Recommendation: The VA Under Secretary of Health should use workload data from the most recently completed fiscal year as part of the models that inform VISNs' and medical centers' general purpose funding needs, when doing so would not significantly delay the allocation of funds. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: April 2020: GAO will update the status of this recommendation when VA provides additional information.

Recommendation: The VA Under Secretary of Health should establish a formal process to document VHA's review of VISNs' adjustments to medical center allocation levels. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: April 2020: GAO will update the status of this recommendation when VA provides additional information.

Recommendation: The VA Under Secretary of Health should revise VHA's existing guidance to require VISNs to provide information on how they determined how much and for what reasons they made adjustments to medical center allocation levels. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: April 2020: GAO will update the status of this recommendation when VA provides additional information.

Recommendation: The VA Under Secretary of Health should revise its existing guidance to require VISNs—in conjunction with medical centers—to develop and submit approaches to improve efficiency at medical centers with declining workload that received adjusted funding levels. These approaches could include adjusting the level of services offered. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: April 2020: GAO will update the status of this recommendation when VA provides additional information.

Recommendation: The VA Under Secretary of Health should require VISNs to provide explanations on the amount of funds redistributed between VISNs and medical centers and VHA to document its review of these redistributions. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open

Comments: April 2020: GAO will update the status of this recommendation when VA provides additional information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that the Director of State's Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources conducts a review of the Section 653(a) process to identify process steps that can be streamlined or eliminated and determine the time frame needed to prepare the annual Section 653(a) report. If State determines that the time frame exceeds 30 days, the office should coordinate with other appropriate officials to submit a legislative proposal to Congress to extend the mandated time frame for submitting Section 653(a) reports. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they would determine a reasonable time frame for completing the report and will coordinate with appropriate officials regarding a potential legislative proposal to Congress.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should ensure that the Director of State's Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources improves the data collection from the many sources contributing to the Section 653(a) reports, such as by enhancing their data information systems. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they are taking steps to modify their Foreign Assistance Coordination and Tracking System database to improve the collection of relevant data.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should develop a plan to address vacancies within State's Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources, consulting with the USAID Administrator as appropriate. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State indicated in their letter commenting on GAO-19-600 that they concurred with this recommendation. In their comments, State said they are developing a plan in coordination with USAID to fill existing vacancies, and are recruiting State and USAID employees to serve on details to fill existing staffing gaps.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Deputy Commandant for the Office of Programs and Resources oversee development and implementation of an approach to enable tracking of unit-level training funds through the budget cycle. This approach should include aligning MCPCs across the Marine Corps and ensuring consistent use of SIC codes. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: As of August 2020, the Navy has informed GAO that efforts to address this recommendation are underway. The Marine Corps has in process a Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) reform initiative that it expects to provide visibility and traceability throughout the budget cycle, to include enabling the tracking of unit-level training funds throughout the budget cycle. DOD expects to complete implementation by the end of fiscal year 2025. We will continue to monitor actions taken related to this recommendation and provide updates as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commandant of the Marine Corps designates a single entity responsible for directing, overseeing, and coordinating efforts to achieve the objective of establishing an enterprise-wide performance management process that links resources to readiness. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: As of August 2020, the Navy has informed GAO that efforts to address this recommendation are underway through its Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) reform initiative. The initiative is expected to result in the addition of an "Assessment" phase to the PPBE process, which will be known as "PPBEA." The new phase is expected to include a system that incorporates campaign planning against traceability of funding, among other factors, and will be documented in a new Marine Corps Order to replace existing PPBE guidance. The Marine Corps expects to complete this process by the end of fiscal year 2025. We will continue to monitor actions taken related to this recommendation and provide updates as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commandant of the Marine Corps assesses C2RAM to determine the extent to which this system, or elements of this system, should be adapted for use in an enterprise-wide performance management process linking resources to readiness. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: As of August 2020, the Navy has informed GAO that efforts to address this recommendation are underway. The Marine Corps' Programs and Resources Department is supporting the transition of the Cost to Run a MEF (C2RAM) from a stand-alone database to a web-enabled platform within the Marine Corps Training Information Management System (MCTIMS) program. The Marine Corps expects this platform to provide the ability to track ground unit-level training costs as they pertain to readiness goals and provide data to more effectively assess readiness investments for subsequent budget cycles. The Marine Corps expects the platform to attain initial operational capability for data input and data management by the end of fiscal year 2020, and to support analytics reporting and predictive resourcing functions by the end of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor actions taken related to this recommendation and provide updates as appropriate.

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

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

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should establish timeframes for providing states with additional information on allowable expenditures of funds reserved for pre-employment transition services. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation and stated that it would establish projected timeframes for providing states with additional information on allowable expenditures for the provision of preemployment transition services. Education also stated that it intends to provide states with additional information in at least two forums before the end of calendar year 2018 and to review and analyze previous guidance provided to states on allowable expenditures.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should take additional steps to provide states assistance on updating and finalizing their interagency agreements with state educational agencies to include pre-employment transition services. These steps could include, for example, accelerating their efforts to discuss the benefits of finalizing interagency agreements, and reminding states of existing technical assistance resources pertaining to updating and finalizing interagency agreements. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education disagreed with this recommendation, in large part, because there is no statutory provision authorizing the agency to identify such states. Nevertheless, Education stated that it is taking some steps as part of its ongoing monitoring of the VR program to provide assistance to states that have not updated their interagency agreements. This is consistent with the intention of our recommendation but we believe more could be done. The agency also noted that it would continue to offer and provide technical assistance if it becomes known through the onsite monitoring of the VR program or through other means that states have not updated their interagency agreements between VR agencies and state educational agencies. In addition, its Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) and Office of Special Education Programs will provide information related to sources of technical assistance, as appropriate, to VR agencies and state educational agencies. While these steps may be helpful, given the number of states that have not updated and finalized their agreements and the length of time Education officials say they will take to complete this round of monitoring where Education asks state VR agencies about these agreements, additional action by Education may be needed to help states more efficiently and effectively coordinate services to students with disabilities.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should develop a written plan with specific timeframes and activities for identifying and disseminating best practices that address, as appropriate, implementation challenges for pre-employment transition services, such as those identified in this report. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: Education disagreed with this recommendation believing it is premature to develop a timeline for the dissemination of best practices. The agency stated that the identification of "best" practices, meaning those that are clearly supported by a body of evidence derived from valid and reliable research findings, is still emerging as states implement the requirements. Education stated that as RSA identifies best practices through its monitoring and technical assistance activities, it will, in collaboration with its Office of Special Education Programs, consider when and how best to disseminate this information to state VR and educational agencies. With regard to including specific timeframes and activities in a written plan, by detailing the specific steps Education is taking and plans to take along with the amount of time it expects them to take, Education would be better positioned to complete those steps in a timely manner and meet the statutory requirement that Education highlight best state practices and support state agencies.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of DSCA takes steps to work with Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)--DSCA's financial service provider--and other DOD components, as appropriate, to improve the reliability of the data the DSCA obtains on all DOD components' use of FMS administrative funds, including actual execution data, at an appropriate level of detail, such as by object class. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February and May 2019, DSCA informed us that it had taken some steps to implement this recommendation, including establishing an automatic interface with certain DOD components' accounting systems to provide DSCA with daily information and data on those components' actual spending of FMS administrative funds. DSCA noted that it is working toward establishing automatic interfaces for the other components that receive these funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that implementation is ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation .

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of DSCA works with DFAS to conduct regular reconciliations of the data that DSCA collects on DOD components' use of administrative funds, to help ensure that the data are reliable. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2019, DSCA noted that it is undertaking an initiative to incorporate reconciliation capabilities into its oversight of components' use of FMS administrative funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that efforts to implement this recommendation are ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation .

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should follow its requirement to conduct at least two annual reviews of military department business processes for administrative funds. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, DSCA informed us that it had conducted two business process reviews for military departments in 2019. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should conduct periodic (e.g., annual or biennial) reviews of other DOD components' (e.g., other than military departments) business processes for administrative funds, based on a risk-based approach. Such an approach could include consideration of whether an entity has received a prior review or representative sampling over time, as well as consideration of factors such as the results of prior audits or other identified risks. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, DSCA informed us that it planned to conduct one review for another DOD component (e.g., other than a military department) in fall 2019. In January 2019, it collaborated with other DOD components that receive FMS administrative funds to develop risk-based criteria for selecting components for periodic business process reviews . DSCA also provided updated policies and procedures for these reviews, which state that DSCA will conduct at least one review for another DOD component annually. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should create and maintain a complete list of military department organizations or offices that receive administrative funds and are subject to DSCA's business process reviews. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2019, DSCA provided supporting documentation to show that, as part of its annual budget review cycle, it had required DOD components to provide a list of sub-components/organizations that receive FMS administrative funds. In October 2019, DSCA provided a list of sub-components/organizations that DSCA obtained as part of the 2019 annual budget cycle. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should update DSCA's policy for selecting military department organizations for reviews of their business processes for administrative funds, to better ensure that it reflects a risk-based approach. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2019, DSCA provided updated standard operating procedures for selecting military department organizations for reviews of their business processes for administrative funds. As of August 2020, we are reviewing the documentation provided and following up with DSCA to determine the extent to which the new procedures reflect a risk-based approach.

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should clarify guidance to ensure that the DSCA officials conducting reviews of business processes for administrative funds periodically track action items until they are completed. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it had updated its policies and procedures to reflect that it will track action items from business process reviews every 30 days, until the action items area completed. DSCA needs to providing supporting documentation for its efforts to track action items. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation .

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should develop a process for conducting periodic (e.g., quarterly or annual), targeted reviews of DOD components' use of administrative funds, including transactions testing, to verify that actual costs incurred are allowable and approved. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it was in the process of conducting "mock" audits of DOD components' use of FMS administrative funds, and that it was undergoing efforts to ensure that a process is in place for the financial review of components' actual spending of these funds. DSCA noted that these efforts were ongoing in October 2019. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of DSCA takes steps to work with DFAS and other DOD components, as appropriate, to improve the reliability of the data that DSCA obtains on all DOD components' use of CAS funds, including actual execution data, at an appropriate level of detail, such as by object class. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February and May 2019, DSCA informed us that it had taken some steps to implement this recommendation, including establishing an automatic interface with certain DOD components' accounting systems to provide DSCA with daily information and data on those components' actual spending of FMS CAS funds. DSCA noted that it is working toward establishing automatic interfaces for the other components that receive these funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that implementation is ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's ongoing actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Director of DSCA works with DFAS to conduct regular reconciliations of the data that DSCA collects on DOD components' use of CAS funds, to help ensure that the data are reliable. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2019, DSCA noted that it is undertaking an initiative to incorporate reconciliation capabilities into its oversight of components' use of FMS CAS funds. In October 2019, DSCA informed us that efforts to implement this recommendation are ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DOD's actions to implement this recommendation

Recommendation: The Director of DSCA should develop a process for conducting periodic (e.g., quarterly or annual), targeted reviews of DOD components' use of CAS funds, including transactions testing, to verify that actual costs incurred are allowable and approved. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Defense: Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2019, DSCA noted that it was in the process of conducting "mock" audits of DOD components' use of FMS CAS funds, and that it was undergoing efforts to ensure that a process is in place for the financial review of components' actual spending of these funds. As of October 2019, DSCA noted that these efforts were ongoing. As of August 2020, we continue to monitor DSCA's ongoing efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA includes all key monitoring provisions specified by applicable guidance as part of agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Agriculture should ensure that USDA officials have full documentation of required monitoring activities in agreements with inter-American organizations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: USDA concurred with our recommendation and said that they will implement it, but has not provided any update on their efforts to implement the recommendation as of August 2019.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop and implement a plan for ongoing monitoring, including testing and evaluation, of the obligation tool using relevant data. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said that implementing the recommendation would require information technology funding.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop controls to check the reasonableness of rental assistance agreement amounts calculated by the obligation tool. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said that implementing the recommendation would require information technology funding.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should develop controls to ensure that RHS uses the inflation rates from the President's economic assumptions in developing budget estimates. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said it would incorporate the recommended controls into the fiscal year 2021 budget cycle.

Recommendation: The Administrator of RHS should provide guidance to Rural Development state offices that specifies that prior to obligating funds, staff are to review information related to a property's mortgage servicing status. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Agriculture: Rural Housing Service
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2019, RHS said it was working toward providing the recommended guidance to Rural Development state offices.

Recommendation: In collaboration with cognizant officials within DOD components, the Director of Human Capital Initiatives should ensure that components have processes in place to verify the accuracy and completeness of data on the execution of initiatives funded by DAWDF.

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

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation and the Human Capital Initiatives office has taken several actions to address it, including establishing a more detailed reporting process and providing new guidance to DOD components on how to use the reporting tools. The DOD components, however, have not yet provided Human Capital Initiatives responses to the updated guidance requiring them to provide information on the processes they use to confirm that the data submitted to Human Capital Initiatives on DAWDF initiatives were reliable and complete. In addition, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2020 made changes to the way that the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund (DAWDF) was funded. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2021 proposes additional changes to the way that DAWDF is funded and managed. Some DAWDF funding may go directly to the DOD components and will not be overseen by Human Capital Initiatives. Once the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2021 is finalized, we will reassess to determine if the recommendation is still relevant.

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

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

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

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

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The EPA Administrator should direct OGD to develop a timetable with milestones and identify and allocate resources for adopting electronic records management for all 10 regional offices.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: According to EPA officials, the Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD) established an agency-wide electronic grants record workgroup in fiscal year 2016. The workgroup identified the contents of the electronic grant file, technical options, and evaluation criteria. OGD completed its alternatives analysis for scope, general approach, and requirements in fiscal year 2017 and EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions). However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.

Recommendation: The EPA Administrator should direct OGD to implement plans for adopting an up-to-date and comprehensive IT system by 2017 that will provide accurate and timely data on agencywide compliance with grants management directives.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: Implementation efforts are ongoing. According to EPA officials, OGD is conducting a multi-modular project to upgrade the agency's grants management IT system. EPA expected this recommendation to be addressed by its new grants management system (GrantsSolutions), which had been targeted for deployment in March 2020. However, in January 2020, EPA officials told us that EPA had ceased its migration to GrantSolutions after determining the long-term costs were unsustainable and that the system lacked fundamental functionality necessary for core grant operations and to maintain appropriate internal controls. EPA is now migrating towards a modernized grants administration and management cloud solution. EPA expects this recommendation to be addressed when the new grants management system is fully implemented. EPA anticipates deployment of the new cloud solution in December 2020.

Recommendation: To strengthen BLM's controls and reasonably assure accountability over mining law program expenditures, both payroll and nonpayroll, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to establish procedures for regular and timely communication to all BLM employees on policy and procedural changes affecting the mining law program's expenditure-related processes.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Interior's (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agreed with our recommendation. In support of closing this recommendation, officials from BLM re-iterated their policy about sending updates regarding guidance changes, which is included in its directives handbook. They also provided us with an example of its timely communication to BLM employees to announce the issuance of its revised Fund Code Handbook. We reviewed the directives handbook and verified that it contains guidance for communicating policy and procedural changes affecting the mining law program's expenditure-related processes. While the guidance in the directives handbook is a good start towards meeting the intent of our recommendation, we communicated to BLM in fiscal year 2019 that the findings in the report were caused in part by inadequate communication processes and the accessibility of the guidance to staff. To address the recommendation, we would like to see evidence that BLM has established procedures to ensure proper communication of changes or policies to the staff using BLM guidance, which includes having written procedures on how BLM publishes updates or communicates policy information, where guidance should be published in BLM's internal page, and the BLM officials who are in charge of that process. In fiscal year 2020, we have sent additional follow-up questions to the agency and are currently waiting for a response. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help improve CMS's process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, the Administrator of CMS should better document the process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, including the methods used to review RUC recommendations and the rationale for final relative value decisions.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS better document the process, including the methods used to review recommendations from the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) and the rationale for final relative value decisions. CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that CMS establishes relative values for new, revised, and potentially misvalued physicians' services based on its review of a variety of sources of information, including the RUC. At that time, CMS officials told us the agency was working to improve the transparency of its process by proposing and finalizing changes to the process in the annual rule for the Physician Fee Schedule. Officials estimated that this process would take several years to complete. In order to close this recommendation as implemented, CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation of its process for establishing relative values. As of June 2020, GAO was still waiting on confirmation from CMS that it had completed its enhancement process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services in a way that would allow for greater transparency and documentation. CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation for establishing relative values in order for GAO to close the recommendation. CMS officials agreed the recommendation should remain open as progress continues.

Recommendation: To help improve CMS's process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, the Administrator of CMS should develop a process for informing the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC, as CMS already does for potentially misvalued services identified by CMS or other stakeholders.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS develop a process for informing the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC), as CMS already does for potentially misvalued services identified by CMS or other stakeholders. CMS did not concur with this recommendation, asserting that the RUC is completely independent of CMS, and as such CMS has no authority to set the RUC's agenda for which services are reviewed. As of June 2020, CMS had not changed its position on the recommendation. We continue to believe that CMS needs to inform the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC, as it does for potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders. We acknowledge that in 2017 CMS changed its process for establishing relative values by including proposed values for almost all services in the annual proposed rulemaking for the Physician Fee Schedule, which means that the changes in values for potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC are open for public comment before they become effective. However, we continue to believe CMS should inform stakeholders of these potentially misvalued services before CMS receives RUC recommendations for them and subsequently publishes the values in the proposed rule. Doing so would give stakeholders the same amount of time they have to provide input on potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders.

Recommendation: To help improve CMS's process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, the Administrator of CMS should incorporate data and expertise from physicians and other relevant stakeholders into the process as well as develop a timeline and plan for using the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS incorporate data and expertise from physicians and other relevant stakeholders into the process, as well as develop a timeline and plan for using the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA). CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that stakeholders have the opportunity each year to nominate potentially misvalued services for review through a public nomination process. In August 2017, CMS officials reported that the final rulemaking for the 2017 Physician Fee Schedule included a data collection effort using PAMA funds and other authorities that will help furnish data to help in valuations for more than half of physician services. However, this effort pertains to global services, which are a specific type of service under the Physician Fee Schedule that include global, professional, and technical components, and does not apply to non-global services, which encompass almost half of physician services. Officials also reported that they had awarded a contract to explore data collection on practice expense and methodologies for using such data when valuing services in the Physician Fee Schedule. However, CMS did not indicate a specific timeline and plan for using the PAMA funds, just that the agency would continue to use these funds to explore more ways to gain improved data. In March 2018, CMS reported that it now incorporates data and expertise from relevant stakeholders-apart from the RUC-into its process for establishing relative values by including any new, revised, or potentially misvalued values in the annual proposed rulemaking, instead of establishing them on an interim final basis in the final rule. This means that the changes in values for services will be open for public comment prior to the implementation of changes to payment. We acknowledge that CMS has made progress towards meeting our recommendation by changing its process to allow for public comments on proposed changes to relative values before they go into effect. CMS has also made progress by beginning to use PAMA funds to assist with valuing global services and exploring avenues for collecting practice expense data. To close this recommendation, we need documentation that CMS has started to incorporate data more broadly into its process for establishing relative values and that it has a documented timeline and plan for how it will use the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014. As of June 2020, we had not received this documentation.

Recommendation: To better protect the retirement savings of individuals who change jobs, while retaining policies that provide 401(k) plans relief from maintaining small, inactive accounts, Congress should consider amending current law to repeal the provision that allows plans to disregard amounts attributable to rollovers when determining if a participant's plan balance is small enough to forcibly transfer it.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: There has been no congressional action as of March 2020. Although bipartisan legislation proposed in February 2018 discussed changes to the amount of vested savings that could be forced out of a 401(k) plan, it did not address whether or not the definition of vested savings for this purpose would continue to exclude rollovers. As we reported in GAO-15-73, rollover savings are always vested when they are transferred into a plan account. If Congress looks further at amending rules related to the threshold for forced distributions, and particularly if that threshold is raised, it bears consideration whether all of an individuals' vested savings--including rollover amounts--should be included in the calculation of that threshold.

Recommendation: To ensure that individuals have access to consolidated online information about their multiple 401(k) plan accounts, the Secretary of Labor should convene a taskforce to consider establishing a national pension registry. The taskforce could include industry professionals, plan sponsor representatives, consumer representatives, and relevant federal government stakeholders, such as representatives from Social Security Administration, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, and Internal Revenue Service, who could identify areas to be addressed through the regulatory process, as well as those that may require legislative action.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of December 2019, the Department of Labor (DOL) has not allocated staff or other resources to look at convening a task force of stakeholders to consider the need for a national pension registry. The agency previously noted the PBGC's expansion of its registry of accounts left in closed defined benefit plans to include accounts in 401(k) plans. However, PBGC's expansion included only transfers from terminating 401(k) plans, not from active plans. In February 2018, bi-partisan legislation was proposed to create a national, online registry for much of Americans' retirement savings account information, particularly those accounts which might otherwise become lost. To create the proposed "Retirement Savings Lost and Found" or something similar would require coordinated regulatory action on the part of multiple agencies, which could only benefit from the initial work and findings of a pension registry task force. The need for access to consolidated online information about multiple 401(k) plan accounts is only growing. Therefore, we continue to recommend that DOL facilitate a task force of stakeholders to identify and discuss legal and other logistical issues critical to the potential creation of a national pension registry.

Recommendation: To ensure that 401(k) plan participants have timely and adequate information to keep track of all their workplace retirement accounts, the Social Security Administration's Acting Commissioner should make information on potential vested plan benefits more accessible to individuals before retirement. For example, the agency could consolidate information on potential vested benefits, currently sent in the Potential Private Retirement Benefit Information notice, with the information provided in the Social Security earnings and benefits statement.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SSA disagreed with this recommendation, but did seek legal guidance to determine if it is permissible to include a general statement encouraging potential beneficiaries to pursue any external pension benefits in its benefit Statement. SSA's Office of the General Counsel determined that it would be permissible as long as it includes information required by law and the information is accurate. However, as of March 2020, SSA continues to believe that adding such information would place SSA in a position to respond to issues or questions about ERISA and private pension plans, which SSA considers to be outside its mission and about which the agency has no firsthand legal or operational knowledge. While we appreciate SSA's concern about providing information or advice about private pension plans, the agency already has a procedure for responding to such inquiries. The agency's Notice of Potential Private Retirement Benefit Information directs recipients to contact DOL with any questions about private retirement savings. We would expect that any increase in individuals asking SSA about their retirement savings, which could result from making information on vested benefits more accessible, could be handled in the same way. SSA said it also believes that the current benefit Statement adequately covers the fact that people need other savings, pensions, and investments and the agency sends notices to people who may quality for other pensions. We welcome SSA's efforts to raise awareness about the role of private retirement savings in ensuring financial security and in to notify individuals of potential benefits. However, these efforts do not supplant the need for individuals to have early and ongoing access to complete information on their potential plan benefits. In February 2018, bipartisan members of Congress introduced legislation that would make this possible. The Retirement Savings Lost and Found Act of 2018 (S. 2474) would house SSA's data on potential private retirement benefits in a secure database, which would be searchable online by participants and beneficiaries prior to retirement. Whether the legislation is enacted or not, we continue to believe that SSA should work to make its valuable data on potential vested plan benefits more accessible to individuals before retirement.

Recommendation: To prevent forced-transfer IRA balances from decreasing due to the low returns of the investment options currently permitted under the Department of Labor's safe harbor regulation, the Secretary of Labor should expand the investment alternatives available. For example, the forced-transfer IRA safe harbor regulations could be revised to include investment options currently under the qualified default investment alternatives regulation applicable to automatic enrollment, and permit forced-transfer IRA providers to change the investments for IRAs already established.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, DOL had not taken action on this recommendation. In 2019, DOL noted that it was engaged more generally with a range of stakeholders on issues surrounding missing and unresponsive participants with the goal of helping plans to locate and pay retirement benefits to missing participants and beneficiaries. We continue to encourage DOL to expand the safe harbor for IRAs created for forced transfers to include investment alternatives more likely to preserve principal and even increase it over time, such as what is permitted for qualified default investment alternatives under the safe harbor for automatic enrollment.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should develop a data collection strategy that ensures that states report accurate and complete data on all sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. There are short- and long-term possibilities for pursuing the data collection strategy, including (1) in the short-term, as part of its ongoing initiative to annually collect data on Medicaid payments made to hospitals, nursing facilities, and other institutional providers, CMS could collect accurate and complete facility-specific data on the sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of the Medicaid payments, and (2) in the long-term, as part of its ongoing initiative to develop an enhanced Medicaid claims data system (T-MSIS), CMS could ensure that T-MSIS will be capable of capturing information on all sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments, and, once the system becomes operational, ensure that states report this information for supplemental Medicaid payments and other highrisk Medicaid payments.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) acknowledged that it lacks adequate data on state financing methods for overseeing compliance with a certain federal requirement related to the nonfederal share and that it will examine efforts to improve data collection toward this end. In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. The proposed rule would establish new policies and codify existing policies related to reporting the sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. For example, the proposed rule would require states to report, at the aggregate and provider level, contributions to the state or local governments used as a source of the nonfederal share for Medicaid supplemental payments. GAO will continue to monitor the status of the proposed rule, as well as review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation. GAO maintains it is important that CMS and federal policymakers have more complete information about how increasing federal costs are impacting the Medicaid program, including beneficiaries and the providers who serve them and plans to continue to monitor CMS's actions to help ensure that states report accurate and complete data on all sources of the nonfederal share.

Recommendation: To better ensure the viability and safety of manufactured housing produced in accordance with the HUD Code, the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development should develop a plan to assess how FHA financing might further promote the affordability of manufactured homes and identify the potential for better securitization of manufactured housing financing.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: According to HUD officials, Ginnie Mae and FHA met to discuss their manufactured housing programs and produced a white paper. Once we receive a copy of the white paper, we will determine if it addresses our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that Congress, stakeholders, and agencies have complete information about changing costs and whether a fee needs to be changed, HUD should assess the feasibility, including an analysis of the benefits and costs, of putting in place user fees for its dispute resolution and installation programs.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2018, HUD stated that the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs continues to work toward fully implementing both the installation and dispute resolution programs in the default states using two new contractors for these purposes. As the implementation of these programs continues to mature, HUD stated that its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs will be monitoring program requirements and service delivery and gathering data that it can use in assessing the feasibility of putting in place user fees for these programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that Congress, stakeholders, and agencies have complete information about changing costs and whether a fee needs to be changed, HUD should establish the goals for use of reserves of the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund, and the minimum and maximum thresholds for the reserves appropriate for meeting these goals.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to this recommendation, as of March 2018, HUD plans to consider user fee reserve best practices in evaluating any carryover balances and developing future operating budgets for its manufactured housing programs. The Office of Manufactured Housing Programs plans on reviewing best practices and determining next steps ideally by the end of Fiscal Year 2019. We continue to believe that setting clear goals for the reserve and clarifying how those reserves will be used helps ensure accountability and transparency both to Congress and users of fee-based programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: Because ROI provides insights on the productivity of a program and is one important factor in making resource allocation decisions, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should calculate actual ROI for implemented initiatives, compare the actual ROI to projected ROI, and provide the comparison to budget decision makers for initiatives where IRS allocated resources.

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

Comments: No executive action taken as of December 2019. While IRS agreed that having actual ROI data for implemented initiatives would be useful, it did not believe it was feasible to produce such estimates, as GAO recommended in June 2014. GAO maintains that IRS should be able to provide some information on past initiatives, such as whether funds requested were used in the manner originally proposed. As of December 2016, IRS officials reported there is no timeline for full implementation. Comparing projected ROI to actual ROI can help hold managers and IRS accountable for the funding received.

Recommendation: To help ensure that it receives accurate information on the full effect of funding decisions on acquisition programs, Congress should consider amending the law that governs the 5-year Capital Investment Plan to require the Coast Guard to submit cost and schedule information that reflects the impact of the annual President's budget request on each acquisition across the portfolio--in addition to the current practice of reporting the cost and schedule estimates in current program baselines.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congressional action has not been taken. GAO will continue to follow up with relevant congressional committees.

Recommendation: To help the Coast Guard improve the long-term outlook of its portfolio, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a 20-year fleet modernization plan that identifies all acquisitions needed to maintain the current level of service and the fiscal resources necessary to build the identified assets. The plan should also consider trade-offs if the fiscal resources needed to execute the plan are not consistent with annual budgets.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: The agency concurred with this recommendation. Since the issuance of GAO's report, in February 2016, Congress directed the Coast Guard to develop a long-term plan to cover fiscal year 2017 and 20 years thereafter and that it should be updated every two years. In November 2017, officials told GAO that the Coast Guard was developing a 20-year long-term plan that specifically focused on the highest priority recapitalization and sustainment efforts for its assets and will focus on meeting the intent of the 2016 congressional mandate. However, as of July 2020, the Coast Guard has not completed this plan. At that time, officials said that the Coast Guard continues to refine the process to define the long term acquisition and capital sustainment needs of the Service and align them with published and anticipated fiscal top line budgets. The Coast Guard is working with internal and external stakeholders to define useful parameters in order to complete work to close this recommendation. GAO will continue to monitor the Coast Guard's actions in completing its long-term plan given that GAO's recent work has found that the Coast Guard continues to pursue an unaffordable acquisition portfolio that is not likely to fully address all known and anticipated capability gaps.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should direct the appropriate IRS officials to perform a risk assessment to determine the appropriate level of Integrated Data Retrieval System (IDRS) access that should be granted to employee groups that handle hard-copy taxpayer receipts and related sensitive taxpayer information as part of their job responsibilities.

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

Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. In October 2019, the functions within the Small Business/Self-Employed organization completed risk assessments to determine the appropriate level of Integrated Data Retrieval System (IDRS) access that should be granted to the employees who handle hard-copy taxpayer receipts and related sensitive taxpayer information as part of their job responsibilities. In addition, IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, the Taxpayer Advocate Service organization, in coordination with the Information Technology organization, as necessary, will complete a risk assessment of all employee groups that handle hard-copy taxpayer receipts and related sensitive taxpayer information to determine the most appropriate level of IDRS access.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should direct the appropriate IRS officials to, based on the results of the risk assessment, update the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) accordingly to specify the appropriate level of IDRS access that should be allowed for (1) remittance perfection technicians and (2) all other employee groups with IDRS access that handle hard-copy taxpayer receipts and related sensitive information as part of their job responsibilities.

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

Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that by October 2020, the Small Business/Self-Employed, Taxpayer Advocate Service, and Tax Exempt & Government Entities organizations will work with the Information Technology organization, as necessary, to ensure that the applicable Internal Revenue Manual section(s) are revised for any policy changes on (1) risk mitigation, including specifying the appropriate level of Integrated Data Retrieval System access that should be allowed and (2) risk acceptance for affected employee groups, as needed.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should direct the appropriate IRS officials to establish procedures to implement the updated IRM, including required steps to follow to prevent (1) remittance perfection technicians and (2) all other employee groups that handle hard-copy taxpayer receipts and related sensitive information as part of their job responsibilities from gaining access to command codes not required as part of their designated job duties.

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

Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that by October 2020, the Small Business/Self-Employed, Taxpayer Advocate Service, and Tax Exempt & Government Entities organizations will work with the Information Technology organization, as necessary, to establish procedures to prevent affected employees from gaining access to command codes not required as part of their designated job duties, as needed.

Recommendation: To help ensure that HHS is adequately and comprehensively assessing HPP and PHEP awardees' performance and progress in meeting the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct ASPR and CDC to develop objective and quantifiable performance targets and incremental milestones that correspond to the new HPP and PHEP performance measures, against which HHS can gauge progress toward the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements and direct technical assistance, as needed.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: Since we examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR had developed few targets for the HPP program measures or their corresponding indicators that were contained in the HPP performance measurement guidance documents issued for Budget Periods (BP) 2-5, ending June 30, 2017. Additionally, the new HPP performance measure implementation guidance for the 5-year project cycle from 2017-2022 introduces 28 performance measures, with few having targets; the guidance notes that corresponding goals or targets may be set at a later date after data from the first budget period of this new project cycle has been reviewed. Regarding PHEP, CDC had developed performance targets for about half of the performance measures as of the PHEP BP5 performance measurement guidance (BP5 ended June 30, 2017). These performance measures generally remain the same, with existing targets, for BP1 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018) of the new 5-year budget cycle. GAO recognizes that it may not be appropriate to develop performance targets for every performance measure depending on the desired process or outcome; however, both agencies still have work to do in this area. In November 2017, both ASPR and CDC officials noted that they could not commit to setting consistent targets with incremental milestones over a budget cycle and therefore could not implement the recommendation. As of August 2018, there was no change from the agencies' position that they do not have plans to fully implement the recommendation at this time.

Recommendation: To help ensure that HHS is adequately and comprehensively assessing HPP and PHEP awardees' performance and progress in meeting the medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should ensure that performance measures and targets remain consistent across the 5-year project cycle and that any future measures be comparable to determine whether awardees are making progress toward meeting short- and long-term medical and public health preparedness goals of the cooperative agreements.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: Since we first examined the HPP and PHEP cooperative agreements in 2012, ASPR and CDC had made efforts to maintain consistency in their performance measures, particularly in the last 3 years of the prior project cycle which ended June 30, 2017. However, because part of the recommendation includes consistency of performance measures into future project cycles, we also examined whether both cooperative agreements continued to use basically the same performance measures into the current 5-year cycle, which began July 1, 2017. ASPR's HPP has made a significant change in its performance measures, introducing a new set of 28 performance measures for this new 5-year cycle. CDC's PHEP performance measures generally remained consistent in the last two budget periods of the prior 5-year cycle, and remained generally the same for the first year of the new 5-year cycle (some measures were "retired," though key components from a measure may continue to be used by CDC in other types of reviews). Additionally, in November 2017, both CDC and ASPR officials noted that they may need to continue to adjust the performance measures during the new 5-year cycle. As of August 2018, as a result of the change to HPP's measures and the agency statements in November 2017, GAO anticipates keeping this recommendation open at least for the next few budget periods, in order to determine whether the agencies maintain consistency with the performance measures during the new project cycle.