Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: "Road repairs"
GAO-18-11, Oct 4, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2017, CBP concurred with our recommendation and stated that it will use the Capability Gap Analysis Process to validate its access and mobility requirements on a national level. The national priorities will be determined through requirements planning at Border Patrol stations. CBP noted that it will outline the process and criteria for making decisions on funding for non-owned operational requirements and communicate this process to Border Patrol sectors. In November 2018, CBP reported that Border Patrol developed a prioritization process related to the order of wall deployments, which will be tailored to use in determining the priority order for road investments. According to CBP, priority order is to be determined based on the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data and the operational expertise of Border Patrol station, sector and national level leadership. The process was developed by USBP's Operational Requirements Management Division, communicated to southern border sectors, and executed to establish the priority deployment order of fiscal year 2018 new road requirements. Once the prioritization process has been refined, it will be expanded to also include the maintenance and repair on existing roads. In October 2019, CBP reported that it continues to work on enhancing the existing prioritization strategy, which includes exploring implementation of a new prioritization modeling tool and methodology. Discussions on how and if the model will be effective as a prioritization tool have been delayed due to several other internal priorities and external disruptions. Therefore, and based on leadership guidance, the prioritization strategy and methodology will be delayed. CBP officials reported in June 2020 that Border Patrol's Strategic Planning and Analysis Directorate Operational Requirements Management Division personnel will conduct data calls over the upcoming weeks with Tactical Infrastructure subject matter experts from the sectors and stations to validate existing road requirements and initiate the data collection for the prioritization process. Once the process is formalized, we will determine whether CBP's efforts fully address the intent of this recommendation.
GAO-17-423, May 22, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, Interior reported that the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) and Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) efforts to coordinate with tribes and the Tribal Transportation Program Coordinating Committee (TTPCC) to address this recommendation were progressing. Established by federal regulations, TTPCC is the committee comprised of 24 tribal representatives that provides input and makes recommendations to the BIA and FHWA. According to Interior, TTPCC has identified data elements--14 of 54 data fields--to be considered for removal from NTTFI, and BIA and FHWA have held discussions with tribes concerning a draft plan to remove these identified data elements from NTTFI. Interior reported that tribal groups have posed no objections to the plan and that they anticipate the plan being implemented later in the year. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, Interior reported that a group of tribal users organized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to review the NTTFI and the coding guide was progressing in its efforts to recommend updates to the coding guide. According to Interior, the group has made recommendations to the Tribal Transportation Program Coordinating Committee (TTPCC) on which data elements to remove from the NTTFI and for clarifying guidance in the coding guide, relevant to the data elements proposed to remain in the NTTFI. Interior anticipates that updates to the coding guide based on the group's recommendations will be completed in 2019. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: Interior told us that, along with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), it has held several meetings with tribal users to identify missing or erroneous data in the NTTFI. For example, the meeting participants identified that data which were formerly but are no longer used in formulas to allocate federal funding to tribes are likely outdated and not useful. Further, recognizing that approximately 70 percent of NTTFI data reflects inventory and condition information of roads owned by non-BIA and non-tribal entities, such as state and local governments, the meeting participants determined that opportunities exist to work with these external entities to monitor data obtained from them to ensure that it is current and accurate for use and display in the NTTFI. As of June 2019, Interior said that, in anticipation of changes to the NTTFI format, its main actions to address this recommendation will be to coordinate with these external entities to monitor the data they provide to NTTFI to ensure it conforms to NTTFI's new format. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019 Interior reported that BIA had developed a data reporting process that incorporates use of a "time-stamp" to indicate when the level of service for a road section is evaluated. Interior said that it anticipates providing guidance on this process to BIA staff, tribes, and others that perform level of service road maintenance assessments so that they can implement the process in 2020. We will continue to monitor efforts to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019 Interior reported that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) had surveyed tribes to determine their capabilities for managing data related to road maintenance costs. Interior further reported that BIA was investigating the use of computer software for tracking road maintenance costs and developing estimates of maintenance needs. Interior said that it expects to complete actions to implement this recommendation in 2020. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: In its official comments on our report, Interior said that that it cannot reasonably accomplish this recommendation because, in reference to the tribes which have agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to maintain BIA roads in their area, it conflicts with the intent of federal law and the minimum-reporting requirements when a tribal entity takes over the day-to-day actions and tasks of a program. However, following our report's issuance, Interior told us that its actions to address other recommendations will assist the tribes in developing data on Road Maintenance Program (RMP) funds expended for performed maintenance on BIA roads. In addition, Interior said that tribes have expressed interest in gathering this data. Further, in June 2019, Interior reported that the Tribal-Interior Budget Council had approved a plan for a pilot project in the BIA Great Plains Region to gather data relevant to addressing this recommendation. Even though tribal reporting of this data is voluntary, we continue to believe that by coordinating with affected tribes on developing a process for their self-reporting of RMP funds expended for maintenance, and by implementing such a process for tribes that BIA serves directly, Interior could improve the reporting of maintenance performed on BIA roads and be better positioned to provide Congress with more accurate and complete information on RMP funding decisions. We will continue to monitor actions to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: At the time of our report, Interior said that it concurred with this recommendation; however, it subsequently changed its position. Interior noted that its tribal and school partners have not requested changes to this formula and that it was therefore not compelled to undertake the rigorous consultation and negotiated rulemaking actions that would be needed to change the formula. As of June 2019, Interior has not acted to address this recommendation.
GAO-15-193, Feb 12, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislative action had been identified as of December 2019. Addressing this action, which GAO suggested in February 2015, could increase coordination between various levels of government and reduce duplication of effort, resources, and costs associated with collecting and maintaining accurate address data.