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: "Supply chain management"
GAO-20-487, Sep 30, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-658, Sep 23, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-701, Sep 21, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Public Health Service: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-711R, Sep 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-441, Jun 18, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-216, Mar 31, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open
Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.
GAO-20-316, Mar 6, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-118, Jan 29, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation and DEA stated it will continue to examine a variety of technologies to analyze ARCOS and other data and implement additional ways to use algorithms to more proactively identify problematic drug transaction patterns.
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation. As of September 2019, DEA officials stated that its Office of Information Systems' Chief Data Officer just recently started to work with DOJ and other components to develop a data strategy in response to the recently released department wide strategy, and has begun efforts to develop a governance structure. In November, 2019 DEA indicated it will continue to mature its data governance structure. The intent of this recommendation is for DEA to establish a formalized data governance structure to manage its collection and use of data used to support the Diversion Control Division's mission.
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOJ neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation but DEA stated in November 2019, that it recognizes that measurable performance targets related to opioid diversion activities can serve as leading practices at different organizational levels including the program, project, or activity level. Our recommendation is intended to ensure that DEA can demonstrate the usefulness of the data it collects and uses to support its opioid diversion control activities.
Agency: Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOJ agreed with this recommendation and in November 2019, stated it has consulted with industry stakeholders and identified solutions to address the limitations of the tool.
GAO-20-65, Nov 1, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-2775
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Finance and Accounting Service
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) provides detailed cost and rate information to customers each year in multiple venues and would reach out to customers to obtain additional details to understand how to fill the information gap regarding rate transparency. In April 2020, DOD provided to GAO DFAS's corrective action plan, which stated that DFAS Client Executives would ask the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps lead Financial Managers for feedback on additional details needed to better plan for the DFAS bill. DFAS would then incorporate this additional detail into the customer bill briefings for the President's Budget Request for fiscal year 2022. DFAS also stated that the Air Force had indicated that DFAS provides appropriate transparency, but had requested that DFAS provide its bill estimate earlier, which DFAS had agreed to do.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Information Systems Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) will make every effort to improve dialogue with customers to ensure the correct people have a full understanding of DISA's methodologies used to develop their rates. In April 2020, DOD provided to GAO DISA's corrective action plan, which stated that DISA would continue to make every effort to improve dialogue with customers to ensure an increased understanding of methodologies used to develop the rates. In this plan, DISA reported that, in February and March 2020, its Chief Financial Officer (CFO) coordinated with the communications and financial management senior leadership for the military services to discuss Defense Working Capital Fund (DWCF) rate methodology and transparency. In May 2020, DOD provided an updated status on this recommendation, stating that a result of the DISA CFO outreach was that DISA would use the regular and recurring DISA Drumbeat engagements with the military departments to present and maintain an open and transparent dialogue on DISA DWCF rates. GAO requested documentation for the recent Navy and Air Force Drumbeat meetings and the pending Army meeting, as well as recent rate briefings that document that DISA is providing this more complete rate-setting information to its customers. GAO will update the status of this recommendation once this documentation is received.
Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Logistics Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with GAO's recommendation and stated that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) would include more detailed information in its annual rate briefing to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the services regarding what is in its costs, how it calculates costs, and how and when changes would impact customers' overall costs. In addition, DLA stated that it conducts semiannual Cost Summits and periodic DLA/Service Days with customers. DLA said it would include discussions, as appropriate, of topics such as potential pricing methodology changes and estimated cost impacts to customers, well in advance of implementation. In March 2020, DLA notified GAO that it had discussed cost rates with the military services during the January 2020 DLA Cost Summit and the Service Days with each of the military services that it held in June and November 2019. GAO requested documentation for these five meetings that includes the more complete information on DLA's rate-setting methodologies that GAO identified in the recommendation. GAO will update the status of this recommendation once this documentation is received.
GAO-19-606R, Aug 8, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA agreed with the recommendation. NNSA officials said they submitted an assessment that includes information on suggested changes to the authority to the congressional committees in March 2020. We requested a copy of the assessment and will update the status of this recommendation after we receive and review it.
GAO-19-321, Apr 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9627
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is addressing the recommendation by completing the supply-chain related actions in its January 2019 Life Cycle Logistics Plan, which involved a comprehensive review of warfighter gaps and the detailed Program of Actions and Milestones required to close them. DOD also cited specific actions to increase the availability of parts, such as increasing funding for parts and allocating more parts to combat-coded units to enable them to meet the 80 percent mission capability goal. DOD's Plan of Action for the supply chain is in continuous development and GAO has not yet been provided with detailed documentation of these planning efforts and associated actions. We will continue to monitor DOD's ongoing planning efforts in this area.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it has developed a process for managing the configurations of the parts within the afloat and deployment spares packages, which has been approved by the F-35 Product Support Manager. According to DOD, it has established a working group to codify the details of the process and is working to correct the part configurations of already-delivered spares packages. These efforts are part of a broader ongoing DOD effort to execute a F-35 Configuration Management Plan for the global spares pool, which includes identifying all of the parts that may require an upgrade. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in these areas.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that its draft program instruction for the establishment of the global network for moving parts is being coordinated with stakeholders. We will review the instruction when it is finalized and continue to monitor DOD's efforts to complete a detailed plan for the global network.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that it is developing guidance to address this recommendation. Specifically, it has developed a draft directive that is currently in coordination with stakeholders and it plans to develop a subsequent program instruction. We will review this guidance when it is completed and continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Joint Strike Fighter affordability strategy addresses price verification as a goal and DOD is in the process of implementing a price verification program, which will include verification for the prices of parts. Additionally the F-35 program office has developed a framework for the contractor to provide all data associated with supply chain assets to include cost and pricing. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to obtain comprehensive cost information for all F-35 parts.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, DOD stated that the Department of Defense Comptroller, with collaboration from the Services and the F-35 Program developed the Transfer of Pooled Assets Methodology as a candidate accounting construct under which the F-35 Program would become the single financial reporting entity for F-35 pooled assets, thus removing the need to allocate "shares" of the pool to the Services and participants. Prior to endorsement and implementation of this methodology, the Department of Defense Comptroller is assessing whether the Department of Navy or the U.S. Air Force would provide more streamlined financial accountability of the F-35 spare parts in the global spares pool. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of February 2020, DOD had not taken steps to address this recommendation. To implement this recommendation, DOD needs to clearly define the strategy by which DOD will manage the F-35 supply chain in the future and update key strategy documents accordingly. This should include determining the roles of both the prime contractor and DOD in managing the supply chain, and the investments in technical data needed to support DOD-led management.
GAO-19-244, Jan 31, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. On February 25, 2020, DOD issued its revised Pre-Positioned War Reserve Materiel Strategic Implementation Plan. However, the updated plan did not include a description of the resources-- including dollar and personnel amounts--required to implement the plan. Instead, the updated plan states that no additional personnel or resources will be required to execute and manage the plan, and that those personnel executing and managing the plan are expected to do so in addition to their normal duties. In May 2020, DOD stated it intends to include additional information about the required resources in the plan's next revision. We will keep this recommendation open pending our review of the next iteration of the plan.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. On February 25, 2020, DOD issued its revised Pre-Positioned War Reserve Materiel Strategic Implementation Plan which lays out a method for joint oversight. While GAO is encouraged and will monitor DOD's implementation efforts, it is too soon to determine the extent to which these efforts-when completed-will address DOD's fragmented management of its prepositioned stock programs. To fully address this recommendation, DOD needs to fully implement the joint oversight method outlined in the plan.
GAO-18-435, Jun 13, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics: Office of Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy: Deputy Assistant Secretary of Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, noting that it plans to takes steps to identify and incorporate available supplier data from across the department into its defense industrial base data system, but noted that they only planned to rely on one data system, DIBNow, instead of continuing to develop its second data system, the Defense Planning Guidance Input and Retrieval System. The Industrial Policy Office, formerly Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy, has taken some steps to improve sharing of industrial base analysis information across the Department, such as establishing a web repository of industrial base assessment information and subject matter expert contacts. However, these sharing tools continue to rely primarily on summary narratives and Industrial Policy has not incorporated program office lower-tier supplier data into this web repository or DIBnow. Industrial Policy has incorporated sub-tier supplier information into DIBnow from commercial industry sources, but these sources do not have the same level of insight into the supply chain as program offices. An Industrial Policy official said there are no plans to incorporate supply chain information from program offices because this information is proprietary and therefore cannot be incorporated into DIBnow, which is built and maintained by a contractor. DOD General Counsel has determined that contractors cannot have access to this proprietary information for the purposes of DIBnow. We continue to believe that program offices have the most complete insight into sub-tier suppliers, which is essential for DOD to achieve its goal of proactive industrial base risk analysis. Industrial Policy should continue to pursue risk reductions solutions, such as non-disclosure agreements and/or data masking, to make better use of existing lower-tier supplier information from program offices.
GAO-18-464R, Apr 25, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. According to DOD officials, the Air Force, the Marine Corps and the Navy all have robust systems for capturing and sharing F-35 operational lessons learned. However, although these systems are accessible by members of the other services, there is a general lack of awareness of how to access systems across military services. As of December 2019, DOD officials stated that they were developing a Lessons Learned Database, which they estimate will be completed during the third quarter of 2020. We are encouraged that the department is aware of the importance of sharing operational lessons learned across the services and that a solution is likely on the horizon. However, until the department implements the solution, this recommendation will remain open.
GAO-18-34, Nov 9, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4841
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agreed with GAO's November 2017 recommendation. VA planned to implement a new Medical-Surgical Prime Vendor (MSPV) program, called MSPV 2.0, by March 2020; however, this program has been delayed to at least January 2021. MSPV 2.0 includes a process where clinicians review requirements for a set list of products. As of August 2020, VA is beginning the national rollout of this clinician review process, but the results of this process won't be implemented until after MSPV 2.0 begins. VA's strategy for its MSPV program depends on full implementation of this clinician review process.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agreed with GAO's November 2017 recommendation. VA implemented a tool-the Medical Product Data Bank's eZSAVE application-to improve the matching of equivalent supply items. In November 2018, VA reported that it holds monthly meetings with selected clinical and logistics staff to obtain their input on the matching process. However, as of August 2020, VA has not provided documentation showing how it has defined the role of clinical staff, including Clinical Product Review Committees, in this process. Without documentary support, GAO cannot assess the extent of the clinical staff role in the matching process. If the roles of clinicians are not clearly defined, it increases the risk of inconsistent involvement in the matching process.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agreed with GAO's November 2017 recommendation. VA's planned Medical-Surgical Prime Vendor (MSPV) 2.0 program includes engaging selected clinicians in its requirement development for a set list of products, known as Clinician-Driven Strategic Sourcing. In April 2019, VA began a pilot for this clinician review process, including input from national clinical program offices. As of August 2020, VA is beginning the national rollout of this process. VA does not plan to incorporate the results of this clinician review process in the list of available supplies until after MSPV 2.0 is implemented, which has been delayed until at least January 2021. Until VA implements MSPV 2.0 and incorporates the results of the Clinician-Driven Strategic Sourcing process, it will not be able to achieve its goals of cost savings and improved clinical consistency.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agreed with GAO's November 2017 recommendation. In August 2019, senior VA acquisition officials agreed to conduct an analysis of its spending to identify items that the department frequently purchases on an emergency basis and to develop plans to purchase those goods and services more strategically, such as by issuing a national contract or adding the items to the formulary as needed. As of August 2020, these officials indicated they would provide this analysis to GAO by the end of 2020.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agreed with GAO's November 2017 recommendation. VA reported that it added thousands of items to the Medical-Surgical Prime Vendor (MSPV) formulary from June 2018 through December 2018, some of which had previously been purchased on an emergency basis. VA also reported in June 2018 and updated in March of 2020 that it is tracking items purchased on an emergency basis. However, as of August 2020, VA has not provided documentation showing whether and how this analysis has informed its selection of which products to add to the formulary. Without documentary support, GAO cannot assess the extent to which items that VA added to the formulary were previously purchased on an emergency basis. If VA does not use analysis of emergency procurements to help inform which items should be added to the MSPV formulary, it will miss opportunities to avoid emergency procurements and increase efficiency.
GAO-18-75, Oct 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-5431
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics contract. A DOD official said that this group is also working to identify appropriate metrics to hold the contractor accountable under a potential long-term performance-based contract. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to re-examine metrics to ensure that they are objectively measureable, fully reflective of processes over which the contractor has control, and drive desired behaviors by all stakeholders.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of December 2019, documentation provided by DOD stated that it had established a joint working group to assess the feasibility of and examine options for DOD's planned 5-year performance-based logistics (PBL) contract. As a product of this assessment, DOD expects that the department will be able to outline what level of knowledge is required of the actual costs of sustainment and technical characteristics of the aircraft in order to enter into a PBL sustainment construct. DOD has not provided us with a timeline of when the working group's assessment will be complete. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts in this area.
GAO-17-768, Sep 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In June 2019, DOD provided follow up information and identified key corrective actions for recommendations from this report. The key corrective actions identified for this recommendation include the issuance of the mission assurance instruction in August 2018 that guides the identification, prioritization, and assessment of defense critical infrastructure. Further, Executive Order 13806 required that DOD perform a whole-of-government assessment of the manufacturing and the defense industrial base, assess risk, identify impacts, and propose mitigation strategies. DOD issued the resulting report in October 2018, which includes a focus on numerous single source and sole supply risks. Lastly, DOD officials stated that DOD senior leadership and Congress were briefed in May 2019 on investments planned to reduce risks and updates will be included in an annual Industrial Capabilities Report to Congress. DOD placed considerable focus on defense industrial base issues in the past year, we will review the next annual report to ensure this focus is continued and that detailed information on DOD's industrial base risks and task critical assets is provided to DOD and Congressional decision makers.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In June 2019, DOD provided follow up information and identified key corrective actions for recommendations from this report. The key corrective actions identified for this recommendation include a description of the mission assurance process and the annual report on the industrial capabilities that were already in place at the time of issuance of this report, therefore do not represent a change or response to this recommendation. Another key corrective action identified is the issuance of the report in response to the Executive Order 13806 in October 2018, which provides a whole of government assessment of the defense industrial base risks and impacts and associated Hill briefing. DOD placed considerable focus on defense industrial base issues in the past year as a result of the Executive Order, we will review the next annual report to ensure this focus is continued and that detailed information on DOD's industrial base risks and task critical assets is provided to DOD and Congressional decision makers.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In June 2019, DOD provided follow up information and identified key corrective actions for recommendations from this report. The key corrective actions identified for this recommendation include the mission assurance process that was already in place at the time of the issuance of this report, which does not reflect a change in response to this recommendation. However, other key corrective actions identified include the identification of several DOD-owned assets in the report DOD issued in response to Executive Order 13806 in October 2018. Further, DOD states that it will provide yearly updates to Congress in its Industrial Capabilities report. Lastly, the corrective actions state that DOD will continue to execute risk mitigation identified in its October 2018 report. DOD placed considerable focus on defense industrial base issues in the past year as a result of the Executive Order, we will review the next annual report to ensure this focus is continued and that detailed information on DOD's industrial base risks and task critical assets is provided to DOD and Congressional decision makers.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD officials stated that they are in the process of developing proactive steps to share information on risks identified through the annual CAIP with relevant program managers, or other designated service or program officials as necessary. However, in June 2019, DOD shared the key corrective actions identified for this recommendation, which include a description of the mission assurance process that was already in place at the time of issuance of this report, therefore do not represent a change or response to this recommendation. It further states that the Critical Asset Identification Process is addressed in semi-annual Joint Industrial Base Working Group meetings, which are attended by all service and agency industrial base representatives. As of November 2019, DOD officials did not respond to a request for more detail, we will continue to assess DOD's actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2018, DOD officials stated that assessing the health of the defense industrial base and associated supply chains was the focus of an Executive Order issued in July 2017 and that the resulting inter-agency report will be released within the next year. DOD officials stated that the issuance of this report will provide significant information towards addressing this recommendation. However, in June 2019, DOD provided key corrective actions for this recommendation, which stated that multiple services and agencies began in 2018 to incorporate contracting language to require prime contractors to track and provide sub-tier data and that this effort will expand to cover more programs. Further, it states that in the Industrial Base Integrated Data System, suppliers are indicated as either single or sole source suppliers and that the services and agencies have access to this list. As of November 2019, DOD officials did not respond to a request for more detail, we will continue to assess DOD's actions.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The DOD official that is the lead for the Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) program stated that as of July 2019, the department has completed the draft DMSMS instruction and accompanying manual that details program requirements, responsibilities, and procedures to be followed. The draft instruction is undergoing legal review and the official expects the instruction and manual to be issued by December 2019. As of November 2019, this recommendation will remain open and we will review the instruction once issued.
GAO-17-650, Jul 20, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7141
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2018, the CBP liaison informed GAO that offices within CBP are collaborating on a plan to assess additional performance metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the ISF program. On June 13, 2018, the CBP liaison stated that CBP staff continue to work on additional performance metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the ISF program and noted, in particular, are analyzing data to: (1) identify the number of unmanifested containers and determine how/if they were mitigated before arrival; (2) determine the number of times C-TPAT companies were identified and given targeting benefits, but did not receive the same treatment based on manifest information; and (3) identify the number of times potential terrorism matches were made against an ISF entities vs. the number of times not matched using the same manifest data. In March 2019, the CBP liaison stated that the new estimated completed date for this recommendation is the end of 2019. This recommendation will remain open until CBP's planned actions are completed and meet the intent of GAO's recommendation. In late February 2020, CBP liaison staff informed GAO that they are continuing to work on this recommendation, which they expect to complete by March 31, 2020.
GAO-17-449, Jun 21, 2017
Phone: (213) 830-1011
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. DOD began reviewing its secondary item inventory warehousing in July 2017 to consolidate underused distribution centers. In February 2018, DOD officials stated that the department will conduct three site studies by fiscal year 2019 to assess the viability and any potential savings from consolidation at these locations. In April 2019, DOD officials stated that the site studies had been completed and they anticipate a final report in late May 2019.
GAO-17-23, Oct 31, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: DOT concurred with this recommendation. As of March 2020, DOT had not issued the National Freight Strategic Plan, but DOT officials stated that they are planning to issue it in 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, in the national strategy, DOT should include plans to identify data sources, gaps, information on supply chains and freight networks, and on how DOT will use this information.
GAO-16-710, Aug 11, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In an October 7, 2016, letter the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said he agreed with GAO's recommendation to assess situations that might warrant the use of the enhanced procurement authority and, should specific circumstances be identified for use of the authority, NNSA would develop a process for its use. The assessment would include an examination of resources to support use of the authority. NNSA would work with other Department of Energy organizations as appropriate in conducting the assessment. NNSA officials said they submitted the assessment to the congressional committees in March 2020. We requested a copy of the assessment and will update the status of this recommendation after we receive and review it.
GAO-16-439, Apr 14, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, as of July 2018, this recommendation conflicts with established Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation guidance for cost estimation and uncertainty analysis. Absent a change in policy at that level, the Joint Program Office will continue to follow Office of the Under Secretary of Defense/Cost Estimation and Program Evaluation policy on this issue. We continue to believe that in order for any risks associated with ALIS to be addressed expediently and holistically, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis must be used on the F-35s cost estimates to improve its overall reliability. Thus, this recommendation will remain open.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. According to DOD officials, since April 2016, the F-35 program has continued to update the ALIS estimate with the latest available cost data, based on recent contracts. Until more reliable actual costs become available, the program utilizes negotiated contract costs, incorporates program initiatives, and ensures the estimate reflects the latest technical baseline and requirements. Until actual costs associated with ALIS historical data are incorporated in the F-35 cost estimate, we believe that the estimate will not be as reliable as it could be. For this reason, this recommendation will remain open.
GAO-16-236, Feb 16, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Status: Open
Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD has drafted new combined DOD instruction and guidance that addresses the process of reporting suspected counterfeit parts to GIDEP. As of August 2020, the document is still in the process of being formally approved. DOD estimated that it could be approved in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021.
GAO-15-350, Apr 20, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-5257
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. As of August 2019, Naval Supply Systems Command has taken some steps, such as defining the requirement and piloting some aspects of the effort, to incorporate graduated management reviews and the ability to track and review the reason for not canceling and modifying on-order excess items into its automated termination module. However, this capability is not implemented into the automated termination module, according to Naval Supply Systems Command officials. Navy Supply Systems Command provided information on its plans to implement this capability in fiscal year 2020 and we will continue to monitor their efforts to address this implementation.
GAO-15-226, Feb 26, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In September 2016, the Marine Corps established a Customer Wait Time (CWT) standard and developed CWT metrics that are in alignment with DOD policy. These changes were to be incorporated into Marine Corps policy through their normal Service procedures. As of August 2020, the Marine Corps has the CWT standard included in its new policy document, but the policy is going through internal coordination and is still in draft at this time. Current timeframe for publication is January 2021. Once we confirm the CWT standard is in the issued policy, we will close the recommendation.
GAO-14-194, Feb 10, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, FDA told us that it was using its drug shortage data system, the "Shortage Tracker," to summarize information reported by manufacturers as the reasons for existing shortages. The agency indicated that it was developing a model that would factor in drug shortage data, warning signs identified through social media, and other factors to help identify early indicators that may predict future shortages. In July 2019, the agency indicated it could conduct periodic analyses of the causes of drug shortages. However, FDA had not yet proactively conducted any rigorous analyses of predictors of drug shortages to help recognize trends, clarify causes, and resolve problems before drugs go into short supply. In an August 2020 written response, FDA reported that it was undertaking modeling efforts to explore the feasibility of predicting future drug shortages using machine learning approaches. FDA planned to complete the initial modeling by fall 2020, at which time it would identify next steps. The agency indicated that the recommendation should remain open, and GAO will continue to monitor the implementation of this recommendation.