze information on the use of prototype other transactions for Army modernization. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 the Army should direct the Army Futures Command, in collaboration with the Army Contracting Command, to regularly analyze information on the use of grants, cooperative agreements, research other transactions, technology investment agreements, partnership intermediary agreements, and cooperative research and development agreements for Army modernization. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 the Army should ensure the Commanding General of the Army Contracting Command establishes consistent practices for its headquarters to collect, archive, and share lessons learned for research and prototype other transactions, grants, cooperative agreements, technology investment agreements, and partnership intermediary agreements. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 the Army should ensure the Commanding General of the Army Contracting Command has the command's contracting centers work with its headquarters to establish consistent, coordinated practices for the contracting centers to collect, analyze, validate, archive, and share lessons learned for research and prototype other transactions, grants, cooperative agreements, technology investment agreements, and partnership intermediary agreements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 the Army should ensure the Commanding General of the Combat Capabilities Development Command establishes consistent, coordinated practices for the command to collect, analyze, validate, archive, and share lessons learned for cooperative research and development agreements. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 the Army should ensure an archive is established to store and share lessons learned information related to the Army's alternative approaches for engaging industry and academia. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
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 Research and Engineering revise its IR&D instruction to require USD (R&E) personnel to annually review defense industry IR&D investments to inform DOD's science and technology strategic planning efforts. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation stating that USD(R&E) will investigate and revise its IR&D Instruction to require annual review of defense industry IR&D investments.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Administrator, Defense Technical Information Center, assess and determine whether the DTIC IR&D database should require contractors to include additional information on IR&D projects, such as: (a) The IR&D project's linkage, if any, to DOD's modernization priorities; (b) The allowable category (basic research, applied research, technology development, or concept study) to which the IR&D project belongs; (c) The nature of the project as either potentially disruptive or potentially incremental research and development; and (d) The actual IR&D project costs when the project is completed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation stating that the DTIC Administrator will assess whether the DOD IR&D database should require contractors to include additional information on IR&D projects, and make his recommendation to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering for Research and Technology for its decision.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should ensure VA's key offices, such as OAA and ORD, provide VA medical centers with examples of successful practices for strengthening research relationships with academic affiliates and that such information reflects the lessons learned from VA medical centers that have successfully cultivated these relationships. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. VA stated that they will establish a working group with representatives from both VA's Central Office and the field to identify and share best practices by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should ensure ORD, in consultation with the field, develops tools, such as a decision tree and successful practices, to help local VA medical center officials decide which entity—NPCs or academic affiliates—should administer extramural funding based on providing optimal support for the research. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. VA stated that the working group established to address GAO's first recommendation, which will include representatives from both VA's Central Office and the field, will develop and share tools to assist VA medical centers and their academic affiliates in determining how federal awards should be administered by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Trade Controls, in consultation with university representatives, provides additional or revises existing guidance and outreach to address university-specific export control issues to further support universities' understanding and compliance with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State concurred with the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should ensure that the Under Secretary for Industry and Security, in consultation with university representatives, provides additional or revises existing guidance and outreach to address university-specific export control issues to further support universities' understanding and compliance with the Export Administration Regulations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce concurred with the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Trade Controls revises existing export compliance guidelines to include information concerning periodic risk assessments to remind exporters that it is beneficial to periodically identify, analyze, and respond to new risks as part of an effective International Traffic in Arms Regulations compliance program. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of State concurred with the recommendation. 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 Research and Engineering takes steps to ensure that its program officers and contracting officers are interpreting export controls consistent with regulations and guidance and consistently determining whether university research constitutes fundamental research. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of CDC should take steps to determine participation rates and distribution needed in the AR Option of the National Healthcare Safety Network for conducting regional and national assessments of antibiotic resistance of public health importance. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of CDC should ensure that CDC's evaluation of its surveillance system for antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea includes measures of its representativeness, such as comparison of the trends in the sample population with those in the overall U.S. population, using specially designed studies if needed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of CDC should provide information on uncertainties for antibiotic resistance estimates in its consolidated Threats Reports, including standard errors or confidence intervals, as appropriate. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services generally concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of CDC should develop a plan for timely, consolidated reports of antibiotic resistance in priority pathogens at regular intervals. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human services concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should identify leadership and clarify roles and responsibilities among HHS agencies to assess the clinical outcomes of diagnostic testing for identifying antibiotic-resistant bacteria. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with GAO's recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FDA should direct the Center for Devices and Radiological Health to conduct additional monitoring and evaluation of the status of FDA-authorized tests that rely on breakpoints, on a regular basis, to determine whether test manufacturers are updating breakpoints, seeking additional resources as needed. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Food and Drug Administration: Office of the Commissioner
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should develop a strategic framework to further incentivize the development of new treatments for antibiotic-resistant infections, including through the use of postmarket financial incentives, and, if appropriate, make recommendations to Congress for necessary authority. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services did not concur with GAO's recommendation. In commenting on our report, the department noted that it has convened a workgroup to develop a strategic framework that includes proposals to address a variety of challenges facing antibiotic product developers and agreed that additional incentives are needed. However, the department stated it is still analyzing whether postmarket financial incentives should be included in this framework. We believe our recommendation is still warranted, given the importance of antibiotic resistance to public health and the importance of sustaining the antibiotic pipeline, including after antibiotics are brought to market. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should direct the CARB Task Force to include in its annual updates to the President plans for addressing any barriers preventing full implementation of the National Action Plan and, as appropriate, make recommendations for new or modified actions. Specifically, the CARB Task Force should identify plans to address barriers, such as those related to expanding (1) a CDC program designed to strengthen the U.S. response to resistant gonorrhea; (2) antibiotic stewardship programs across health care settings; and (3) antibiotic use data collection across health care settings, to the extent feasible. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with this recommendation, and stated that beginning in 2020 and continuing annually thereafter, the CARB Task Force's progress reports will include discussion of any barriers preventing full implementation of the National Action Plan, including, as appropriate, barriers that GAO has identified. When we confirm any actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense partially concurred with this recommendation noting the challenge with balancing ensuring public access to research data with considerations of national security and personally identifiable information. As discussed in our report, balancing these considerations is a challenge that agency officials and stakeholders identified during our work. Accordingly, our recommendation to DOD regarding findability and accessibility of agency-funded research data was qualified to pertain to appropriate agency-funded research data--recognizing that it might not be appropriate to make certain datasets publically available because of national security or other concerns. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, the Department awarded a contract to support enhancements to its Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) to link scholarly research publications supported by the Department to its publicly accessible datasets. The Department indicated it expects to complete this work by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the Department has taken to implement this recommendation we will provide additional information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open

Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation and noted that it was in the process of establishing a portal on its website to increase public access to agency-funded research. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by June 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should take steps to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation but indicated in its comments on the report that had already taken steps to implement it. As discussed in the report, the department's efforts to ensure research data availability pertained to a portion of the agency's federally-funded research data. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the National Science Foundation should fully implement plans to ensure appropriate agency-funded research data are readily findable and accessible to the public. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: NSF concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, NSF is expanding its public access repository to include metadata records about data that support publications resulting from NSF-funded research. NSF's response stated that, by storing metadata records for supporting datasets alongside metadata records for publications, the public will be able to more easily find and access appropriate agency funded research data. We will provide an update when we obtain additional information about the status of implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should complete development of data management plan requirements for extramural researchers. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation noting planned steps to complete development of data management plan requirements. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality should complete development of data management plan requirements. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open

Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should complete development of data management plan requirements. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation, stating that it would develop a departmentwide management directive for research and development data as well as data management plan guidance and a template to document requirements. The department estimated that these efforts would be completed by June 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator should complete development of data management plan requirements for extramural researchers. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Agency for International Development agreed with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should complete development of guidance and provide training to agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with the findings of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator should complete development of and provide training for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Agency for International Development agreed with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 14)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 15)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation, and indicated it would evaluate training needs for data management plan reviews and develop plans to fulfill any additional training needs identified. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 16)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation and identified several planned steps to identify and meet training needs for those involved in reviewing researchers' data management plans. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 17)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open

Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation stating that it would assess training needs for agency officials and others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and would develop and provide additional training if warranted. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken to implement the recommendation we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 18)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 19)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation and stated it would assess and develop a plan to meet the training needs of internal DOE staff and external peer reviewers of data management plans. DOE estimated these efforts would be completed by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Environmental Protection Agency Administrator should evaluate training needs for agency officials or others involved in reviewing the merits of researchers' data management plans and, if additional training is found to be warranted, develop and provide such training. (Recommendation 20)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency agreed with this recommendation stating that, during fiscal year 2020, the agency will evaluate training needs for agency officials who review researchers' data management plans. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 21)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Department of Agriculture agreed with the findings of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 22)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with this recommendation When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements.(Recommendation 23)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Status: Open

Comments: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 24)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The Food and Drug Administration concurred with this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Director of the National Institutes of Health should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 25)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open

Comments: The National Institutes of Health concurred with this recommendation but stated that the agency already had mechanisms in place to ensure compliance with public access plan and associated requirements for publications and data. As discussed in the report, we believe our recommendation, as worded, appropriately reflected the extent to which the agency had implemented researcher compliance mechanisms at the time of issuance of our report. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 26)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security concurred with this recommendation and stated it would develop a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the department's public access plan and data management plan requirements. The department estimated these efforts would be completed by September 30, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrator should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 27)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with this recommendation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration indicated it was pursuing multiple mechanisms to implement it. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 28)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Energy concurred with this recommendation stating that it would develop a compliance mechanism to identify researchers receiving funding from DOE financial assistance awards who are not compliant with DOE's public access plan for publications. DOE estimated these efforts would be completed by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 29)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs concurred with this recommendation but indicated in its comments on the report that had already taken steps to implement it. As discussed in the report, the department's public access compliance mechanism covered a portion of the agency's federally-funded research data.. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to the recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 30)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Transportation concurred with this recommendation. According to its response to our report, the Department will build upon existing compliance mechanisms to ensure researcher compliance with its public access plan and associated requirements. As part of this process, the Department reported that it plans to update its public access plan, and expects to complete these actions by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the Department has taken to implement this recommendation we will provide additional information.

Recommendation: The National Institute of Standards and Technology Director should fully develop and implement a mechanism to ensure researcher compliance with the public access plan and associated requirements. (Recommendation 31)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with this recommendation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology identified several planned steps to implement it with full completion anticipated by December 31, 2020. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the Office of Science and Technology Policy co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 32)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open

Comments: OSTP disagreed with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, stating that the subcommittee had already taken steps to implement the leading practices GAO identified. However, OSTP officials did not provide documentation of these efforts and GAO continued to believe the recommendation was warranted. In March 2020, OSTP provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the Department of Defense co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 33)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, noting that DOD participates in subcommittee initiatives, including a working group on disclosure risk management, which is a topic of great importance to DOD. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the Department of Energy co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 34)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. DOE noted that, as a co-chair of the subcommittee, it is actively identifying areas of collaboration across agencies in implementing open science practices. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the National Institutes of Health co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 35)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: National Institutes of Health
Status: Open

Comments: NIH concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. NIH stated that the subcommittee and its working groups are actively coordinating and building consensus on issues and processes to implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration across federal agencies. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 36)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NOAA concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation, noting that NOAA would work with the subcommittee to identify more opportunities for collaboration to promote access to research results. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Open Science moves forward, the National Science Foundation co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agencies, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 37)

Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: The National Science Foundation concurred with GAO's November 2019 recommendation. In March 2020, the Office of Science and Technology Policy provided information on steps the subcommittee has taken to address issues associated with public access to federally funded research results, including certain areas GAO identified as presenting challenges to public access plan implementation in the November 2019 report. GAO will collect and evaluate additional information to determine the extent to which these steps incorporate leading practices for interagency collaboration GAO has identified. By taking steps to fully implement the relevant leading practices we have identified, the subcommittee and its member agencies could better marshal their collective efforts to address common public access plan implementation challenges that agency officials and stakeholders identified.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that S&T take steps to more fully incorporate practices for developing milestones within DHS's budget preparation guidance, into the Surface Transportation Explosive Threat Detection program. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, GAO reported on a Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) research and development (R&D) program to develop technologies to secure mass transit systems. DHS budget guidance requires S&T to develop results-oriented milestones to track program progress. GAO found that the S&T program's milestones did not clearly link to key activities described in program plans, and thus, were not results oriented. Therefore, we recommended that DHS develop milestones to track its progress developing the technologies that fully adhered to guidance. DHS concurred with our recommendation, and in February 2020, reported that S&T's Finance and Budget Division validated that milestones for the program were compliant with DHS guidance. GAO is currently working with DHS S&T to review documentation related to the validation process in order to close the recommendation..

Recommendation: The Administrator of TSA should develop a mechanism to more routinely and comprehensively share appropriate information on the performance of mass transit security technologies (such as the annual sensor catalog and security technology assessments) with mass transit operators and stakeholders until DHS completes work on a more permanent information sharing resource. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, GAO reported on key mechanisms that TSA uses to collaborate and share information on identifying capability gaps and security technologies with stakeholders, including mass transit operators. We found that TSA regularly assesses commercially available technologies, but does not routinely or comprehensively share its results with mass transit operators. Therefore, we recommended that TSA develop a mechanism to routinely and comprehensively share security technology information with mass transit operators. TSA concurred with our recommendation, and in February 2020, reported implementing two of three planned efforts to better share security technology information, including steps to increase distribution of its annual publication on security technologies and to provide regular updates on assessed technologies at routine stakeholder meetings. We will continue to monitor TSA efforts with a third effort in order to close this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Commanding General of Army Futures Command, in coordination with relevant Army entities, to establish command-wide performance measures and develop a plan to use these measures to systematically assess the effectiveness of small business engagement in support of research and development. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: In fiscal year 2020, AFC developed both short-term and long-term performance measures to capture and monitor information on small business engagements across the command, but are still developing a database to systematically track the progression of engagements and outcomes. Officials expect to establish a database by fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Director to work with other sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals for the Manufacturing USA program with measurable targets and time frames. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. Commerce stated that it lacks the legal authority to compel action by other federal agencies, and that legal constraints aside, it believes it is bad management practice to ask institutes to respond to performance goals issued by different bodies. As of March 2020, Commerce stated that it plans to report on performance goals for Commerce-sponsored institutes effective with the 2019 annual report, which it expects to issue by September 2020. Commerce also agreed to continue working closely with other sponsoring federal agencies on program and network goals for the Manufacturing USA institutes, but did not commit to working with sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the development of network-wide performance goals, targets, and time frames as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's network-wide coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Moreover, our recommendation specifically pertained to developing performance goals for the Manufacturing USA program, not individual institutes. As we stated in our report, this would not necessarily entail new performance measures but, rather, could consist of measurable near-term performance goals corresponding to program performance measures already in place. Further, as stated in our report, GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to develop and implement network-wide performance goals with targets and time frames, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress toward long-term Manufacturing USA program goals and objectives.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NIST Director to work with other sponsoring federal agencies to ensure that the Manufacturing USA network-wide performance measures are directly aligned with the network-wide performance goals, the Manufacturing USA strategic objectives and program goals, and the statutory purposes of the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation (RAMI) Act. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it supports the alignment of performance measures with performance goals only for Commerce-sponsored institutes. Commerce stated that it is unable to commit to this recommendation as 13 of the 14 existing institutes were authorized under authorities other than the RAMI Act and are sponsored by agencies other than Commerce. Commerce also stated that, until additional institutes authorized by the RAMI Act are in place, it does not support additional performance measures for the single Commerce-sponsored institute beyond the RAMI Act requirements, as doing so would impose an unfair level of scrutiny. Commerce agreed to report on performance metrics for department-sponsored institutes effective with the current annual report, which is expected by September 2020. We recognize that Commerce does not have management authority over other the institutes sponsored by other agencies. We believe our report sufficiently characterizes the effort to align the network-wide performance measures with network-wide performance goals and Manufacturing USA program goals as a collaborative effort between Commerce and sponsoring agencies that is in keeping with Commerce's coordination functions under the RAMI Act. Our recommendation does not ask Commerce to compel actions by other agencies, nor to develop any additional performance measures. As noted in our report, the Manufacturing USA program's performance measurement structure aligns near-term performance measures directly to the program's long-term goals. This structure bypasses connecting the performance measures with the program's objectives that have been developed to break down the long-term goals more specifically. GAO's prior work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Our recommendation was designed to ensure that the Manufacturing USA program performance measurement structure that Commerce has already worked with the other sponsoring agencies to develop more fully aligns with these key practices. We continue to believe that by working with other sponsoring federal agencies to ensure that the Manufacturing USA network-wide performance measures are directly aligned with the Manufacturing USA strategic program goals and objectives and the statutory purposes of the RAMI Act, Commerce would be better able to observe and report on progress made toward achieving the statutory purposes of the Manufacturing USA program.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should direct the NIST Director to develop criteria to evaluate whether the Commerce-sponsored institute can sustain its operations without additional federal financial assistance after its initial agreement. If an analysis based on such criteria indicates that additional federal financial assistance is needed to help the institute sustain its operations, then the Secretary of Commerce should consider a legislative proposal to amend relevant provisions of the RAMI Act. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce partially concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In March 2020, Commerce stated that it will develop criteria to evaluate the sufficiency of the Commerce-sponsored institute's sustainability plan based on the anticipated operating costs of the institute at fully operational steady state, and the likelihood of sustaining those operations through the specific efforts outlined in the sustainability plan. Commerce stated that it plans to develop the evaluation criteria by April 2020. We will update this recommendation after we learn more about these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Director of DOD's Manufacturing USA institutes to develop criteria to evaluate whether DOD-sponsored institutes can sustain their operations without additional federal financial assistance after their initial agreements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to information DOD provided in March 2020, DOD developed criteria to evaluate whether each DOD-sponsored institute is effectively executing its mission, providing value to the department, and transitioning advanced manufacturing to U.S. manufacturers, while demonstrating progress toward business viability (diversified revenue, controlled costs, etc.). As of March 2020, DOD plans to incorporate these criteria into a strategic management plan, under which the department will review institutes' progress at the end of their agreements to determine the type and level of DOD's continued participation. DOD expects to complete work on the strategic management plan by the end of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should direct the Director of DOE's Manufacturing USA institutes to develop criteria to evaluate whether DOE-sponsored institutes can sustain their operations without additional federal financial assistance after their initial agreements. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with this recommendation according to its response to our report. In September 2019, DOE stated that it will direct the Directors of DOE-sponsored institutes to collectively work toward updating institute sustainability plans and activities and collaboratively develop criteria and metrics to assess the institutes' progress toward financial sustainability. After development of the metrics, DOE will track as appropriate. As of March 2020, DOE reported agreement with its institutes on an initial set of criteria and metrics to assess progress toward financial sustainability. We will update this recommendation as we collect more information about these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should take action to educate and communicate the agency's scientific integrity polices to staff through, for example, regular training. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE said the scientific integrity official will be responsible for leading and coordinating with other elements of the Department, in the development of measures to educate and communicate DOE's scientific integrity policies to staff.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should establish steps and a time frame for designating a scientific integrity official to oversee the department's scientific integrity activities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE said that it was still in the process of identifying an individual to serve as a scientific integrity official.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should develop mechanisms to regularly monitor and evaluate implementation of the department's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE stated that the Department's scientific integrity official will have the responsibility to lead and coordinate with other elements of the Department in developing procedures to monitor and evaluate the implementation of DOE's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should develop mechanisms to regularly monitor and evaluate implementation of the department's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2020, the Department of Transportation provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, officials said that DOT was still working on this action. According to officials, the department will implement several mechanisms to address the recommendation, including conducting annual reviews of the scientific integrity policy and making the policy available to all relevant employees. DOT estimated it would complete these actions by the end of March 2021.

Recommendation: The Director of NIST should develop mechanisms to regularly monitor and evaluate implementation of the agency's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Status: Open

Comments: In Commerce's written comments, NIST had stated that, beginning in fiscal year 2019, the agency would review implementation of its policy at least annually and make recommendations to the Director of NIST as to whether any improvements were needed. In a September 2020 update, NIST provided a memorandum reporting that in fiscal year 2019 the Scientific Integrity Officer and General Counsel had discussed an allegation related to scientific integrity, and that it was determined that programmatic factors, not a lapse in scientific integrity, had occurred. According to NIST, it monitors the effectiveness of the implementation of its documented scientific integrity policy, order, and procedure by means of informal feedback from NIST researchers and supervisors, as documented in the memorandum.

Recommendation: The NOAA Administrator should develop mechanisms to regularly monitor and evaluate implementation of the agency's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In Commerce's written comments, NOAA stated that it will identify additional metrics for monitoring and evaluating its policy. As of October 2020, we have requested an update from the agency but have not yet received information to evaluate implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of USGS should develop mechanisms to regularly monitor and evaluate implementation of the agency's scientific integrity policy, including mechanisms to remediate identified deficiencies and make improvements where necessary. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: U.S. Geological Survey
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2020, the Department of the Interior provided an update on this recommendation. In that update, officials stated that the expected completion date is the end of November 2022.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should develop documented procedures for identifying and addressing alleged violations of its scientific integrity policy. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, DOE provided an update on the status of this recommendation. In that update, DOE stated that the department's scientific integrity official will be responsible for leading and coordinating with other elements of the Department in developing procedures for identifying and addressing alleged violations of DOE's scientific integrity policy.

Recommendation: The Administrator of NASA should develop documented procedures for identifying and addressing alleged violations of its scientific integrity policy. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA officials stated that the agency is undergoing additional internal and external reviews-with NASA officials working through the National Science and Technology Council's Joint Committee on Research Environments, which supports scientific security, rigor, and integrity-and that completion of the implementation of the recommendation is due October 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should develop a mechanism that aligns processes and information sources for collecting R&D project data from DHS components to ensure that the information can be collected, integrated and result in a comprehensive accounting of R&D projects DHS-wide. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, DHS reported that S&T was revising the related DHS Directive to improve R&D project data collection and that detailed procedures for the data collection would be described in an associated guidance document. DHS further reported that S&T would be coordinating with the Undersecretary for Management, and meeting with DHS components regarding the data collection efforts. We will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should direct Office of the Chief Financial Officer program officials to ensure that S&T take steps to more fully incorporate leading practices, such as those included in DHS's budget preparation guidance, into R&D milestones. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, S&T reported preparing Budget Justification documents, which will include key milestones for R&D projects, and indicated that the documents will be reviewed by the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer. We will continue to monitor DHS's efforts related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should develop standard processes and procedures for collecting and analyzing customer feedback, applicable to components conducting R&D, for improving the usefulness of existing customer feedback mechanisms to assess R&D efforts and for implementing such mechanisms where absent. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary: Office of the Deputy Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, DHS stated that a new DHS Directive and Instruction is being developed related to R&D customer and program feedback. This recommendation remains open, and we will continue to monitor DHS's efforts to address it.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should clarify whether and how to use the laboratory initiated research authority within the Capital Investment Program. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2018, DOD agreed with our recommendation. In March 2019, DOD reported that the Navy was working on establishing a process for its laboratories to use the funds made available to them through the laboratory initiated research authority and planned to have this new policy in place by September 1, 2019 but was subsequently changed to a new date of October 1, 2019. However, the Navy was unable to finalize its policy prior to the start of the 2020 fiscal year. In February 2020, a senior USD(R&E) official stated that internal discussions between Navy acquisition officials and Navy financial management officials were ongoing. This official further noted that the Navy planned to finalize its policy by December 1, 2020, in time to influence the Navy's fiscal year 2022 budget request.

Recommendation: As the Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science (QIS Subcommittee) moves forward, the Office of Science and Technology Policy co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agency officials, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open

Comments: The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation despite expressing some concerns about required resources and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019, the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As the QIS Subcommittee moves forward, the Department of Commerce co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agency officials, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As the QIS Subcommittee moves forward, the Department of Energy co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agency officials, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Energy agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As the QIS Subcommittee moves forward, the National Science Foundation co-chair, in coordination with other co-chairs and participating agency officials, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: The National Science Foundation agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken steps to work with the other co-chairs of the National Science and Technology Council's Quantum Information Science (QIS) Subcommittee to begin implementing it. The QIS Subcommittee, created pursuant to the National Quantum Initiative Act, enacted in 2018, continues to be led by four co-chairs from the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation (NSF), and OSTP. The law requires, among other things, that the QIS Subcommittee develop a 5-year Strategic Plan by December 21, 2019. In January 2020, an NSF official and OSTP staff reported that a draft strategic plan was under review. According to the NSF official, the strategic plan will include an assessment of actions the agencies are taking in support of QIS, and, in particular, the degree to which the agencies have developed mechanisms that enhance and sustain collaboration. The official said the draft plan will be submitted to the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee, which conducts independent assessments of and advises the President and QIS Subcommittee on matters related to the National Quantum Initiative. The NSF official reported that the membership of the Advisory Committee will be announced in the spring 2020 timeframe, at which time it will begin its review of the draft strategic plan. In addition to the development of a strategic plan, the National Quantum Initiative Act called for the establishment of a National Quantum Coordination Office to support the QIS Subcommittee, which OSTP formed in March 2019. Following this, in Oct. 2019 the QIS Subcommittee created three interagency working groups: (1) the science working group is working to coordinate the scientific and technical aspects of programs; (2) the workforce, infrastructure, and industry working group is working to identify workforce and technology needs; and (3) the end-user group is working to connect the nation's research and development community, including academics and industry players, to potential early adopters in the federal government. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in quantum computing. When the strategic plan is finalized and we confirm what additional actions the QIS Subcommittee has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: As the Interagency Working Group on Synthetic Biology moves forward, the Director of the National Science Foundation, in coordination with participating agency officials, should take steps to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: National Science Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: The National Science Foundation (NSF) agreed with GAO's September 2018 recommendation and, as of January 2020, had taken some steps to implement it. In November 2018, the Interagency Working Group on Synthetic Biology was formally established under the Biological Sciences Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council. The co-chairs of the Interagency Working Group on Synthetic Biology are officials from the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and NSF. The charter for the working group states that the group is to facilitate coordination and collaboration across 16 federal agencies. In October 2019, the working group hosted an Interagency Synthetic Biology Workshop to examine a roadmap that included basic science, enabling technologies, infrastructure and workforce needs in the area of synthetic biology. The workshop included 100 participants across the federal government, academia and industry, according to NSF officials. On the final day of the workshop participants from federal agencies used the input from the workshop to prepare a list of priority areas for investment along with agencies interested in participating in those priority areas. In January 2020, NSF officials reported that among the next steps for the working group was to develop a federal strategic roadmap for synthetic biology. Officials also reported that the working group is actively preparing a memorandum of understanding to create policies that will enable more sharing of information and collaboration. Taking this action will help to enhance and strengthen interagency collaboration and could help ensure that agencies effectively marshal their efforts to maintain U.S. competitiveness in synthetic biology. When we confirm what additional actions the working group has taken to fully implement leading practices that enhance and sustain collaboration, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to fully report the range of challenges in federal patent licensing, such as those outlined in this report, by, for example, leveraging its survey of practices at federal technology transfer offices, past Federal Laboratory Consortium studies, and agency reports and including that information in its summary reports to Congress. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. In August 2020, Commerce officials stated that the next annual report to the President and Congress was in the review process and is expected to be published this fall.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to clarify the link between establishing patent license financial terms and the goal of promoting commercial use, through appropriate means, such as the upcoming rule-making process and updating relevant guidance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process and the purpose of licensing royalties will be addressed through a related initiative. The expected completion date for this action has been revised to November 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should instruct NIST to facilitate formal information sharing among the agencies to provide federal labs with information on financial terms in comparable patent licenses, as appropriate. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: According to the Department of Commerce, NIST actions in response to the recommendation are in process. The actions to address it have been discussed by the Interagency Workgroup for Technology Transfer and the FLC, including adding a licensing guide and community of practice for licensing terms to the FLC website. In August 2020, Commerce stated that the expected completion date for this action has been revised to September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the agency or its labs document processes for establishing license financial terms, while maintaining flexibility to tailor the specific financial terms of each license. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD officials stated that DoDI 5538.08, which would require military departments and defense agencies to instruct their laboratories to document their licensing processes as appropriate, is in the review process as of August 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Investment and Innovation within SBA should work with participating agencies to implement the Commercialization Benchmark or, if that is not feasible, revise the benchmark so that it can be implemented (Recommendation 2).

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SBA agreed with the recommendation. As of January 2020, SBA officials said they plan to continue working with participating agencies to determine a feasible way to implement the Commercialization Benchmark. According to SBA officials, SBA is leading an interagency Commercialization Working Group with participating agency officials and has implemented a commercialization reporting tool on the SBIR.gov site. Agency officials participating in the interagency working group have identified challenges with a single model for the benchmark and are working to resolve the issues.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Energy should lead the development of a mechanism for interagency collaboration to determine roles and responsibilities for addressing priorities related to research on the health effects of low-dose radiation.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In a July 2018 update, DOE stated that it believes that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the appropriate entity to lead interagency collaboration and coordinate science and technology policy. According to DOE, OSTP intends to charter an interagency working group under the NSTC on a government-wide strategy related to research on the health effects of low-dose radiation. As of December 2019, OSTP had begun to address a related requirement under the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act to coordinate federal efforts related to radiation biology research and planned to release a report on this topic in early 2020. When we confirm what actions OSTP has taken to establish this working group, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to counter both near and far term threats, consistent with its S&T framework, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to annually define the mix of incremental and disruptive innovation investments for each military department.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with our recommendation, stating that it would be premature to get ahead of the Secretary of Defense's final decisions on the role of the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) until that position is established, as required by law. In July 2018, the Department issued a memorandum finalizing the organizational structures, and roles and responsibilities for USD(R&E), but did not include a requirement for that office to annually define the mix of incremental and disruptive innovation investments for each military department. In September 2019, the Office of the USD(R&E) released an updated science & technology strategy. While the updated strategy acknowledges the need to invest in both incremental and disruptive innovation, the strategy does not define what an appropriate investment mix should be. In lieu of a DOD-wide defined mix set by USD(R&E), in April 2019, the Air Force issued its own science and technology strategy that acknowledged the need for both incremental and disruptive investments and defined what that mix should be. However, recent Army (2019) and Navy (2017) science and technology strategies do not define those military departments' desired mixes of incremental and disruptive innovation investments. In the Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed USD(R&E) to report further on this issue to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by December 31, 2019.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to counter both near and far term threats, consistent with its S&T framework, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to annually assess whether that mix is achieved.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with our recommendation, stating that it would be premature to get ahead of the Secretary of Defense's final decisions on the role of the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) until that position is established, as required by law. In July 2018, the Department issued a memorandum finalizing the organizational structures, and roles and responsibilities for USD(R&E), but did not require that office to annually assess whether a desired mix of incremental and disruptive innovation investments mix had been achieved. In December 2019, a senior official within the Office of the USD(R&E) stated that DOD's Communities of Interest -- a component of DOD's overarching Reliance 21 framework for science and technology coordination -- are required to plan short- and long-term research and assess that research for an appropriate mix and balance between research priorities. However, as of December 2019, USD(R&E) has not yet articulated what the appropriate mix of incremental and disruptive innovation investments should be for DOD. Therefore, it is unknown the criteria the Communities use to evaluate whether an appropriate balance exists between research priorities, including incremental and disruptive innovation. In the Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed USD(R&E) to report further on this issue to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by December 31, 2019.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes emphasizing greater use of existing flexibilities to more quickly initiate and discontinue projects to respond to the rapid pace of innovation.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with our recommendation, stating that it would be premature to get ahead of the Secretary of Defense's final decisions on the role of the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) until that position is established, as required by law. In July 2018, the Department issued a memorandum finalizing the organizational structures, and roles and responsibilities for USD(R&E), but did not require it to define a science and technology management framework that includes a process for discontinuing projects. In December 2019, a senior official with USD(R&E) reported that DOD has successfully implemented flexible funding vehicles such as the Defense Modernization Account that allowed funds to be rapidly moved to promising prototype projects within DOD's science and technology enterprise. In addition, this senior official reported an increased use of Other Transaction Authority by the Defense Innovation Unit and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Nonetheless, the Office of the USD(R&E) has not yet developed policy or guidance that military departments could use to emphasize greater use of existing flexibilities for initiating and discontinuing science and technology projects. Consequently, DOD's processes for initiating and terminating science and technology projects largely remain linked to the annual federal budgeting process, which is not responsive to the rapid pace of innovation. In the Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed USD(R&E) to report further on this issue to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by December 31, 2019.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes incorporating acquisition stakeholders into technology development programs to ensure they are relevant to customers.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with our recommendation, stating that it would be premature to get ahead of the Secretary of Defense's final decisions on the role of the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) until that position is established, as required by law. In July 2018, the Department issued a memorandum finalizing the organizational structures, roles, and responsibilities for USD(R&E), but did not require that office to define, in policy or guidance, a science and technology framework that includes incorporating acquisition stakeholders into technology development programs. In December 2019, a senior official within the Office of the USD(R&E) reported that USD(R&E) actively partners with acquisition stakeholders to ensure technology development programs are relevant to customers. The official cited Rapid Prototyping Programs (RPPs), Joint Capability Technology Demonstrations (JCTDs), and Emerging Capability Technology Development (ECTD) programs as examples where management frameworks in which technology managers actively partner with (1) operational managers from the Combatant Commands or military departments and (2) technology transition managers from the military departments to ensure programs are relevant to customers. However, these efforts are narrow in scope and do not constitute the majority of science and technology investments DOD makes. In addition, the senior official reported that the Army and the Air Force are taking steps to incorporate and integrate acquisition stakeholders into their science and technology projects, but these efforts are in their infancy. In the Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed USD(R&E) to report further on this issue to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by December 31, 2019.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes promoting advanced prototyping of disruptive technologies within the labs so the S&T community can prove these technologies work to generate demand from future acquisition programs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2017, the Department of Defense disagreed with our recommendation, stating that it would be premature to get ahead of the Secretary of Defense's final decisions on the role of the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)) until that position is established, as required by law. In July 2018, the Department issued a memorandum finalizing the organizational structures, and roles and responsibilities for USD(R&E), but did not require it to define, in policy or guidance, a science and technology framework that includes promoting advanced prototyping of disruptive technologies within the labs. In December 2019, a senior official within the Office of the USD(R&E) reported that the Emerging Capability Technology Development (ECTD) program is one framework USD(R&E) uses to promote the prototyping of disruptive technologies within the labs. Under this framework, USD(R&E) co-funds and co-sponsors projects with Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs), and the military department laboratories. An integrated management team leads the evaluation and demonstration of technologies and connects technology managers with acquisition programs in the Combatant Commands and the military departments. The senior official further reported that USD(R&E) leverages Rapid Prototyping Funds (RPFs) and Rapid Prototyping Programs (RPPs) to promote and prove advanced demonstrations in military department laboratories. In the Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Congress directed USD(R&E) to report further on this issue to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives by December 31, 2019.

Recommendation: To help ensure DOD takes a strategic approach for its prototyping and innovation initiatives and overcomes funding and cultural barriers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to develop a high-level DOD-wide strategy, in collaboration with the military services and other appropriate DOD components, to communicate strategic goals and priorities and delineate roles and responsibilities among DOD's prototyping and innovation initiatives.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, but its progress on addressing it has stalled. In November 2019, DOD's Prototyping Guidebook indicated that the department was developing policy and strategy documents pertaining to prototyping. As part of this effort, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering was drafting a broad DOD Research and Engineering strategy that would include strategies pertaining to prototyping and innovation and address this recommendation. As of August 2020, DOD had not published this strategy.

Recommendation: To help ensure that DOD is implementing the fraud, waste, and abuse prevention requirements to the OIGs, the Inspectors General of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should implement the requirements themselves or delegate the implementation of the requirements to the investigative services.

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Naval Inspector General
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation in its comments on the draft report. In June 2020, we requested information on the status of the recommendation. When we confirm the actions the Navy has taken, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To help ensure that DOD is implementing the fraud, waste, and abuse prevention requirements to the OIGs, the Inspectors General of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should implement the requirements themselves or delegate the implementation of the requirements to the investigative services.

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Inspector General
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation in its comments on the draft report. As of July 2020, the Army had drafted a memorandum that would delegate the requirements to the investigative services or program office. We will update the status of this recommendation after the Army issues the final memorandum.

Recommendation: To help FAA better manage and oversee its portfolio of R&D activities, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA to take a more strategic approach to identifying research priorities across the agency, including developing guidance to identify long-term priorities and emerging issue areas, as part of FAA's portfolio development process.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, FAA issued a redesigned National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) for 2017/2018. In September 2019, FAA officials told GAO that the redesigned NARP helped the agency take a more strategic approach to identifying research priorities. FAA officials also said that the agency has taken actions to understand emerging aviation issues requiring FAA's research attention and those emerging issues will be incorporated into future plans. In June 2020, FAA officials told us that they are developing guidance--to be finalized by December 2020--to ensure that future NARPs continue to take a strategic approach. GAO will review FAA's actions to implement the recommendation once the guidance is completed.

Recommendation: To help FAA better manage and oversee its portfolio of R&D activities, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA to develop guidance to ensure that future National Aviation Research Plans (NARP) and R&D Annual Reviews meet statutory requirements to the extent practicable, including (a) The NARP lists activities that are carried under cooperative agreements. (b) The NARP describes the rationale for the prioritized research programs. (c) The NARP identifies how resources were allocated for long-term and near-term research. (d) The NARP identifies REDAC recommendations that are accepted, not accepted, and the reasons for non-acceptance. (e) The NARP provides a detailed description of technology transfer to government, industry, and academia. (f) The Annual Review describes new technologies developed and the dissemination of research results to the private sector. (g) The Annual Review allows a comparison to the NARP. (h) The Annual Review is prepared and presented in accordance with agency performance reporting requirements.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, FAA issued a redesigned the National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) to include, among other things, information required by statue. In June 2020, FAA officials told us that they redesigned the R&D Annual Review in 2019 to also address the statutory requirements. The officials said that they are also in the process of revising guidance that the agency uses to develop the NARP and R&D Annual Review to ensure that future documents meet statutory requirements. FAA plans to finalize the guidance by December 2020. GAO will review FAA's actions to implement the recommendation once FAA provides GAO the redesigned R&D Annual Review and once guidance for both the NARP and R&D Annual Review are completed.

Recommendation: To enhance interagency collaboration in the Manufacturing USA program, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to work with all non-sponsoring agencies whose missions contribute to or are affected by advanced manufacturing to revise the Manufacturing USA governance system to ensure the roles and responsibilities for how these agencies could contribute to the Manufacturing USA program are fully identified.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reported that, working through the Manufacturing USA interagency team and the National Science and Technology Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing, it had revised the Manufacturing USA governance document to include a section defining roles related to facilitating information sharing for agencies who are not sponsoring Manufacturing USA institutes. We are seeking clarification from NIST on which non-sponsoring agencies are covered by the new section. We will revisit the status of this recommendation once we receive clarification.

Recommendation: To enhance the ability of the Executive Office of the President to implement the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014 requirements related to reporting on advanced manufacturing, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, working through the National Science and Technology Council and agency leadership, as appropriate, should identify the information they will collect from federal agencies to determine the extent to which the objectives outlined in the National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing are being achieved.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy
Status: Open

Comments: In October, 2018, the Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing, Committee on Technology of the National Science Technology Council released a Strategy for American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing. This strategy provided some information on progress toward achieving the objectives of the prior National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing; however, it is unclear what information is to be collected from agencies and likewise how progress toward achieving the goals of the current strategy will be measured. We will update the status of this recommendation when the Office of Science and Technology Policy identifies the information to be collected from federal agencies and how this information will be used to assess progress in achieving the current goals, objectives, and priorities.

Recommendation: In order to ensure complete, analyzable records regarding research grant award decisions are available for management and analysis, the Secretary of Energy should direct DOE's grant-making agencies to implement additional data collection efforts, which should include: (1) Retaining complete records of pre-proposal, proposal, and award data, including a record of proposal disposition, in linked electronic files to facilitate aggregate, statistical analysis of the grant-making process, including the calculation of success rates. (2) Collecting demographic, education, and career information from applicants, on a voluntary basis, that is not available to proposal reviewers but is used for analysis of success rates.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE generally agreed with this recommendation. DOE's Office of Science began collecting investigator demographics during the second quarter of fiscal year 2015 and already retained complete records that enabled the calculation of success rates. According to DOE officials, since September 2017, the other three grant-making components included in our audit have been taking various actions to implement the recommendation. These three components, the Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), all complete steps to ensure that they retain complete grant life cycle information for each individual award, including complete records of pre-proposal, proposal, and award data in linked electronic files, thus fulfilling the first part of our recommendation. In 2019, EERE coordinated the development of a Federal Register Notice (FRN) regarding data collection jointly with NE and ARPA-E. The FRN drafted by EERE was finalized and published on February 11, 2020 (Vol. 85, Issue 28, Pages 7759-7760 [FR DOC# 2020-02674]). Under the proposed information collection request, an interface will be implemented in DOE grant application systems to allow external users to voluntarily provide a minimal amount of demographic information to comply with this recommendation, pursuant to review by the Office of Management and Budget. On June 30th, DOE officials shared with GAO the draft FRN for the 30-day notice and request for public comment prior to implementation.

Recommendation: To comply with Title IX enforcement requirements, the Secretary of the Department of Defense, which funds STEM research at universities, should direct the Director of the Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity to ensure that Title IX compliance reviews of DOD's grantees are periodically conducted.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and noted it is in the process of revising current DOD guidance which will address its Title IX enforcement requirements. In September 2017, a DOD official stated that the agency is in the process of formulating instructions related to both Title IX and Title VI that they believe will address the recommendation regarding Title IX enforcement. In a memorandum issued in December 2017, a DOD official described the agency's corrective action plan (CAP), including drafting an updated rule for the Code of Federal Regulations and the development and issuance of internal DOD policy documents regarding Title IX enforcement requirements. Both of these activities were expected to be completed by June 2019. DOD reported in March 2020 that it is continuing to revise current DOD guidance to address its Title IX enforcement requirements. The Director of DOD's Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) stated in a letter to GAO that the revised Titile IX policy is in the early stages of DOD's policy process. ODEI expressed its commitment to developing the revised policy and ensuring Title IX compliance reviews are conducted as per the revised policy and GAO's recommendation. In September of 2020, DoD sent an update indicating that they will issue a policy memorandum, specifically outlining the requirement for DoD Components who provide financial assistance to educational programs or activities conduct periodic compliance reviews. This is expected to be complete by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: To help federal, state, local, and private sector decision makers access and use the best available climate information, the Executive Office of the President should designate a federal entity to develop and periodically update a set of authoritative climate change observations and projections for use in federal decision making, which state, local, and private sector decision makers could also access to obtain the best available climate information.

Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help federal, state, local, and private sector decision makers access and use the best available climate information, the Executive Office of the President should designate a federal entity to create a national climate information system with defined roles for federal agencies and nonfederal entities with existing statutory authority.

Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress may wish to consider directing DOT to study and provide a report to Congress identifying approaches for extracting, storing, and analyzing electronically collected motor carrier drivers' schedule data, including the potential benefits, privacy, and cost concerns, and options for how such concerns could be mitigated.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action to direct DOT to study this matter.

Recommendation: To enhance DOD's ability to make consistent and informed decisions in its management of the TCC program in accordance with internal control standards, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should require the Director, Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, to document the procedures for approving projects within the TCC program for civilian institutions.

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

Comments: DOD did not agree with the recommendation. In 2016, DOD's Corrosion Office consistently maintained that its existing process is adequately documented in the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan and the Technical Corrosion Collaboration (TCC) Definitions Document. However, GAO maintained that DOD could enhance its oversight of corrosion projects by documenting how it approves projects for civilian institutions. As of March 2019, DOD has since decided to take action to implement this recommendation. Specifically, the Corrosion Office plans to include information on documenting procedures for approving projects in a new DOD manual on corrosion that it has a goal of creating by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation

Recommendation: To enhance DOD's ability to make consistent and informed decisions in its management of the TCC program in accordance with internal control standards, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should require the Director, Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, to document the procedures for selecting and approving projects within the TCC program for military academic institutions.

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

Comments: DOD did not agree with the recommendation. In 2016, DOD's Corrosion Office had consistently maintained that its existing process is adequately documented in the DOD Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation Strategic Plan and the Technical Corrosion Collaboration (TCC) Definitions Document. However, GAO maintained that DOD could enhance its oversight of corrosion projects by documenting how it selects and approves TCC projects for military academic institutions. As of March 2019, DOD has since decided to take action to implement this recommendation. The Corrosion Office plans to include information on documenting procedures for selecting and approving projects in a new DOD manual on corrosion that it has a goal of creating by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance DOD's ability to make consistent and informed decisions in its management of the TCC program in accordance with internal control standards, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should require the Director, Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, to document the procedures for selecting and approving military research labs supporting civilian and military institutions in conducting projects within the TCC program.

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

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2018, the Corrosion Policy and Oversight office is currently re-writing Appendix A of the "Technical Corrosion Collaboration (TCC)" document to include steps and grading criteria for decision makers when selecting and approving military research labs supporting civilian and military institutions conducting projects with the TCC program. The Corrosion Policy and Oversight office will complete this re-write and the post procedures to their web site by November 30, 2018. As of March 2019, the Corrosion Policy and Oversight office plans to include procedures for selecting and approving labs to support institutions in a new DOD manual on corrosion. Its goal to create this new manual is by the end of calendar year 2020. We will monitor the extent to which DOD implements this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that nonmedical DOD research organizations coordinate with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs early in the research process to understand medical research requirements and avoid inefficiencies that may lead to duplicative work, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to communicate to DOD's nonmedical research organizations the importance of coordination with the Joint Program Committee for Combat Casualty Care chair on combat casualty care issues, and require this coordination early in the research process when these organizations conduct research with implications for combat casualty care.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD took several actions in 2014 to communicate to DOD's nonmedical research organizations the importance of coordination with the Joint Program Committee for Combat Casualty Care. Specifically, DOD chartered the Armed Services Biomedical Research Evaluation and Management Community of Interest to include both medical and non-medical researchers and to improve coordination, collaboration, and cooperation. DOD also appointed senior leaders to work in both this community of interest and in other DOD research communities of interest, to improve coordination. Furthermore, DOD conducted joint research meetings to share research data across the medical and non-medical communities. However, DOD had not indicated a requirement for this coordination to occur early in the research process, as included in GAO's recommendation. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided additional information or documentation to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to significantly reduce the uncertainty that some taxpayers have about their ability to earn credits for their research activities, the Secretary of the Treasury should issue regulations clarifying the definition of gross receipts for purposes of computing the research credit for controlled groups of corporations.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury issued proposed regulations clarifying the definition of gross receipts on December 13, 2013 and solicited public comments. During the course of 2014, tax practitioners and business executives submitted comments criticizing the regulations and asking for them to be withdrawn. As of March 2020, Treasury has yet to issue final regulations that would include responses to these criticisms. The regulations would not become effective until the tax year beginning after the date on which the regulations are published in final form.

Recommendation: In order to significantly reduce the uncertainty that some taxpayers have about their ability to earn credits for their research activities, the Secretary of the Treasury should provide additional guidance to more clearly identify what types of activities are considered to be qualified support activities.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to clarify what types of activities are considered to be qualified support activities.

Recommendation: In order to significantly reduce the uncertainty that some taxpayers have about their ability to earn credits for their research activities, the Secretary of the Treasury should provide additional guidance to more clearly identify when commercial production of a qualified product is deemed to begin.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to more clearly identify when commercial production of a qualified product is deemed to begin.

Recommendation: In order to reduce economic inefficiencies and excessive revenue costs resulting from inaccuracies in the base of the research tax credit, Congress should consider eliminating the regular credit option for computing the research credit.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit.

Recommendation: In order to reduce economic inefficiencies and excessive revenue costs resulting from inaccuracies in the base of the research tax credit, Congress should consider adding a minimum base to the ASC that equals 50 percent of the taxpayer's current-year qualified research expenses.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit. Adding a minimum base for the ASC would reduce the revenue cost of the credit without affecting the average incentive it provides for research.

Recommendation: If Congress nevertheless wishes to continue offering the regular research credit to taxpayers, it may wish to consider reducing inaccuracies in the credit's base and to reduce taxpayers' uncertainty and compliance costs and IRS's administrative costs by updating the historical base period that regular credit claimants use to compute their fixed base percentages.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to update the historical base period that regular credit claimants use to compute their fixed base percentages.

Recommendation: If Congress nevertheless wishes to continue offering the regular research credit to taxpayers, it may wish to consider reducing inaccuracies in the credit's base and to reduce taxpayers' uncertainty and compliance costs and IRS's administrative costs by eliminating base period recordkeeping requirements for taxpayers that elect to use a fixed base percentage of 16 percent in their computation of the credit.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken to eliminate base period recordkeeping requirements for taxpayers that elect to use a fixed base percentage of 16 percent in their computation of the credit.

Recommendation: If Congress nevertheless wishes to continue offering the regular research credit to taxpayers, it may wish to consider reducing inaccuracies in the credit's base and to reduce taxpayers' uncertainty and compliance costs and IRS's administrative costs by clarifying for Treasury its intent regarding the definition of gross receipts for purposes of computing the research credit for controlled groups of corporations. In particular it may want to consider clarifying that the regulations generally excluding transfers between members of controlled groups apply to both gross receipts and QREs and specifically clarifying how it intended sales by domestic members to foreign members to be treated. Such clarification would help to resolve open controversies relating to past claims, even if the regular credit were discontinued for future years.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to clarify for Treasury its intent regarding the definition of gross receipts for purposes of computing the research credit for controlled groups of corporations. In particular, it may want to consider clarifying that the regulations generally excluding transfers between members of controlled groups apply to both gross receipts and QREs and specifically clarifying how it intended sales by domestic members to foreign members to be treated. Such clarification would help to resolve open controversies relating to past claims, even if the regular credit were discontinued for future years.

Recommendation: In order to develop an approach to decision making and the development of evidence on high-clockspeed trends affecting highway safety that are characterized by uncertainty, the Secretary of Transportation should consider and evaluate practices and principles for making decisions under conditions of uncertainty and for using data in such decision making and, on that basis, develop an approach to guide decision making on high-clockspeed trends that, although somewhat uncertain, may affect highway safety.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In GAO-09-56, GAO recommended the Secretary of Transportation consider and evaluate practices and principles for making conditions under uncertainty and for using data in light of issues encountered in developing evidence on high-clockspeed trends affecting highway safety that are characterized by uncertainty. GAO had studied driver distraction involving electronic devices, in particular cell phones with texting capability and identified these evolving electronic devices as a high clockspeed trend. DOT reports several actions on distracted driving, specifically: (1) an Executive Order to federal employees not to engage in text messaging while driving government-owned vehicles; when using electronic equipment supplied by the government while driving; or while driving privately owned vehicles when they are on official business; (2) the Secretary called on state and local governments to (a) make distracted driving part of their state highway plans, (b) pass state and local laws against distracted driving in all types of vehicles, (c) back up public awareness campaigns with high-visibility enforcement actions; (3) the Secretary directed the Department to establish an on-line clearinghouse on the risks of distracted driving and also (4) pledged to continue the Department's research on how to best combat distracted driving. DOT also notes that the Department's www.distraction.gov website provides information on the latest data on distracted driving and that 34 states have passed laws against texting and driving since the 2009 announcement by the Secretary of DOT.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should evaluate whether or not new approaches to data collection are needed to better track new trends related to highway safety.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT has not responded to this recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to improve the information available to the Congress for reauthorization, the Secretary of Transportation should analyze and report on trends currently anticipated to affect highway safety through 2020 and beyond in a systematic fashion--including information on high-clockspeed trends, discussion of evidence about these and other individual trends, their implications and potential interactions, and DOT responses.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT has not responded to this recommendation, but DOT announced a distracted driving summit September 30-October 1, 2009, with a limited number of invitees, and invited the GAO Assistant Director on this report to participate. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stated that the purpose of the summit is to "to address the dangers of text-messaging and other distractions behind the wheel." The summit will include "senior transportation officials, elected officials, safety advocates, law enforcement representatives and academics" who will convene in Washington, DC "to discuss ideas about how to combat distracted driving."

Recommendation: In order to improve the information available to the Congress for reauthorization, the Secretary of Transportation should determine, in consultation with relevant congressional committees, schedules for periodic reporting that will be sufficiently frequent to update the Congress on fast-changing trends.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: DOT has not responded to this recommendation.