Recommendation: EBSA should explore ways to collect information on fees charged to participants or alternate payees by a retirement plan—including plan service provider fees the plan passes on to participants—for review and qualification of domestic relations orders and evaluate the burden of doing so. For example, DOL could consider collecting fee information as part of existing reporting requirements in the Form 5500. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: EBSA should take steps to ensure that information regarding the requirements for QDROs is available and easily accessible for participants and alternate payees. For example, EBSA could develop a checklist of documents and information that parties could use to help draft a domestic relations order that would be more likely to be qualified as a QDRO on a plan administrator's first review. In addition, EBSA could conduct outreach focused on QDROs to practitioners, such as members of the family bar who may draft domestic relations orders. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should ensure the Office of Acquisition and Grants, in consultation with the Chief Information Officer, revises relevant guidance to identify the role of contracting officials in the Agile software development process.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The Social Security Administration agreed with the recommendation but has not yet taken actions to implement it.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs should direct the Division of Federal Employees' Compensation to send a reminder to all FECA recipients as they approach retirement that they may want to obtain FERS retirement benefits estimates for comparisons with FECA, including annuity estimates from their employing agencies and estimates of their Thrift Savings Plan and Social Security benefits. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs should direct the Division of Federal Employees' Compensation to coordinate with the Social Security Administration to take steps to modernize and improve the process of manually generating benefit amounts with and without federal earnings and exchanging information between the agencies to enable the provision of offset estimates to FECA recipients upon request and to reduce the potential for human error in applying offsets. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Social Security should direct the Office of Earnings and International Operations to coordinate with the Division of Federal Employees' Compensation to take steps to modernize and improve the process of manually generating benefit amounts with and without federal earnings and exchanging information between the agencies to enable the provision of offset estimates to FECA recipients upon request and to reduce the potential for human error in applying offsets. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should ensure that BLS explores cost-efficient ways to evaluate the data sources currently used to produce subpopulation indexes, such as by engaging more directly with other stakeholders or seeking input from its advisory groups and other knowledgeable entities about approaches to expand data collection in a cost-efficient manner. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would continue to investigate improvements to subpopulation indexes.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should ensure that BLS explores the use of already collected National Accounts data to produce more accurate, timely, and relevant CPIs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor (DOL) disagreed with this recommendation, stating that the National Accounts data are not a replacement for Consumer Expenditure Survey data. We agree that the National Accounts data are not a wholesale replacement for the Consumer Expenditure Survey data, but it would still be useful to examine National Accounts data as an augmenting, alternative source of data to supplement or enrich the Consumer Expenditure Survey. Such an effort could potentially lead to more accurate, timely, and relevant CPIs. Although DOL noted that the Consumer Expenditure Survey is a continuous survey and that data are received quarterly, most CPIs still rely on expenditure weights based on Consumer Expenditure Survey data that are up to 4 years out-of-date. In addition, the Consumer Expenditure Survey faces increasing costs and declining response rates. DOL said it is exploring ways to accelerate the data collection and processing time and that it periodically investigates the frequency of updating expenditure weights. This is a laudable effort that we believe warrants further action to explore additional opportunities for improvement, such as researching the extent to which there are instances or categories for which the National Accounts data could be used to produce more up-to-date expenditure weights than the Consumer Expenditure Survey.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should develop specific instructions within the Internal Revenue Manual, the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Audit Techniques Guide, or other IRS training material to aid examiners in obtaining and evaluating information they can use to determine whether there exists a restricted period with respect to a company with a single-employer defined benefit plan and if a company with a single-employer defined benefit plan has, during a restricted period, set aside assets for the purpose of paying deferred compensation under an executive retirement plan. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS stated that they would review and consider developing further specific instructions within the Internal Revenue Manual, the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Audit Techniques Guide or other IRS training material to aid examiners. We believe that implementing this recommendation will help ensure that IRS is aware of when companies with at-risk single-employer defined benefit plans are reporting assets set aside to pay deferred compensation to key executives while in a restricted period as income for those employees

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should review and determine whether its reporting requirements for executive retirement plans should be modified to provide additional information DOL could use to oversee whether these plans are meeting eligibility requirements. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOL stated that it does not have plans to issue guidance or regulations regarding executive retirement plans, citing, among other considerations, existing resource constraints and priority regulatory and guidance projects in development, and that it would not be advisable to shift resources from other projects. GAO continues to maintain that DOL's one-time single page alternative reporting for executive retirement plans lacks important information sufficient to help the agency identify whether companies may be including ineligible employees in its plan and DOL's current data on executive retirement plans has limited usefulness due to the age and limits of the original data submitted.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should explore actions the agency could take to help companies prevent the inclusion of rank-and-file employees in executive retirement plans and determine which, if any, actions should be implemented. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: DOL stated that the agency has not encountered evidence of systematic abuses involving executive retirement plans or that ERISA's claims procedure rules and judicial remedies are inadequate to protect participants' benefit rights. However, we reported that industry surveys indicate that some companies may be extending employee eligibility to high percentages of their workforce who are lower-paid and lower-ranked employees who may not be considered a part of a select group. Industry experts also told us that plan eligibility requirements for executive retirement plans are not clearly defined and that companies are unclear on how to establish eligibility, and they identified court cases that contribute to the confusion regarding plan eligibility. Implementing this recommendation will help ensure that only executives who can bear the risks inherent in these plans are participating.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should provide specific instructions for companies to follow to correct eligibility errors that occur when rank-and-file employees are found to be participating in executive retirement plans, and should coordinate with other federal agencies on these instructions, as appropriate. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: DOL suggested a remedy in an amicus brief for companies to follow to correct eligibility errors in these plans could have unintended consequences for participants because, according to IRS officials, it could result in violations of federal tax law and additional tax for participants. We urge DOL to develop instructions to correct eligibility errors, in coordination with other federal agencies, as needed, in a way that does not adversely affect rank-and-file employees participating in these plans.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should assess options for updating Publications 590-A and 590-B to either include more information or direct taxpayers to other resources for IRA owners with investments in unconventional assets. Such information could include: storage requirements for IRA investments in certain precious metals; valuation methods for hard-to-value IRA assets; the Department of Labor's process for granting exemptions to IRA prohibited transactions rules; and IRA investments with the potential to create unrelated business income tax liabilities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, building on forthcoming compliance research using new IRA asset data, should evaluate the feasibility of requiring disclosure for high-risk IRA asset types associated with abusive schemes as transactions of interest. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop resources (such as training materials or job aids) for Small Business/Self-Employed examiners conducting IRA owner audits that explain how IRAs with unconventional assets can generate unrelated business income tax liability, and how examiners can refer cases to unrelated business income experts in IRS for assistance. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should clarify policies and procedures to remind staff that a diagnosis of a substance use disorder is not necessary to conduct a Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency stated that it had revised related policies in February 2020, and had planned to issue guidance and video-on-demand training to further clarify policies and procedures in this area. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed further implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should ensure that staff document their rationale for decisions involving the Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation process. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. The agency said it had planned to issue guidance reinforcing its policy on properly documenting decisions involving the Drug Addiction and Alcoholism evaluation process. However, SSA said its efforts to maintain mission critical activities amid the COVID-19 pandemic have delayed implementation of this recommendation and a specific implementation date could not be provided at this time.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should ensure that (a) the agency's policies and guidance are specific enough so field office staff know how to apply complex suitability criteria for assessing payee suitability, such as by providing a minimum set of specific questions; and (b) additional regional guidance that is made available to staff is centrally reviewed for compliance and completeness. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation but did not specify plans to address it.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should create safeguards in the Electronic Representative Payee System (eRPS) to ensure that field office staff fully document all required information, such as the rationale for their decision, before approving an application. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and identified actions to address it. Specifically, SSA reported that, as part of implementing the Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of 2018, planned changes to eRPS will improve documentation of selection decisions. SSA also reported it will also consider additional enhancements to eRPS in the future. We will consider closing this recommendation when this effort is complete.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should complete a plan, including timeframes, for comprehensively evaluating if and how to leverage external sources of information on organizations' suitability, such as by conducting background checks or credit checks on organizations or key staff that handle beneficiaries' funds or requiring organizations to conduct their own background checks on key staff. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and identified actions to address it. SSA officials stated that it is first focusing on implementing provisions of the Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of 2018 related to background checks for certain individual payees. After completing this work, the agency plans to evaluate conducting criminal background checks and credit checks on organizational payees and their staff. While we agree that implementing background screening pursuant to the law should take precedence, SSA should seek opportunities to implement screening for organizational payees at the earliest opportunity.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should develop and implement mechanisms to systematically obtain and review feedback from organizational payees and communicate findings to SSA management. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation but did not identify plans to address it.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should (a) establish a plan and time frame for periodically reviewing the predictive model's design; (b) consider additional data sources that would allow for additional screening or modeling of potentially high-risk organizational payees; and (c) ensure that subsequent design decisions are documented in sufficient detail so the development process can be more fully understood and replicated, either by SSA or a knowledgeable third party, with minimal further explanation. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation in 2019 and identified actions to address it. The agency stated that it would pursue other data sources to develop additional screening tools and models to identify potentially high-risk organizational payees, but that it is unable to incorporate additional data into the existing model. They reported they cannot use new data to modify the existing model, which was built from cases and transactions that occurred many years ago. We recognize that the current model, which focuses on misuse findings and is based on historical data, presents challenges for both updating and including new data sources. Therefore, as SSA considers additional screening tools and models to identify high-risk, low-volume organizational payees, SSA should develop a plan for revising the existing model that allows for more timely updates and results in documentation of related design decisions. In April 2020, SSA officials reported that the agency is finalizing a plan to revise the existing model and would pursue other data sources to develop additional screening tools and models to identify potentially high-risk organizational payees.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should require field offices to contact payees about missing or problematic annual accounting forms within a specific time frame. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation but did not identify plans to address it.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should revise the annual accounting form to enhance its effectiveness. Such revisions could include (but not be limited to) more fully ascertaining the use of collective accounts, adopting stakeholders' recommendations on using the form to collect more meaningful data, and reflecting best practices from behavioral science insights in the design of the form. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation but did not identify plans to address it.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should enhance the eRPS system to ensure that field offices are (a) alerted when collective accounts are due to be reviewed; and (b) able to take action on expired collective account information and thereby avoid payees' continued use of these accounts without oversight. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and identified actions to address it. SSA officials reported that they would work with staff to ensure staff know where to find alerts for expiring accounts and enhance how eRPS displays information on collective accounts that have already expired. We agree with SSA's proposed actions. However, we adjusted our recommendation to clarify that SSA should enhance eRPS in a manner that ensures staff take action on expired accounts and that payees do not continue to use expired accounts without oversight.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should, as it carries through with its plan to develop a risk assessment for the organizational payee program, ensure that that the plan reflects periodic consideration of findings from onsite reviews and audits. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. In April 2020, SSA officials reported starting its Representative Payee Fraud Risk Assessment. We will consider closing this recommendation when SSA ensures that its risk assessment plan reflects periodic consideration of findings from onsite reviews and audits.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should evaluate the results of its financial literacy training assessments to determine where gaps in servicemembers' financial knowledge exist and revise future trainings to address these gaps. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The agency stated that in 2017 it added questions to its annual Status of Forces Survey to assess the military population's understanding of basic financial concepts. While these survey results will allow DOD to respond to identified gaps in servicemembers' financial literacy, Status of Forces survey results have taken years to compile in the past. Assessing servicemembers' financial literacy as part of mandatory trainings will allow DOD to more promptly identify gaps in servicemembers' knowledge and adjust trainings to address those gaps.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should provide servicemembers disclosures that explain key pieces of information about the lump-sum payment, including some measure of its relative value, the potential positive and negative financial ramifications of choosing the lump-sum payment option, and a description of how it was calculated. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD agreed with this recommendation and stated that it has developed a training course, published information to help educate servicemembers on the BRS's lump-sum option, and included a lump-sum section in its BRS calculator. These efforts to develop various tools for educating servicemembers on the BRS's lump-sum option are encouraging, however, we identified additional information that is important to include in lump sum disclosures in the report.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board should work with the Secretary of Defense to explore alternative options (including online resources) for servicemembers to receive their initial Thrift Savings Plan password so that servicemembers can access and manage their online accounts without added delays. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board: Office of the Executive Director
Status: Open

Comments: FRTIB agreed with this recommendation and said they will continue to explore avenues to address how servicemembers receive their initial TSP password while continuing to emphasize the need for security.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury, as Chairperson of the Boards of Trustees, should work with the other trustees to take steps—in consultation with the chief actuaries of SSA and CMS—to improve the management of the report development schedule in order to provide the Trustees reports to Congress by the statutory deadline. These steps could include regularly updating the schedule using actual progress and archiving the final iteration of the schedules. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury agreed with the recommendation and said they would work with the other trustees to take steps to improve the management of the report development schedule.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury, as Chairperson of the Boards of Trustees, should work with the other trustees to establish a policy to inform Congressional committees of jurisdiction when the trustees determine that the reports are expected to miss the issuance deadline. This outreach should include 1) the factors that are contributing to delays, and 2) the reports' expected issuance dates. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury agreed with this recommendation. The agency said it would explore the potential for a policy to inform Congressional committees of jurisdiction when the trustees determine that the reports are expected to miss the April 1 deadline.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should document internal policies and procedures for managing the IRA prohibited transaction exemption process. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to create an internal procedure manual which will document the Office of Exemption Determinations' process for managing IRA prohibited transaction exemption applications. When we confirm what actions DOL has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, should establish a formal means, such as a memorandum of understanding or other mechanism, to support and guide DOL's and IRS's collaborative efforts to oversee IRA prohibited transaction exemptions. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL agreed with this recommendation and plans to periodically discuss all IRA exemption cases with IRS and did not elaborate on the formal means for this information sharing. IRS said that it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, should establish a formal means, such as a memorandum of understanding or other mechanism, to support and guide DOL's and IRS's collaborative efforts to oversee IRA prohibited transaction exemptions. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation and said it has met with DOL to formalize collaboration on exemptions from prohibited transaction treatment in IRAs. DOL agreed to contact IRS within 25 days of DOL receiving an IRA prohibited transaction exemption application to determine if there are any Internal Revenue Code issues. To avoid any disclosure concerns, DOL will not identify the applicant at that time. This new process will be reflected in DOL's forthcoming internal procedure manual for the prohibited transaction exemption process.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services, working in coordination with the Chief Information Officer, should develop, document, and implement a Retirement Services IT modernization plan for initial project phases that is consistent with key aspects of IT project management, such as determining objectives, costs, and time frames for each initial phase. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that it has established initial high-level funding estimates for each of its five key IT initiatives. OPM cited that its ability to implement the modernization plan depends on the availability of funding and coordination with the agency's top leadership. In December 2019, OPM stated that it was evaluating what corrective actions it plans to take. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should adopt management practices to enhance the use of performance information on processing timeliness to inform how OPM manages operations, identifies problem areas, and allocates resources. For example, OPM could enhance use of performance measures at the operational level or establish a timeliness performance goal for reviewing disability retirement eligibility. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation and responded that it measures overtime spending, reviews daily work level in each work unit, and assesses employee productivity in these units. Collecting and reviewing such operational-level data contributes to monitoring efforts; however the recommendation emphasizes the importance of using performance information to better manage operations to align with organizational goals. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should provide explanatory information, such as the range of processing times and the exclusion of disability retirement eligibility determinations, as part of the performance measure on processing timeliness. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM agreed to add an explanation about disability retirement eligibility determinations to its public reports. OPM disagreed that reporting data on the range of processing times would be beneficial because, according to OPM, it provides processing information through other means, such as through applicants' online accounts and agency benefit officers. OPM also acknowledged that it already collects and shares such data. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should develop and implement policies and procedures for assessing strategies intended to improve processing times, including collecting and improving data needed to support those strategies, such as collecting better productivity data or staffing data and linking them to processing outcomes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that a new case management system could provide better productivity and staffing data with which to assess effectiveness, but is dependent on funding and IT support. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should examine its process for assessing its assistance to agencies on retirement applications. For example, OPM could incorporate into its assessment process more agency feedback or documentation of assessment results, which could improve its partnership with agencies to strengthen the assistance provided. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM concurred with the recommendation. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: The Associate Director of OPM's Retirement Services should work with agencies to determine if there are cost-effective ways to make the retirement application error report that it sends to agencies more user-friendly. For example, explore whether there are cost-effective ways to provide the error report in a format that could be manipulated (e.g., Excel spreadsheet), or to include additional information, such as incorporating disability retirement applications or providing clearer descriptions of errors or trend data, some of which OPM already collects. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation. OPM stated that it will explore using MS Excel spreadsheets and incorporating clearer descriptions of errors and data trends. OPM also stated that collecting disability application error information is not an inexpensive or simple process change. In April 2020, GAO contacted OPM about the status of this recommendation and we are awaiting a response.

Recommendation: To better identify the incidence and amount of loan offsets in 401(k) plans nationwide, we recommend that the Secretary of Labor direct the Assistant Secretary for the Employee Benefits Security Administration, in coordination with IRS, to revise the Form 5500 to require plan sponsors to report qualified plan loan offsets as a separate line item distinct from other types of distributions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. The agency said it would consider the recommendation as part of its overall evaluation of the Form 5500. IRS said it would work with DOL as it responds to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should work with the Department of the Treasury to consider clarifying if transfers of unclaimed savings from employer-based plans (such as 401(k) plans) to states are distributions, what, if any, tax reporting and withholding requirements apply, and when they apply. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would work with Treasury to consider clarifying the issues raised by this recommendation.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should work with the Department of the Treasury to consider adding retirement savings transferred to states from terminating DC plans to the list of permitted reasons for rolling over savings after the 60-day rollover period, in a form consistent with the rules adopted on the taxation of transfers of unclaimed retirement savings. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would work with Treasury to consider addressing the issues outlined in this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should specify the circumstances, if any, under which uncashed distribution checks from active plans can be transferred to the states. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. However, DOL stated it plans to continue to evaluate whether there are circumstances in which the transfer of uncashed distribution checks from an ongoing plan to the states advances the goal of reuniting missing participants with their savings, which is consistent with this recommendation. We commend DOL for recognizing the importance of this issue and will monitor the agency's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress should consider passing legislation to put postal retiree health benefits on a more sustainable financial footing.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action on this matter.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) should clarify whether an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 plan may incorporate material ESG factors into the investment management for a qualified default investment alternative (QDIA). (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. On April 23, 2018, while DOL was reviewing our report, the agency issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2018-01 regarding retirement plans' use of ESG factors. While this new bulletin specifically mentions the use of ESG factors in a QDIA and reiterates the conditions under which an investment option may generally be considered a QDIA, it focuses on the use of ESG factors for collateral benefits rather than on cases where ESG factors are considered in investment decisions because they have been determined by fiduciaries to be material to financial performance. For example, the new field assistance bulletin states that the QDIA regulations do not suggest that fiduciaries should select a QDIA based on collateral public policy goals. ESG factors can be used to address material risks, which might otherwise be ignored, and there is interest in considering such factors within a QDIA. The use of ESG factors in this manner can be distinct from pursuing collateral public policy goals. Additional clarification from DOL that explicitly addresses plans' use of financially material ESG factors in investment options designated as a QDIA could enhance the agency's effectiveness in assisting plan fiduciaries with understanding and fulfilling their obligations under ERISA. In June 2019, DOL stated that it would be appropriate to engage with stakeholders before reaching any conclusions about the necessity or appropriateness of issuing further guidance in this area. Additional information about DOL's efforts to engage with stakeholders, including the outcome of such efforts and rationale for any conclusions reached would help determine the effectiveness of the agency's actions.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for EBSA should provide further information to assist fiduciaries in investment management involving ESG factors, including how to evaluate available options, such as questions to ask or items to consider. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. GAO believes that while DOL's new field assistance bulletin provides information on the limitations of using ESG factors for pursuing collateral benefits, additional clarifying information could help sponsors conduct due diligence in considering whether ESG factors are material to an investment's financial performance and, if so, how to address those material risks. DOL's written comments recognize that additional clarification could be appropriate, depending on responses to the new field assistance bulletin from the public. We appreciate the consideration of the need for additional information, particularly as some have noted the new field assistance bulletin could create a chilling effect that leads fiduciaries to avoid considering ESG factors that could address material risks in their investments, to the detriment of plan participants' best interests. In June 2019, DOL stated that it would be appropriate to engage with stakeholders before reaching any conclusions about the necessity or appropriateness of issuing further guidance in this area. DOL further stated that the agency added a new project to the Spring 2019 regulatory agenda related to proxy voting. Additional information about DOL's new project on proxy voting and efforts to engage with stakeholders, including the outcome of such efforts and rationale for any conclusions reached, would help determine the effectiveness of the agency's actions.

Recommendation: The Board should work with SSA to explore options for obtaining data electronically and limiting the reliance of the financial interchange process on manual data entry. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Railroad Retirement Board
Status: Open

Comments: RRB reported taking steps to implement this recommendation. In January 2020, the agency received a cost estimate from SSA for a proposed data exchange. In May 2020, RRB and SSA held an inaugural conference call and reached an understanding of the technical requirements to move forward with a data exchange. As of June 2020, RRB reports that systems analysts at SSA are developing the procedures and systems necessary for an electronic data exchange. GAO will close this recommendation when the data system is implemented.

Recommendation: The Board should produce written documentation on the financial interchange process such that a knowledgeable third party could carry out and replicate its process consistently without further explanation. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Railroad Retirement Board
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, RRB reports that it has been working to draft documentation of the financial interchange calculation process, and sharing drafts of this documentation with SSA for its review. SSA has requested revisions in this documentation and RRB plans to hire additional staff to implement GAO's recommendation. GAO will close this recommendation once RRB finalizes its documentation of the financial interchange calculation process.

Recommendation: The Board should produce formal policies on how the work of staff performing the financial interchange is reviewed. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Railroad Retirement Board
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, RRB reports that it is in the process of developing formal review policies and plans to include them in its written documentation of the financial interchange process. GAO will close this recommendation once RRB's formal review policy is complete.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of SSA should work with RRB to explore options for electronically sharing data and limiting the reliance of the financial interchange process on manual data entry. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA reported that it received a data exchange request from RRB in October 2018. RRB proposed to send SSA a file of beneficiary and earnings data, and receive calculations for sample financial interchange cases. RRB and SSA discussed options for exchanging information electronically. In early 2020, SSA reported that it is developing a Rough Order of Magnitude/Cost Estimate for electronically sharing data and limiting the reliance of the financial interchange process on manual data entry under its existing agreement. The agency has no timeline to complete this effort.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of SSA should take additional steps to provide oversight of financial interchange calculations at the individual-case level. This could include periodically reviewing a subset of these cases. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2020, SSA reported that it has developed plans to review of a subset of financial interchange calculations as the individual-case level. SSA anticipates that this review will take place following the completion of RRB's fiscal year 2021-2022 financial interchange calculations. We will close this recommendation once SSA's review successfully takes place.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should, consistent with its existing statutory authority, take additional steps to provide oversight of financial interchange calculations at the individual-case level. If the Secretary concludes that there are limitations in its authority in this area, the Secretary should seek to obtain the necessary additional authority. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, HHS continues to disagree with this recommendation. HHS officials said that RRB is responsible for certifying its costs through the financial interchange, and that they believe the department lacks the authority to question RRB's calculations. We continue to believe that HHS would be better positioned to ensure that the transfers it makes and receives through the interchange are calculated correctly if it reviews case-level calculations. We will close this recommendation if HHS seeks the authority to review financial interchange calculations or takes other steps to ensure the accuracy of financial interchange calculations performed by RRB.

Recommendation: To improve RRB's ability to make accurate disability benefit eligibility determinations, including CDRs, and to decrease the potential for making improper payments, Congress should consider granting RRB access to the Department of Health and Human Services' quarterly earnings information from the National Directory of New Hires database. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, no legislation has been enacted resulting from this matter to Congress. RRB's (the Board) fiscal year 2020 budget proposal included a legislative proposal to provide the Board access to the NDNH. Although the Board reported that the resulting proposed legislation drafted by HHS - the entity that maintains the NDNH - would, if enacted, provide access to the NDNH, the Board opposed the proposal in part because it would not waive associated fees to access the NDNH, and concluded access to the NDNH would not be cost-effective. In January 2020, the Board informed GAO it is not currently seeking legislation to gain access to the NDNH, resulting in the Board continuing to use earnings data that may be outdated in its continuing disability reviews, but that it may seek access in the future.

Recommendation: To enhance RRB's ability to manage and oversee its CDR program, RRB should routinely compile and analyze CDR program data, such as the number of cases selected for review, the number of beneficiaries in each medical improvement category, outcomes, and the costs and benefits of conducting CDRs, to improve program oversight. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Railroad Retirement Board
Status: Open

Comments: RRB agreed with this recommendation. In June 2020, RRB reported that its Program Evaluation and Management Services (PEMS) section will compile and analyze all relevant CDR program case and cost data to better oversee CDRs. RRB said that its first analysis would cover CDR's adjudicated from April 2019 through September 2020; as of June 2020 they had adjudicated 107 CDR cases. In addition, RRB reported that its monthly reporting on CDRs to the Director of Disability includes information on the type of CDR completed, the medical improvement category for medical CDR, and the disposition of the CDR. In August 2018, the agency had reported that it began reporting in October 2017 weekly pending CDR type action cases to the Director of Programs, and that it had begun tracking CDR reason codes for each medical improvement category. To close this recommendation, RRB will need to include an analysis of the costs and benefits of conducting CDRs, including any overpayments or underpayments processed, and share its complete analysis of CDRs through September 2020 after it is completed. At that point GAO will review the analysis and decide if it provides a sufficient bases for program oversight.

Recommendation: Congress should consider legislation modifying the Internal Revenue Code to allow routine account transfers within the same foreign workplace retirement plan or between two foreign workplace retirement plans in the same country to be free from U.S. tax in countries covered by an existing income tax treaty that provides for favorable U.S. tax treatment of foreign workplace retirement plan contributions.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: We will monitor congressional action related to this matter.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should issue guidance on the obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 of sponsors of ongoing plans to prevent, search for, and pay costs associated with locating missing participants. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: Labor agreed with this recommendation. In June 2019, the Department reported that it engaged with a range of stakeholders on issues surrounding missing and unresponsive participants, including representatives of plans, employers, financial services groups, consumer groups, and state unclaimed property funds. Their goal is to help plans locate and pay retirement benefits to missing participants and beneficiaries; they will evaluate constructive guidance to issue. There is no specific timeline for next steps regarding subregulatory guidance or regulatory proposals. GAO will monitor the agency's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should review taxation issues relating to distributions involving incorrect participant addresses and uncashed benefit checks and clarify for the public the Internal Revenue Code's requirements in these circumstances. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed to review taxation issues relating to distributions involving incorrect participant addresses and uncashed benefit checks and to clarify for the public the Internal Revenue Code's requirements in these circumstances. We will consider closing this recommendation when the agency provides evidence that it completed these efforts.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should consider revising the letter forwarding program in a cost-effective manner to again provide information on behalf of plan sponsors on unclaimed retirement accounts to participants. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS disagreed with this recommendation, noting that the IRS address of record for a participant would likely be of no greater value than addresses available through alternatives such as commercial locator services. However, our report does not cite the accuracy of IRS addresses, but rather other benefits that make a program revision worth considering, specifically the likelihood that individuals will open IRS correspondence, and the trust DOL places in the service as way for plan fiduciaries to meet their obligations. IRS also stated that the limited number of IRS staff and resources impact the feasibility of reinstating this program for plan participants. We continue to believe that expanding the letter forwarding program would be beneficial, and we encourage IRS to consider cost-effective ways to do so.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should clarify how U.S. individuals are to report their foreign retirement accounts. The clarification could include addressing how these accounts should be designated and how the taxpayer should report contributions, earnings, and distributions made from the account. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. We encourage IRS to take the necessary steps to dispel any confusion U.S. individuals may have over how to properly classify and report their foreign retirement accounts on a U.S. tax return-such clarification should help ensure that these taxpayers can meet their tax reporting obligations.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should systematically analyze data reported through Form 8938 filings on foreign retirement accounts owned by U.S. individuals with the goal of developing an evidence-based understanding of how these accounts change over time and what level of risk these accounts pose for tax evasion. To assist with this analysis, IRS should consider revising Form 8938 to more clearly distinguish between retirement accounts and other types of accounts or assets being reported by taxpayers under current reporting requirements. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS disagreed with this recommendation but not on its merits, citing a lack of resources to implement it. Specifically, IRS noted that although the modification to the Form 8938 suggested in this recommendation may seem minor, systemically collecting and analyzing the data would require resources beyond those currently available to IRS. However, our report notes that IRS indicated that they already collect foreign account filing data through the Form 8938 and that the current reporting requirements help the agency to "keep a line of sight" on U.S. individuals' foreign pension arrangements. IRS told us that without such data being reported, U.S. individuals with foreign retirement accounts may seek to avoid proper reporting on their tax returns when distributions are made. However, without agreeing to take steps to analyze these data reported by taxpayers, the question remains why the agency continues to collect such information-which we show in the report to present a substantial reporting burden on taxpayers-if the agency has no plan to analyze the data in order to make an informed decision about the risk for tax evasion that such accounts present. It is also unclear how IRS would maintain a line of sight on foreign retirement accounts belonging to U.S. individuals without analyzing the data reported by taxpayers on such accounts. We recognize that resources are limited. When staff and resources become available, IRS should modify the form and conduct a systematic analysis of these data-data that current law requires taxpayers to report-in order to assess the risk of tax evasion that foreign retirement accounts pose. Such an analysis can provide a basis to reach an evidence-based understanding of how these accounts change over time and what level of risk they pose for tax evasion, and U.S. individuals owning foreign retirement accounts will continue to face these substantial reporting burdens without the knowledge that the data they are required to provide will be put to good use by the federal government.

Recommendation: The IRS Commissioner should take steps to improve the likelihood that the Notice of Potential Private Pension Benefit Information corresponds to actual retirement benefits in the future, for example, by working with the Social Security Administration as necessary. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: IRS agreed with this recommendation. The agency indicated it would work to improve the likelihood that the Notice of Potential Private Pension Benefit Information corresponds to actual retirement benefits in the future, and agreed to take steps to ensure that the data reported on Form 8955-SSA are accurate and to advise plan sponsors of any changes to reporting these data.

Recommendation: The Social Security Administration Commissioner should take steps to improve the likelihood that the Notice of Potential Private Pension Benefit Information corresponds to actual retirement benefits in the future, for example, by working with IRS as necessary. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation. In November 2019, SSA stated that the agency is meeting with the IRS regularly to discuss Form 8955-SSA, which provides the basis for the information shown in the "Potential Private Retirement Benefit Information" notice. The IRS agreed to incorporate SSA's suggestion to update Form 8955-SSA to explain that the filer should include the individual pension plan participant's full social security number (SSN) on the form. SSA reported that it is working with the IRS to clarify coding instructions for Form 8955-SSA and institute a new edit to its paper processing to ensure accuracy. They are also considering potential data exchanges with filers. We will monitor the agency's progress in completing these tasks.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of SSA should develop a set of public performance measures, to include accuracy and consistency, as well as timeliness, of administrative law judges' (ALJ) disability decisions. SSA could consider whether existing quality review or monitoring efforts could provide suitable data for such measures. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would address it as part of a comprehensive assessment and refinement of its oversight roles and processes. As of February 2020, SSA officials reported that the agency developed a new review of hearing decisions to assess decisional quality on a national level. Officials said they implemented the review throughout fiscal year 2019 and will draft a report on the findings in fiscal year 2020. As they review results from this review, SSA officials said that they will assess whether existing quality review measures will provide suitable data for performance measures related to timeliness, consistency, and accuracy. Officials said they do not have a timeline for implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of SSA should systematically evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of its quality assurance reviews and take steps to reduce or better manage any unnecessary overlap among them to ensure strategic use of resources. Such steps could include enhancing collaboration where reviews overlap or only conducting the reviews that are most efficient and effective in achieving agency goals for improving accuracy and consistency of ALJ disability decisions. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would address this recommendation as part of a comprehensive assessment and refinement of its oversight roles and processes. In March 2018, SSA noted that the Offices of Quality Review and Appellate Operations are now consolidated under the Office of Analytics, Review, and Oversight (OARO). According to SSA, OARO was created with the purposes of enhancing collaboration, eliminating unnecessary overlap, and enhancing the efficiency of reviews. As of February 2020, SSA officials said that they developed a new review of favorable and unfavorable hearing decisions to provide statistically valid results on the quality of decisions on appealed disability claims at the national level. Officials said they will use the results of this one-time review to help assess the utility of their other quality reviews. Successful completion of these efforts should help to ensure effective use of resources in overseeing the quality of decisions on appealed disability claims.

Recommendation: Congress should consider establishing an independent commission to comprehensively examine the U.S. retirement system and make recommendations to clarify key policy goals for the system and improve how the nation can promote more stable retirement security. We suggest that such a commission include representatives from government agencies, employers, the financial services industry, unions, participant advocates, and researchers, among others, to help inform policymakers on changes needed to improve the current U.S. retirement system.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: On April 25, 2018, the Senate introduced the "Commission on Retirement Security Act of 2018" (S.2753). On May 14, 2019, the Senate re-introduced this legislation (S.1435). This bipartisan legislation would establish a comprehensive retirement Commission that would be responsible for developing findings, conclusions, and recommendations for how to improve or replace existing private retirement programs. Commission members would be appointed using a bipartisan process and would include representatives from government agencies; current or former members of Congress; economic experts; and practitioners with expertise or experience engaging with employers, labor unions, and consumers designing and administering retirement plans. As of July 2020, no additional action has been taken.

Recommendation: The Chief Investment Officer of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board should use key practices as appropriate to increase opportunities for MWO asset managers if and when implementing its mutual fund window platform. Specifically, the Chief Investment Officer should take actions to demonstrate top leadership commitment, remove potential barriers, conduct outreach to MWO firms, and communicate its priorities and expectations for an inclusive selection process to its staff and consultants if and when it begins to search for a mutual fund window platform. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
Status: Open

Comments: The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) did not concur with this recommendation. In July 2020, FRTIB officials told us they expect to award the mutual fund window contract in the last quarter of 2020 and that one of the goals in offering the mutual fund window is to ensure that Thrift Savings Plan participants have a variety of funds from which to choose. However, FRTIB has not changed its position on the recommendation. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid and will monitor FRTIB's efforts to address it.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the agency to develop a long-term facility plan that explicitly links to SSA's strategic goals for service delivery, and includes a strategy for consolidating or downsizing field offices in light of increasing use of and geographic variation in remote service delivery.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, SSA said its Space Acquisition Review Board (SARB) continues to meet periodically and focuses on efficiently using the agency's resources to reduce its real estate footprint and proactively addressing organizational and operational changes. In addition, SSA said its goals, results, and future plans of its real estate strategy are documented in its annual Real Property Efficiency Plan. GAO reviewed SSA's Real Property Efficiency Plan for 2019-2023 (dated September 2018). This plan states that SSA is using two model field offices to test how emerging technologies and service delivery methods could result in reductions to field office space agency-wide. However, it does not include specific plans for adjusting its overall physical footprint in light of expanding remote service delivery. To close this recommendation as implemented, SSA will need to demonstrate that it has developed a long-term facility plan--possibly building on its model field office pilot--that links to its strategic goals for service delivery and includes a plan for adjusting its field offices in light of increasing use of and geographic variation in remote service delivery.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the agency to reassess and, if needed, revise its field office space standards to ensure they provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate both unexpected growth in the demand for services and new service delivery technologies.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it published its consolidated and revised Space Allocation Standards and Space Computation Worksheets in June 2019. It said the revised standards include standardized offices, work stations, and employee personal storage space. To close this recommendation as implemented, GAO will need to see evidence that the revised space allocation standards allow more flexibility for growth in demand and new service delivery methods, or at least that SSA considered incorporating such flexibility.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the agency to develop a cost-effective approach to identifying the most common issues with online benefit claims that require staff follow-up with applicants, and use this information to inform improvements to the online claims process.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it has identified the most common reasons for technician follow-up on the iClaims system, and based on these reasons has developed a list of potential future enhancements to iClaim. SSA said it prioritized the enhancements based on which would provide the most relief, but is still determining if enhancements can be made. To close this recommendation as implemented, GAO will need to see evidence that SSA has in fact implemented changes to the iClaim system based on the data it collected on reasons for technician follow-up.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the agency for its alternative customer services approaches, including desktop icons and video services in third-party sites, to develop performance goals and collect performance data related to these goals.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it has developed performance goals for its SSA Express Icons: 15,000 new visitors annually and 50 new partner sites annually. It also said it continues to work on a dashboard for behavioral based management information data collection for the Icon project. This effort will allow the agency to collect better data regarding customer usage. For GAO to close this recommendation as implemented, SSA will need to demonstrate that it has implemented performance measures for its full range of alternative service delivery methods and is collecting related performance information.

Recommendation: The Board of Directors should ensure that TVA propose, and work with the TVA Retirement System board to adopt, funding rules designed to ensure the plan's full funding.

Agency: Tennessee Valley Authority
Status: Open

Comments: In their initial response to our report, TVA neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. In response to our report, TVA has taken some steps to improve the plan's funding status. For example, in fiscal year 2017, TVA made a one-time pension contribution of $500 million to the TVA Retirement System (TVARS) in addition to its $300 million required annual contribution, resulting in a total of $1.7 billion in contributions from fiscal year 2017 through fiscal year 2020 . TVA's one-time contribution and investment returns have improved the funding status of the TVARS plan but the TVARS Rules do not adjust TVA's required contributions to ensure pension liabilities will be fully funded. In order to fully implement this recommendation, the Rules need a mechanism that adjusts TVA's contributions to ensure adequate funding regardless of future plan experience.

Recommendation: To preserve the balance between the importance of repaying federal student loan debt and protecting a minimum level of Social Security benefits put in place by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Congress should consider modifying Social Security administrative offset provisions, such as by authorizing the Department of the Treasury to annually index the amount of Social Security benefits exempted from administrative offset to reflect changes in the cost of living over time.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2018, Congress has not yet taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform affected borrowers of the suspension of offset and potential consequences if the borrower does not take action to apply for a TPD discharge. Such information could include notification that interest continues to accrue and that offsets may resume once their disability benefits are converted to retirement benefits.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education does not currently notify borrowers of the suspension of offset, but plans to implement a process to do so in the future using a new mailing sent to affected borrowers by their default servicer. The current budget situation does not allow for this type of enhancement, and it is not clear when that will change. In the interim, the agency is exploring alternative notification approaches that could be put in place prior to the implementation of an automated solution. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that this effort has been completed. As of October 2020, Education's website includes information about the suspension of offset. However, affected borrowers may not know to check the website and the agency has not provided documentation that it has directly alerted affected borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should revise forms sent to borrowers already approved for a TPD discharge to clearly and prominently state that failure to provide annual income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period will result in loan reinstatement.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The FUTURE Act (H.R. 5363), signed into law on Dec. 19, 2019, requires the Department of Education (Education) to automate the income monitoring process for borrowers whose loans are discharged for total and permanent disability. As a result of automating the process, borrowers will no longer need to receive Education's forms requesting the borrower to individually provide their income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform borrowers about the financial hardship exemption option and application process on the agency's website, as well as the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education agrees with the recommendation and said that they will include this change in upcoming revisions to the agency's web content. The agency reported that the Notice of Offset to borrowers is sent by Treasury and that they will share this recommendation with Treasury and discuss possible changes to the notice. As of October 2020, Education's website notes that borrowers can request a review of their offset , but it does not specifically note that they may do so because of a financial hardship. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that the agency has notified borrowers about the financial hardship exemption process on its website and the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should implement an annual review process to ensure that only eligible borrowers are exempted from offset for financial hardship on an ongoing basis.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education reported that it plans to fully automate their process for tracking hardships and other exceptions from offset. However, due to competing priorities and funding limitations, full implementation of these improvements have not been scheduled. As they fully implement this process, they will review complementary strategies to assist borrowers in complying with annual reporting requirements. As of December 2018, Education reported that it is in the process of re-designing the student loan financial services environment, which will lead to major improvements such as offset exceptions. They are conducting market research on the new environment, then plan to develop requirements and timelines in support of a procurement with a projected completion in September 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when we receive documentation that the agency has implemented an annual review process.

Recommendation: To ensure that current vesting policies appropriately balance plans' needs and interests with the needs of workers to have employment mobility while also saving for retirement, Treasury should evaluate the appropriateness of existing maximum vesting policies for account-based plans, considering today's mobile labor force, and seek legislative action to revise vesting schedules, if deemed necessary. The Department of Labor could provide assistance with such an evaluation.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2020, no action had been taken on this recommendation. Treasury did not report an evaluation of existing maximum vesting policies for account-based plans and reiterated its policy of not recommending any legislative change to Congress. Other priorities have delayed the agency's plan to work with IRS on guidance to update the regulations under Code section 411, which concern vesting schedules, as currently in effect. But those updates, even if they should occur in the future, cannot modify permitted vesting schedules because, as Treasury notes in its comments, the vesting rules were determined by Congress. Given that more than 84 million people hold 401(k) plan accounts and that median current tenure in the private-sector is about four years, the potential for these policies to significantly impact Americans' retirement security remains. We will close this recommendation when Treasury evaluates the appropriateness of current maximum vesting policies to help determine whether they unduly reduce the retirement savings of workers, regardless of whether the agency opts to seek legislative action.

Recommendation: To help participants better understand eligibility and vesting policies, the Department of Labor (DOL) should develop guidance for plan sponsors that identifies best practices for communicating information about eligibility and vesting policies in a clear manner in summary plan descriptions. For example, DOL could discourage plans from including in documents information about employer contributions or other provisions that are not actually being used by the plan sponsor.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, the Department of Labor (DOL) was considering delaying regulatory action to improve disclosures, to direct its regulatory resources elsewhere. The agency noted however, that it may reopen for further comment a Request for Information posted in 2019, which sought public input on actions that could make retirement plan disclosures more understandable and useful for participants and beneficiaries, among other things. Such actions may include revising standards for the summary plan description, which our report found can contain obsolete and confusing information concerning eligibility and vesting. We continue to encourage the agency to include eligibility and vesting among topics considered for clarification in its future regulatory work and, in the meantime, to consider using sub-regulatory guidance to help plan sponsors better communicate these critical policies.

Recommendation: Congress should consider whether ERISA's provisions related to the timing of employer matching contributions need to be adjusted to reflect today's mobile workforce and workplace plans, which are predominantly 401(k) plans offering matching employer contributions.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, Congress has not taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: Congress should consider whether ERISA's provisions related to last day policies need to be adjusted to reflect today's mobile workforce and workplace plans, which are predominantly 401(k) plans offering matching employer contributions.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress did not take action on this matter.

Recommendation: To guide fiduciaries as they consider how the account balances of their participants will translate into financial security in retirement, DOL should modify its Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities publication or issue new guidance to encourage plan sponsors to use a record keeper that includes annuities from multiple providers on their record keeping platform.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL stated that it reviewed its publications to explore ways to encourage use of products and arrangements designed to provide participants and beneficiaries a lifetime income stream after retirement, and it is working on ways to build on them to better educate participants and plan sponsors about the need to think of making retirement savings last throughout retirement. The agency noted that its Spring 2018 regulatory agenda continues to classify the relevant project as a long-term action and there has been no change or additional action since then.

Recommendation: To guide fiduciaries as they consider how the account balances of their participants will translate into financial security in retirement, DOL should modify its Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities publication or issue new guidance to encourage plan sponsors to offer participants the option to partially annuitize their account balance by allowing them the ability to purchase the amount of guaranteed lifetime income most appropriate for them.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In 2019, DOL stated that it reviewed its publications to explore ways to encourage use of products and arrangements designed to provide participants and beneficiaries a lifetime income stream after retirement, and it is working on ways to build on them to better educate participants and plan sponsors about the need to think of making retirement savings last throughout retirement. In 2020, the agency reviewed "Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities" in light of this recommendation. It is updating this publication to, among other things, implement lifetime income provisions in the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement (SECURE) Act. We await further progress by the agency.

Recommendation: To guide fiduciaries as they consider how the account balances of their participants will translate into financial security in retirement, DOL should modify its Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities publication or issue new guidance to encourage plan sponsors to include participant access to advice on the plan's lifetime income options from an expert in retirement income strategies.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL stated that it reviewed its publications to explore ways to encourage use of products and arrangements designed to provide participants and beneficiaries a lifetime income stream after retirement, and it is working on ways to build on them to better educate participants and plan sponsors about the need to think of making retirement savings last throughout retirement. In 2019, the agency noted that its Spring 2019 regulatory agenda continues to classify the relevant project as a long-term action.

Recommendation: To guide fiduciaries as they consider how the account balances of their participants will translate into financial security in retirement, DOL should modify its Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities publication or issue new guidance to encourage plan sponsors to consider providing RMD-based default income-plan distributions as a default stream of lifetime income based on the RMD methodology-beginning, unless they opt-out, when retirement-age participants separate from employment, rather than after age 70½.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL stated that it reviewed its publications to explore ways to encourage use of products and arrangements designed to provide participants and beneficiaries a lifetime income stream after retirement, and it is working on ways to build on them to better educate participants and plan sponsors about the need to think of making retirement savings last throughout retirement. In 2019, the agency noted that its Spring 2019 regulatory agenda continues to classify the relevant project as a long-term action.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should clarify its policy for assessing the reasonableness of expenses used in determining beneficiaries' repayment amounts to help ensure that withholding plans are consistently established across the agency and accurately reflect individuals' ability to pay.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, SSA reported taking a number of steps to address this recommendation. According to SSA, it updated its guidance in 2017 to help ensure that staff consistently process various requests from overpaid individuals. SSA also reported that it is taking additional steps to update instructions on how staff should consider whether expenses reported by individuals are reasonable when approving withholding plans. The agency expects these instructions to be complete by the end of fiscal year 2021. We will close this recommendation once SSA releases additional guidance on assessing the reasonableness of expenses.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should adjust the minimum withholding rate to 10 percent of monthly DI benefits to allow quicker recovery of debt.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and in 2017 estimated that this change would result in an additional $213 million in collections over a 5-year period. The fiscal year 2021 President's budget submission contained a legislative proposal to make this change, and budgets since 2017 have contained similar proposals. As of June 2020, SSA reported that it plans to continue to submit similar legislative proposals. SSA also included the proposal in its regulatory agenda, noting that the change can also be implemented via regulatory change. We will close this recommendation once SSA achieves resolution from Congress on its legislative proposal or from its own regulatory efforts.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should consider adjusting monthly withholding amounts according to cost of living adjustments or charging interest on debts being collected by withholding benefits. Should SSA determine that it is necessary to do so, it could pursue legislative authority to use recovery tools that it is currently unable to use.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: Although SSA initially disagreed with this recommendation, the agency reassessed its response in June 2019 and decided to take additional actions. As of June 2020, SSA is developing a system to track debts (the Debt Management Product) which will have the ability to store, track, and apply interest and penalties to overpayment debts. SSA also reports that it is seeking a regulatory change to clarify procedures to charge interest on debts. While SSA is pursuing these measures to position itself to charge interest on debts, the agency has not yet decided whether it will ultimately do so. We will close this recommendation once SSA makes a decision on how to proceed with charging interest on overpayment debts.

Recommendation: To further ensure the effective screening of work reports, SSA should monitor its process for handling work reports to determine whether staff are taking action on work reports in accordance with proper procedures, and provide feedback to staff as needed.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA continues to disagree with this recommendation as of December 2019. As we reported, when SSA accepts a beneficiary's return to work allegation (work report), staff have 30 days to determine whether additional action is needed, such as a continuing disability review (CDR) to assess continued eligibility and determine whether benefits should be adjusted. However, not all work reports result in a CDR, and GAO reported that SSA lacks an oversight process to help determine whether work reports are not resulting in CDRs when they should. SSA continues to maintain that its staff carefully review work reports and make independent determinations on the need for a CDR. Absent an oversight process to ensure that work reports are properly screened, SSA may be missing opportunities to prevent overpayments for unreported work. SSA further reported that it may decide to complete a CDR through alternative approaches, such as its Continuing Disability Review Enforcement Operation process using Internal Revenue Service data, its Quarterly Earnings Project using Office of Child Support Enforcement data, or its analysis of electronically reported wages. However, SSA did not indicate whether these alternative avenues for conducting CDRs could identify errors made by its staff handling work reports and result in feedback. Implementing this recommendation will help ensure that SSA staff appropriately take action on work reports.

Recommendation: To enhance beneficiary understanding of work reporting requirements, SSA should: (a) Clarify work reporting requirements provided to beneficiaries. (b) Explore options for increasing the frequency of reporting reminders to DI beneficiaries, similar to those currently available to SSI recipients.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2019, SSA reported taking several steps to clarify work reporting requirements. For instance, SSA reported it has developed outreach materials to share information with beneficiaries and advocacy groups. However, SSA has not provided sufficient documentation for GAO to determine if it has clarified issues identified in GAO's 2015 report, such as how and when to report work, and that beneficiaries may have to repay overpayments that occur even when they report work. Finally, SSA has not indicated whether it has assessed options for increasing the frequency of reporting reminders to DI beneficiaries. Until SSA can demonstrate that it has improved the clarity of its work reporting requirements and frequency of its work reporting reminders, DI beneficiaries may continue to incur overpayments, or be required to repay overpayments that occurred even though they reported work.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), with regard to estimating improper payments, to establish and implement key quality assurance procedures, such as reconciliations, to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the sampled populations.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD), in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD will work with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to implement key quality assurance procedures, such as reconciliations, to ensure the completeness and accuracy of sampled populations. In August 2017, DOD officials stated that its Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will continue its work with DFAS to annually reconcile gross outlays (as stated on its Statement of Budgetary Resources) with outlays as reported in its Agency Financial Report. These reconciliations are currently done only on a summary level. In the future, DOD's validation of its universe of transactions combined with planned reconciliations with the Defense Departmental Reporting System trial balance and transaction data from DOD's entitlement systems will provide more complete reconciliations. As of December 2019, DOD officials stated that DOD needs to resolve its material weakness relating to the universe of transactions. This material weakness is preventing the department from performing the reconciliations necessary to ensure that the populations, from which the samples are drawn to estimate improper payments, are complete and accurate. As of May 2020, DOD had developed a spreadsheet including over 80 financial management and disbursing systems. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, OUSD(C), is planning to review and analyze these systems to (1) determine the types of payments and lists of systems used to process the types of payments; (2) confirm if reconciliations are done to verify the total outlays; and (3) determine the testing status of the universe of payments. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), with regard to implementing recovery audits, to monitor the implementation of the revised FMR chapter on recovery audits to ensure that the components either develop recovery audits or demonstrate that it is not cost effective to do so.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would work with the applicable components to monitor the implementation of the revised Financial Management Regulation (FMR) chapter on recovery audits (subsequently renamed as payment recapture audits). According to DOD officials, this action would help to ensure that recovery audits are developed, or will demonstrate that it is not cost-effective to do these audits. In July 2015, DOD was working to update the FMR chapter on recovery audits to reflect revised Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance issued in October 2014. DOD issued its revised FMR chapter in November 2015. This chapter requires components to develop cost-effective payment recapture audits or to submit a quantitative justification to the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) for approval. However, we consider this recommendation to be open because DOD did not provide documentation demonstrating that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is monitoring component implementation of recovery auditing. Further, as of April 2017, DOD's efforts to develop cost-estimates for recovery audits were still under way. As of October 2018, this recommendation remains open. As of December 2019, DOD stated that in FY 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) will coordinate with the DOD improper payment reporting components to analyze whether it would be cost effective to implement payment recapture audit programs for their payments. In a March 20, 2020 memorandum, the Deputy CFO asked DOD components, programs, or activities with annual payments exceeding $1 million to submit a payment recapture plan by June 30, 2020. If a component determines that payment recapture audits are not cost-effective, then the plan must provide the specific analysis and documentation used to reach that conclusion. When completed, the results of the evaluation will serve the Department's final position on payment recapture audit programs. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open as this evaluation was not yet complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), with regard to implementing recovery audits, to develop and submit to OMB for approval a payment recapture audit plan that fully complies with OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would develop and submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a payment recapture plan that fully complies with OMB guidance and is informed by a cost-effectiveness analysis. In July 2015, DOD's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) efforts to develop a payment recapture audit plan to ensure cost-effectiveness were ongoing and these efforts must be completed before a plan can be submitted to the OMB. In June 2016, DOD officials stated that the Comptroller's efforts to develop a payment recapture audit plan to ensure cost-effectiveness were ongoing. As of August 28, 2017, DOD officials stated that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will determine if a payment recapture audit plan was developed and submitted to OMB for approval in the previous fiscal years. If so, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will determine its relevance and significance (i.e. cost effectiveness)to the improper payments program. If the payment recapture audit plan is considered to be applicable, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) will update the previous plan to comply with current OMB guidance. As of October 2018, this recommendation remains open. As of December 2019, DOD stated that in FY 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary (Comptroller) will coordinate with the DOD improper payment reporting components to analyze whether it would be cost effective to implement payment recapture audit programs for their payments. In a March 20, 2020 memorandum, the Deputy CFO asked DOD components, programs, or activities with annual payments exceeding $1 million to submit a payment recapture plan by June 30, 2020. If a component determines that payment recapture audits are not cost-effective, then the plan must provide the specific analysis and documentation used to reach that conclusion. When completed, the results of the evaluation will serve the Department's final position on payment recapture audit programs. As of September 30, 2020, this recommendation remains open as this evaluation was not yet complete..

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), with regard to reporting, to design and implement procedures to ensure that the department's annual improper payment and recovery audit reporting is complete, accurate, and in compliance with IPERA and OMB guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Department of Defense (DOD) officials, in concurring with this recommendation, stated that DOD would design and implement procedures to further ensure that its annual improper payment and recovery audit reporting is complete, accurate, and in compliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERA) requirements and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance. In June 2015, DOD revised its FMR chapter on improper payments to require components to provide information needed to report on improper payment and recovery audit activities in its annual financial report (AFR) in accordance with IPERA requirements and OMB guidance. DOD's fiscal year 2015 AFR reflected its implementation of the revised FMR. We found that DOD's improper payment reporting in its fiscal year 2015 AFR had improved. However, we were not provided with evidence that Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is performing oversight and monitoring activities to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the improper payment and recovery audit data submitted by DOD components for inclusion in the AFR. DOD is continuing to work on procedures for ensuring that its reporting on improper payment and recovery audits is accurate, complete, and in compliance with IPERA and OMB guidance. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) has developed and implemented a Payment Integrity Checklist to ensure that the department's annual improper payment and recovery audit reporting was complete, accurate, and in compliance with IPERA and OMB guidance. However, the DOD Inspector General in its May 2020 report, stated that while DOD published improper payment estimates for all eight programs for fiscal year 2019, it did not publish reliable estimates for five of the eight programs: Military Health Benefits, Civilian Pay, Military Retirement, DOD Travel Pay, and Commercial Pay. Moreover, DOD did not use accurate populations in calculating the improper payment estimates for the Military Retirement, Commercial Pay, and DOD Travel Pay programs. Based on these issues affecting improper payment reporting, we consider this recommendation to be open as of September 30, 2020.