Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology should take steps, such as updating guidance or other written communication, to ensure that the topical-research working groups (1) define and monitor progress toward achieving long-term outcomes, and (2) regularly update and monitor their charters and other written agreements to reflect these outcomes, in line with leading practices. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology should take additional steps, such as providing more specific guidance or instructions to the modal administrations on the information that should be updated or required, to ensure that the information in the Research Hub is complete and accurate. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should develop an approach to ensure that all relevant participants are involved in the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were proposed changes to CNCS's approach for involving key participants from across the agency in the process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) assess the extent to which they address our recommendation and (2) confirm that these proposed changes were approved. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should define roles and responsibilities for all relevant participants involved in the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendation and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. Among these planned actions were workforce planning and hiring based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for CNCS to address its evidence priorities. The letter stated that once those actions were completed, CNCS would revisit the roles and responsibilities of participants involved in the agency's evidence-building activities. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer of CNCS should revise written guidance for the agency-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs to ensure it identifies all relevant participants and their respective roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on a draft of this report, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Subsequently, in a June 2020 letter, CNCS stated that it agreed with our recommendations and described planned actions to strengthen its agency-wide evidence prioritization process. However, as of October 2020, CNCS had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to (1) confirm that these proposed changes were approved and (2) assess the extent to which written guidance for the revised process addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor CNCS's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should develop an approach to ensure that all relevant participants are involved in the department-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Labor should revise written guidance for the department-wide process for prioritizing evidence needs to ensure it identifies all relevant participants and their respective roles and responsibilities. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: In a November 2019 letter providing comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Labor (DOL) agreed with this recommendation. The letter further described actions DOL planned to take to address it. DOL stated that in fiscal year 2020 it would update its written guidance to formalize the involvement of relevant participants in department-wide evidence-building activities. However, as of October 2020, DOL had not yet provided us with documentation that would allow us to assess the extent to which its updated guidance addresses our recommendation. We will continue to monitor DOL's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress should consider establishing a federal organizational arrangement to periodically identify and prioritize climate resilience projects for federal investment. Such an arrangement could be designed for success by considering the six key steps for prioritizing climate resilience investments and the opportunities to increase the climate resilience impact of federal funding options identified in our report. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, no action had been taken to establish a federal organizational arrangement to periodically identify and prioritize climate resilience projects for federal investment.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop written criteria for ranking Section 219 projects for funding, taking into account a clear set of priorities, such as those identified by recent congressional direction.

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

Comments: In November 2019, the Department of Defense indicated that the Army Corps of Engineers plans to develop and implement written criteria for ranking Section 219 projects by March 2020. We will evaluate actions taken by the Corps once they are complete.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of CBP should analyze the costs associated with future barrier segments and include cost as a factor in the Impedance and Denial Prioritization Strategy. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2018, we reported on U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) efforts to construct new physical barriers along the southwest border. We found that the Impedance and Denial Prioritization Strategy--CBP's decision support tool for prioritizing locations for barrier construction projects--did not include analysis of the costs of deploying barriers in each location, which can vary depending on topography, land ownership, and other factors. We recommended that CBP analyze the costs associated with future barrier segments and include cost as a factor in the Impedance and Denial Prioritization Strategy. CBP agreed with this recommendation. CBP officials stated that, after prioritizing locations, CBP conducts detailed cost estimates as part of the acquisitions process. As of January 2020, CBP officials stated that this cost information may affect how the construction projects are executed, but that it would not influence how CBP prioritizes barrier construction projects across various locations. As we have previously reported, organizations should use an integrated approach to the requirements, acquisitions, and budget processes to prioritize needs and allocate resources, so they can optimize return on investment, and maintain program affordability. To fully address our recommendation, Border Patrol needs to incorporate its analysis of the costs of barrier projects into its process for prioritizing locations for construction of barriers.