Recommendation: The Secretary of State, working with the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, should collaborate with the Departments of Defense and Agriculture and other Departments as necessary, to develop a comprehensive approach to the monitoring and evaluation of projects that directly support the objectives of prosperity, governance, and security, and incorporate this approach into the Strategy monitoring and evaluation plan.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: State did not concur with the recommendation, indicating that it continues to collaborate with agencies regarding U.S. government activities in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. However, in May 2020, State noted that, to the extent possible, it would seek to include agencies, such as the Departments of Defense and Agriculture, into the Progress Report for the U.S. Strategy for Central America's Plan for Monitoring and Evaluation. When we confirm what actions State has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment to determine and identify in final guidance for middle-tier acquisition programs the metrics that will be used to assess the performance of middle-tier acquisition programs across the military departments, including whether programs are meeting statutory objectives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it planned to determine performance metrics in coordination with its release of its final guidance on middle-tier programs, which DOD expected to release in late 2019. In December 2019, Congress passed the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. Section 837 in the Conference Report accompanying the Act requires DOD to submit a report to the congressional defense committees no later than December 15, 2019, that includes guidance on the use of middle-tier acquisition authority and the metrics required to assess the performance of such a program, among other topics. DOD's report, provided to Congress in January 2020, identified metrics that DOD planned to use to assess the performance of these programs. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment subsequently leveraged these metrics in its March 2020 bi-annual review of middle-tier acquisition programs to assess program execution. However, DOD has yet to identify these metrics in guidance as we recommended, which we continue to believe is important to facilitate consistent reporting across the military departments and DOD components.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should develop a plan for how the department will assess the effect of recent acquisition reforms, including identifying who will be responsible for the assessment and what data will be needed. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it has included a division in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition to analyze the effect of recent acquisition reforms and other high-level oversight and policy issues. In December 2019, Congress took additional action. The Conference Report accompanying the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act required DOD to submit a report with the budget for fiscal year 2021 on the progress of implementing acquisition reform initiatives. In response, DOD provided a report to Congress in March 2020 that includes how the Secretary will identify, quantify, assess and manage program risk, describes changes to DOD's data collection and sharing processes, and describes new acquisition frameworks to be implemented. However, the report does not address how DOD will assess the acquisition reforms, what data is needed, or who is responsible. Additionally, in August 2020, the Assistant Secretary of Defense approved a plan for assessing the implementation of new acquisition pathways at DOD. However, DOD is still identifying the specific data needed to assess each acquisition pathway, as well as determining how to assess the remaining acquisition reforms we covered in our June 2019 report. Therefore, we will continue to monitor DOD efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: Congress should consider legislation requiring comprehensive and timely information on political appointees serving in the executive branch to be collected and made publicly accessible. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, no bills have been introduced related to this matter. When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of the Small Business Administration should implement procedures to track and verify that required employees complete initial ethics training and that completion of this training is documented. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: SBA officials provided documentation, including internal operating procedures for certifying and tracking initial ethics training, to support that they have taken initial steps to address our recommendation. In a letter dated September 13, 2019, SBA's Designated Agency Ethics Official stated that, since February 2019, SBA has used those procedures to document the provision of initial ethics training to political appointees. In that letter, SBA stated that it planned to provide additional documentation to GAO to support this action. When we receive this documentation, we will assess the implementation of SBA;s new procedures to confirm that, in operation, these procedures meet the intent of our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Departmental Ethics Office, in conjunction with the Chief Human Capital Officer, to develop, document, and implement a strategic workforce planning process that aligns with its ongoing departmental reorganization and that is tailored to the specific needs of the ethics program. As part of this process, Interior should monitor and assess the critical skills and competencies that its ethics program needs presently and is projected to need in the future. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated September 10, 2019, Interior's Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget stated that Interior concurred with this recommendation and is in the process of reorganizing the Department's ethics program, including working with the Chief Human Capital Officer to develop and implement strategic workforce planning. Interior expects to complete this action by December 31, 2021. When we can confirm what actions Interior has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should ensure that the department's ethics program policies and procedures are documented and easily accessible to program staff. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated September 10, 2019, Interior's Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget stated that Interior concurred with this recommendation and is in the process of developing ethics program policies and procedures. Interior expects to complete this action by December 31, 2021. Once finalized, Interior plans to make ethics program policies and procedures easily accessible to the program staff. When we can confirm what actions Interior has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Senior Deputy Comptroller for Large Bank Supervision should revise Large Bank Supervisions policy to require documentation of examination teams internal deliberations that lead to consequential decisions for the bank, such as the decision whether to issue a Matter Requiring Attention, among others. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that consistently documenting internal deliberations that lead to consequential decisions for the bank could increase the transparency and accountability of examination teams' findings and decisions.

Recommendation: The Senior Deputy Comptroller for Large Bank Supervision should revise Large Bank Supervisions policy to require that bank examination teams retain drafts of key documents, including the conclusion memorandum and supervisory letter, that record the supervisory review process. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that revising the policy to ensure that drafts of key documents are not deleted will help OCC increase the transparency and accountability of the supervisory review process.

Recommendation: The Senior Deputy Comptroller for Large Bank Supervision should revise Large Bank Supervisions policy to require documentation of communications with banks, including those between executive and senior management and banks, that inform supervisory decisions. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that having meeting minutes and other documentation of key communications would provide OCC with a more complete and transparent record of the information banks provide to examiners and how that information impacts supervisory decisions.

Recommendation: The Senior Deputy Comptroller for Large Bank Supervision should systematically track and monitor Large Bank Supervisions use of informal recommendations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and stated that it neither has taken nor plans to take any actions to address it. We maintain that tracking and monitoring the use of informal recommendations could increase transparency of the supervisory process, which could help Large Bank Supervision mitigate the risk of regulatory capture.

Recommendation: The Chief Counsel should develop a policy for Large Bank Supervision (1) to check employees active conflicts of interests during the staffing process for examinations and other supervisory activities and (2) to document the results of this check. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020,, OCC continued to disagree with GAO's recommendation and does not plan to develop a policy to check if employees have active conflicts of interest during the staffing process for examinations and other supervisory activities. OCC noted in its December 2018 response letter to the report that they believed such a policy would shift the responsibility for ensuring compliance with recusal requirements from employees to those responsible for staffing. We maintain that this recommendation does not aim to alleviate the personal responsibility all employees have to comply with recusal requirements. Rather, our recommendation aims to strengthen the due diligence of those responsible for staffing by requiring an independent, preliminary check of active conflicts of interest.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure that the role and responsibilities of the Interagency Program Office are clearly defined within the governance plans for acquisition of the department's new electronic health record system. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation to ensure that the role and responsibilities of the Interagency Program Office (IPO) were clearly defined within the governance plans for acquisition of the department's new electronic health record system. As of December 2019, VA and the Department of Defense (DOD) have replaced the IPO with a new joint governance body. Specifically, the Federal Electronic Health Record Modernization (FEHRM) program office has been established to serve as the single point of accountability in the delivery of a common health record between the departments and the advancement of interoperability with the private sector. In its charter, the FEHRM was described as a single decision-making authority to manage issues in support of the departments' integrated electronic health record objectives and its leadership is responsible for, among other things, working to formulate, oversee, de-conflict, and ensure adherence to electronic health record-related VA and DOD policies. However, the corresponding Implementation Plan that is intended to document how the FEHRM executes its full responsibilities has yet to be issued. To fully implement this recommendation, VA needs to document the role and responsibilities of the FEHRM with respect to VA's acquisition of its new electronic health record system, explaining the role, if any, the FEHRM will have in the governance process. We will continue to monitor the departments' incorporation of the FEHRM into the plans for the ongoing acquisition.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission should designate a chief FOIA officer at the assistant secretary level or equivalent. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open

Comments: American Battle Monument Commission (ABMC) officials stated they are working to implement GAO's recommendations by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission should update and publish comprehensive FOIA regulations that include requirements established by law and Justice guidance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open

Comments: American Battle Monument Commission (ABMC) officials stated they are working to implement GAO's recommendations. On February 18, 2020, ABMC published proposed revised FOIA regulations which are pending final rule in the Federal Register.

Recommendation: The Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Broadcasting Board of Governors should update and publish comprehensive FOIA regulations that include requirements established by law and Justice guidance. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: U.S. Agency for Global Media
Status: Open

Comments: The U.S. Agency for Global Media (formally known as the Broadcasting Board of Governors) performed a comprehensive review of its FOIA regulations and updated its regulations in accordance with GAO's recommendation. The agency anticipates publishing proposed updates for notice and comment in spring 2020, followed by a final rule.

Recommendation: The Secretary of DHS should take steps to develop and document a plan that fully addresses best practices with regards to reduction of backlogged FOIA requests. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2018, the Department of Homeland Security initiated a department-wide compliance assessment and stated that it plans to use the results of the assessment to help guide the department in identifying best practices and areas of improvement. The department does not have an estimate for when the plan will be complete.

Recommendation: The Secretary of DOI should take steps to develop and document a plan that fully addresses best practices with regards to reduction of backlogged FOIA requests. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, the Department of Interior informed GAO that the department has created a preliminary backlog reduction plan that includes expanding the use of automation tools, expanding the use of interim responses, and closing the Department's 10 oldest requests. Currently, GAO is awaiting a copy of the Department's backlog reduction plan.

Recommendation: The Chair of EEOC should designate a chief FOIA officer at the assistant secretary level or equivalent. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Status: Open

Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations..

Recommendation: The Chair of EEOC should take steps to develop and document a plan that fully addresses best practices with regards to reduction of backlogged FOIA requests. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Status: Open

Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations.

Recommendation: The Attorney General of the United States should take steps to develop and document a plan that fully addresses best practices with regards to reduction of backlogged FOIA requests. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, the Department of Justice acknowledged that it plans to reexamine its progress and take steps for continued improvement in reducing its backlog. Currently, GAO is awaiting a response from the Department on a publication date.

Recommendation: The Administrator of NASA should provide agency records of final opinions online. (Recommendation 14)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, NASA agreed to provide agency records of final opinions online. NASA noted that final opinions will be provided online as they are issued and released for public posting. To date, the Department has not posted any final opinions.

Recommendation: The Chairman of NTSB should take steps to develop and document a plan that fully addresses best practices with regards to reduction of backlogged FOIA requests. (Recommendation 16)

Agency: National Transportation Safety Board
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, NTSB provided a plan that laid out tasks for reducing its backlog. The plan did not, however provide milestones or dates for when these tasks would be completed. GAO is currently waiting for the finalized backlog FOIA plan.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should designate a chief FOIA officer at the assistant secretary level or equivalent. (Recommendation 18)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: GAO is currently awaiting the agency's response to GAO recommendations.

Recommendation: The Director of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation should designate a chief FOIA officer at the assistant secretary level or equivalent. (Recommendation 19)

Agency: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Status: Open

Comments: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation stated that it has designated the deputy director as the chief FOIA officer. It also noted that the director is at the Senior Level. However, this position is not equivalent to the assistant secretary level identified by GAO.

Recommendation: The President of TVA should ensure its FOIA tracking system is compliant with section 508 requirements. (Recommendation 22)

Agency: Tennessee Valley Authority
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2018, TVA provided a response to GAO's recommendation to ensure their FOIA tracking systems is compliant with section 508 requirements. TVA is currently performing an in-depth assessment of their tracking system to identify where updates can be made to ensure 508 compliance. TVA expects the assessment to be completed by the end of January 2020.

Recommendation: The President of the U.S. African Development Foundation should update and publish comprehensive FOIA regulations that inform a requester of limited unusual circumstances fees. (Recommendation 24)

Agency: African Development Foundation
Status: Open

Comments: U.S. African Development Foundation officials have stated that their FOIA regulations are currently under review and expect them to be published in the first half of calendar year 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should continue to provide ongoing technical assistance that significantly contributes to agencies making their own determinations about their DATA Act reporting requirements and monitor agency submissions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OMB stated in January 2020 that it believes that the assistance it has previously provided to help agencies make their own reporting determinations fulfills the recommendation's intent. However, because we continue to identify instances where agencies had not submitted these data, we continue to believe that OMB needs to follow up with agencies that are not submitting quarterly data to find out why they are not reporting. It also needs to update its list of agencies required to report.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should clarify and align existing guidance regarding the appropriate definitions agencies should use to collect and report on Primary Place of Performance and establish monitoring mechanisms to foster consistent application and compliance. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OMB has issued or contributed to guidance documents that are intended to help agencies collect and report on "Primary Place of Performance." We believe that providing specific examples of how agencies should approach challenging situations when reporting on this data element for grants would provide further clarity.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should reasonably assure that ongoing monitoring controls to help ensure the completeness and accuracy of agency submissions are designed, implemented, and operating as designed. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In September 2019, Treasury officials stated that they are working to formalize a process for monitoring agency submissions. This process will include (1) emailing agencies prior to submission deadlines to remind them of the approaching submission deadlines; (2) following up with agencies that do not submit required data by the submission deadline and offering technical assistance as needed; and (3) forwarding a list of non-compliant agencies to OMB. GAO will continue to monitor Treasury's efforts to establish monitoring controls to help ensure the completeness and accuracy of the data.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Treasury should disclose known data quality issues and limitations on the new USAspending.gov. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of January 2020, Treasury has made progress by disclosing limitations related to unreported spending, among other things. Treasury is planning a major update to the USAspending.gov website to include more information about known data quality issues. Treasury plans to make this update to the website in the coming months and has an internal target date of June 2020 for completion. When completed, this action will help users make more informed decisions about how to interpret and use the data provided on the website.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should revise and publicly issue OMB guidance--through an update to its Circular No. A-11, a memorandum, or other means--to provide time frames and associated milestones for implementing the federal program inventory. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB provided a time frame for implementing some of the federal program inventory requirements. In that guidance, OMB states that beginning with the 2021 budget cycle, agencies' program activities will be used for the inventory's program-level reporting requirements. This will allow OMB and agencies to leverage federal spending data reported on USASpending.gov as required by the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. Those data can be presented at the program activity level, and therefore could meet the inventory requirements to present program-level spending data. However, OMB's guidance does not yet present any time frames or milestones for meeting other inventory requirements, such as describing the purpose of each program or how it contributes to the agency's mission and goals. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should consider--as OMB determines its strategy for resumed implementation of the federal program inventory--using a systematic approach, such as the information architecture framework, to help ensure that GPRAMA requirements and our past recommendations for the inventory are addressed. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. In its June 2019 and July 2020 updates to Circular No. A-11, OMB states that it and agencies will meet some of the federal inventory requirements by leveraging the spending data reported on USASpending.gov. The guidance notes that this information is provided in a structured information architecture format on USASpending.gov. In July 2019, OMB staff told us that they considered an information architecture approach in response to our past reports on the topic. However, OMB has not yet clarified in guidance or elsewhere how the information architecture format of USASpending.gov-which is currently focused on spending data-could be used to meet additional information reporting requirements and our past recommendations related to the inventory. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should work with the Performance Improvement Council to identify and share among agencies practices for expanding the use of data-driven performance reviews beyond agency priority goals, such as for other performance goals and at lower levels within agencies, that have led to performance improvements. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have taken some actions toward addressing this recommendation. OMB and the PIC, in guidance provided through Circular No. A-11 and the Goal Playbook respectively, have encouraged agencies to expand their use of data-driven reviews beyond agency priority goals. In March 2019, OMB staff told us that they would work with the PIC to provide agencies with case studies and other resources that could help expand their use of data-driven reviews, should agencies choose to do so. However, as of October 2020, OMB and the PIC have not yet identified and shared practices related to expanding the use of those reviews as we recommended. We will continue to monitor OMB's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enable the department to enhance its visibility over contractor personnel for whom it may become responsible in the event of contingency and other applicable operations, the Secretary of Defense should, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, update accountability guidance clarifying the types of contractor personnel that are to be accounted for in a steady-state environment.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, but as of September 2020, has not yet taken steps to implement it. DOD stated that DOD Instruction 3020.41, Operational Contract Support, is being updated, and will include guidance on the types of contractor personnel that are to be accounted for. The department also stated it would update Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual 3150.13C, Joint Personnel Reporting Structure-Personnel Manual, to clarify the types of contractor personnel that are to be accounted for. As of September 2020, neither of these guidance documents had been updated. This recommendation will remain open.

Recommendation: To ensure that combatant commands are not contracting with entities that may be connected to or supporting prohibited organizations, the Secretary of Defense should, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, develop and issue guidance that clarifies the foreign-vendor vetting steps or process that should be established at each combatant command, including the operational conditions under which a foreign-vendor vetting cell should be established.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation but as of September 2020, has not implemented it. In its response to our report, DOD agreed that the development and issuance of overarching guidance and partially concurs with the development and issuance of guidance that clarifies the foreign vendor vetting steps or process that should be established at each combatant command, including operational conditions under which a foreign vendor vetting cell should be established. In April 2018, DOD issued Directive-Type Memorandum 18-002, Prohibition on Providing Funds to the Enemy and Authorization of Additional Access to Records. In August 2020, DOD officials said that they had drafted department-wide vendor vetting guidance (now known as vendor threat mitigation), but had not yet issued it. Since the guidance has not been issued, the recommendation will remain open at this time.

Recommendation: To ensure that PACOM is not contracting with entities that may be connected to or supporting prohibited organizations, while awaiting DOD guidance on vendor vetting, the Secretary of Defense should direct the PACOM commander to consider developing vendor vetting guidance as other combatant commands have done, to prepare for the event that PACOM becomes actively engaged in hostilities.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, but as of September 2019, has not yet taken the steps necessary to implement it.. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD program managers have the necessary information to maintain complete visibility and accountability of ITEF-funded equipment in SCIP, the Secretary of Defense should identify the root causes, such as potential interoperability and data reporting issues within SCIP and other DOD data systems, for why DOD components are not ensuring that ITEF-funded equipment transportation dates are captured in SCIP.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of October 2019, DOD was in the process of developing a plan to address this recommendation. GAO is continuing to monitor DOD's progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD program managers have the necessary information to maintain complete visibility and accountability of ITEF-funded equipment in SCIP, the Secretary of Defense should develop an action plan with associated milestones and time frames for addressing the root causes for why DOD components are not ensuring that ITEF-funded equipment transportation dates are captured in SCIP.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of October 2019, DOD was in the process of developing a plan to address this recommendation. GAO is continuing to monitor DOD's progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD program managers have the necessary information to maintain complete visibility and accountability of ITEF-funded equipment in SCIP, the Secretary of Defense should develop written procedures that specify under which data field ITEF-funded equipment transfer dates should be captured in the Enhanced Freight Tracking System in SCIP.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. The department commented that the relevant organizations have most, if not all, of the written procedures that are necessary for reporting these dates in the Enhanced Freight Tracking System. However, it would coordinate with all interested parties to update these procedures if needed. As of October 2019, GAO was continuing to monitor DOD's progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that DOD program managers have the necessary information to maintain complete visibility and accountability of ITEF-funded equipment in SCIP, the Secretary of Defense should update the 1st Theater Sustainment Command's (1st TSC) written standard operating procedures to include the 1st TSC commander's verbal order requiring the inclusion of unique equipment case identifier information for ITEF-funded equipment on transfer documentation.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of October 2019, DOD officials said they had updated the 1st TSC's written standard operating procedures to include the 1st TSC's commander's verbal order, and GAO was in the process of obtaining documentation of these changes.

Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to develop a comprehensive long-term capital asset plan to inform its allocation of school facility funds. Such a plan should include a prioritized list of school repair and maintenance projects with the greatest need for funding.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its Office of Facilities, Property, and Safety Management was undergoing a reorganization to establish a work group focused on asset management and will continue to work with the Office of Management and Budget to develop a capital asset management plan. In October 2018, Indian Affairs provided a prioritized list of deferred maintenance projects for 2018 and documentation of its processes for prioritizing school deferred maintenance requirements and allocating one type of construction funding. They also provided a memorandum on facilities management communication and organizational roles and responsibilities and sample agendas and minutes from meetings regarding construction. Indian affairs did not provide a long term capital asset plan. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation and await documentation on the actions it is taking to develop a capital asset plan. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation and await documentation on the actions it is taking to develop a capital asset plan.

Recommendation: To ensure accountability for BIE school facility funds, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs to improve oversight and technical assistance to tribal organizations to enhance tribal capacity to manage major construction projects.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that its Division of Facilities Management and Construction will develop a project tracking and monitoring process for all projects above a certain monetary threshold. Additionally, Indian Affairs reported that this office will work with BIA and BIE officials to identify common challenges that tribes face in managing projects and provide appropriate technical assistance. In September 2018, Indian Affairs provided documentation of templates it had created for regional Indian Affairs officials to use in communicating with tribes and agendas for training presentations. Neither of these documents show any direct technical assistance to tribes or address oversight. We will continue to monitor Indian Affairs' efforts to implement this recommendation and await documentation on the actions it is taking to improve oversight and technical assistance to tribal organizations.

Recommendation: To help improve oversight of the concessions program, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Director of the National Park Service to develop performance goals with targets and timeframes in its commercial services strategic plan.

Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2019, the agency provided an update of their recent efforts, including their revised Commercial Services Improvement Plan. This plan include performance goals and general time frames , however did not include performance measures or specific targets for each of the initiatives. The agency has subsequently reviewed this plan and determined that many of the goals and time frames identified were not realistic to achieve, making it difficult to establish performance measures or targets. As of July 2020, the agency is currently updating its 2015 Strategic Plan and reviewing the improvement plan to identify those items that will be feasible to implement. According to agency officials, they plan to develop goals and performance targets where feasible and develop time estimates for achieving them. Since this effort is currently underway, we will update the status of their efforts in the summer of 2021.

Recommendation: To improve the quality of the data published on ForeignAssistance.gov and help ensure consistency in published information, the Secretary of State should, in consultation with the Director of OMB and the USAID Administrator, develop additional guidance that takes into consideration current challenges to updating ForeignAssistance.gov with verified data.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of May 2020, State had taken some steps to coordinate with OMB and USAID to improve the quality of data reported for ForeignAssistance.gov. Notably, in May 2020, State and USAID submitted a joint report to Congress outlining a plan to consolidate the two federal websites reporting foreign assistance spending--ForeignAssistance.gov (managed by State) and explorer.usaid.gov (managed by USAID). As part of the plan, State and USAID will establish a joint data governance structure to reduce discrepancies in data, bolster the capacity of agencies to submit data, and ensure the accuracy and quality of data. Once the governance structure is finalized, they will send a copy to GAO. GAO will then review this information to assess if it sufficiently addresses GAO's recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve DOE's ability to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of policies that call for all organizations, including contractors, to embrace a strong safety culture and create a work environment that encourages a questioning attitude by all employees, the Secretary of Energy should develop and implement an independent evaluation process for routinely and accurately measuring contractor employees' willingness to raise safety and other concerns without fear of retaliation. This process should ensure that an independent third party develops, conducts, and consistently applies the evaluation methodology--which should include safeguards that protect anonymity. The process should also enable DOE to oversee and ensure that appropriate corrective actions are taken in response to evaluation results.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. DOE has developed a plan to analyze tools utilized by site contractors to determine the viability of using the data to monitor the influence of work environment on employees' willingness to raise safety concerns. As of March 2020, DOE had completed assessments of safety culture sustainment tools and drafted a report. According to officials, the draft report is undergoing final review and officials anticipate issuing the report by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: To help ensure that the organizational placement and practices of DOE- and contractor- provided Employee Concerns Programs (ECP) do not inhibit contractor employees from raising safety and other concerns, the Secretary of Energy should revise DOE's ECP order and guidance to (1) require that the organizational placement and practices of contractor ECP's do not compromise or impair their independence, (2) clarify the circumstances under which DOE's ECP is permitted to transfer and refer concerns to contractors, and notify or require approval of the contractor employee raising the concern, and (3) provide criteria for overseeing and evaluating the effectiveness and independence of contractor-provided ECPs.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. DOE issued its revised order on the employee concerns program (ECP) in January 2019. However, that order did not address all three issues raised in our recommendation. Specifically, the order states that it is a best practice for contractor ECP managers to report to a designated executive in the contractor management chain, but does not include information on concerns of independence. Additionally, there is instruction that ECP managers must assess programs and how often, but there is not specific criteria for overseeing and evaluating effectiveness or independence. As of May 2020, we are continuing to discuss these issues with DOE officials.

Recommendation: To help ensure that Congress has the information it needs as it considers whether or not to make permanent the enhanced whistleblower pilot program and that DOE has assurance that contractor employees have an effective mechanism to seek remedy for unlawful retaliation, the Secretary of Energy should fully evaluate the extent to which the pilot program has been implemented and whether its provisions will mitigate challenges associated with DOE's 708 program. This evaluation should include, at a minimum, an assessment of (1) contractors that have adopted the pilot program and the date they did so; (2) contractors that have not adopted the pilot program and an explanation of why not; (3) cases filed under the pilot program, if any; and (4) the pilot program's potential for mitigating challenges associated with the 708 program.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: DOE concurred in principle with the recommendation. In response, the Office of Hearings and Appeals conducted a review of the Part 708 program that addressed three of the four items identified in the recommendation. As of May 2020, we are continuing to work with DOE on whether or how it plans to assess the contractors that have adopted the pilot program and the date they did so.

Recommendation: To help improve DOE's ability to take enforcement action against unlawful retaliation when appropriate and take action against contractors that create a chilled work environment, the Secretary of Energy should revise DOE's Integrated Safety Management policy and guidance to clarify what constitutes evidence of a chilled work environment and define the appropriate steps DOE should take to hold contractors accountable for creating a chilled work environment.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOE concurred with the recommendation. In January 2018, DOE issued a revision to DOE Policy 450.4A. The revised policy states that organizations should foster a culture that allows employees to "feel free to raise safety concerns without fear of retaliation...and supporting a questioning attitude concerning safety by all employees." However, the policy does not define the appropriate steps DOE should take to hold contractors accountable for creating a chilled work environment. As of May 2020, we are continuing to work with DOE to determine whether they plan to make additional changes to the policy to address our recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure the Army retains accountability of SRC I ammunition in an in-transit status, consistent with DOD policy, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to evaluate and identify actions to enable the Army to retain accountability for in-transit items until acknowledgment of receipt.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of January 2020, the Army is undergoing a financial audit of all munitions processes that affect the financial voucher, including the Material-In-Transit between locations, both wholesale and retail. The Army gained a consensus that until a unified record for both wholesale and retail is adopted, the shipping and receipt process will remain the same as that currently in use. An effort is underway to determine the best Army Enterprise Ammunition Supply Chain via an Other Transaction Agreement solution intended to provide a seamless supply chain from wholesale to the end user. The estimated completion date is September 2023.

Recommendation: To improve the consistency and completeness of Amtrak's financial reporting and to provide Congress with accurate information to make funding decisions, the President of Amtrak should ensure that Amtrak's depreciation expenses are appropriately allocated to its lines of business once the underlying capital asset data are determined reliable.

Agency: National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, Amtrak had not allocated its depreciation costs to its lines of business, as we recommended. In 2019, Amtrak stated that federal law required Amtrak to allocate and report its capital spending by line of business. Amtrak further stated that depreciation expense is a good proxy for capital spending and that the changed reporting requirements eliminated the need to report depreciation by line of business. In addition, although Amtrak's external auditor did not find any material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in Amtrak's fiscal year 2019 audited financial statement-the most recent available-those statements do not allocate Amtrak's depreciation costs to its various business lines. We will update this recommendation's status with any new information from Amtrak.

Recommendation: In addition, to better inform congressional decision making regarding the funding of Northeast Corridor infrastructure improvements, the Northeast Corridor Commission should work with its members to establish criteria for its members to use in selecting and prioritizing capital projects to be included in future editions of its 5-year capital plan.

Agency: Northeast Corridor Commission
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, the Northeast Corridor (NEC) Commission and its members had yet to establish criteria for selecting and prioritizing capital projects in its 5-year capital plan. The Commission staff told GAO that it had developed potential criteria for selecting projects for both regional and NEC-wide priorities to be included the Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan, Fiscal Years 2020 - 2024, published in April 2019 and updated in December 2019. However, those potential criteria were not formally adopted by the Commission members. Specifically, the Commission's proposed criteria for selecting NEC-wide priorities included projects that would prevent the potential severing of the Northeast Corridor and advance state-of-good repair. Proposed criteria for regional priorities included projects that would increase train capacity and improve passenger access to rail services. While the proposed criteria were not used to select or prioritize projects in the Capital Investment Plan, Fiscal Years 2020 - 2024, the plan presented the proposed criteria as "benefits" for the projects in that plan. While this information may be helpful to stakeholders in understanding some of the rationale for the inclusion of projects in the plan, it does not demonstrate that the Commission and its members have established formal criteria for selecting and prioritizing projects, as GAO recommended. GAO will continue to monitor the Commission's progress in addressing this recommendation.

Recommendation: To more accurately communicate DHS's funding plans for USCG's major acquisition programs, the Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure the funding plans presented to Congress in fiscal year 2015 are comprehensive and clearly account for all operations and maintenance funding DHS plans to allocate to each of the USCG's major acquisition programs.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with this recommendation and stated in their comments that the U.S. Coast Guard and the DHS Chief Financial Officer will develop a plan to address this recommendation by September 30, 2015, then work together to fully implement the plan. DHS estimated it would complete this effort March 31, 2016. However, the USCG encountered technical challenges during this process and was unable to implement the plan by that time. The U.S. Coast Guard has revised the estimated completion date and now anticipates it will be able to address this recommendation in fiscal year 2022. GAO will continue to assess the updated APBs as a part of its annual review of select DHS major acquisition programs to determine whether the department has addressed the recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure that FBI whistleblowers have access to recourse under DOJ's regulations should the individuals experience retaliation, and to minimize the possibility of discouraging future potential whistleblowers, the Attorney General should clarify in all current relevant DOJ guidance and communications, including FBI guidance and communications, to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures and, further, explicitly state that employees will not have access to recourse if they experience retaliation for reporting alleged wrongdoing to someone not designated in DOJ's regulations.

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In response to our report, in December 2016, Congress passed and the President signed the FBI Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-302, which, among other things, provides a means for FBI employees to obtain corrective action for retaliation for disclosures of wrongdoing made to supervisors and others in the employees' chain of command. Following this, the FBI worked closely with the Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) to develop a training that clearly identifies to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures. In addition, the FBI issued an aligned policy directive and two fact sheets detailing whistleblower rights. In October 2018, a DOJ official reported to us that the department was in the process of updating its regulations and, in February 2020, DOJ officials confirmed that the updated regulation was in the departmental clearance process but they could not provide an estimate for when it would be finalized. As a result, as of February 2020, DOJ's regulations have not been updated and are inconsistent with the current statute and FBI's guidance and training; as such, the problem of unclear or conflicting guidance to FBI employees still needs to be addressed. To address this recommendation, DOJ would need to update its regulations and ensure that all relevant guidance is clear and consistent across the department.

Recommendation: To improve the CSA program, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to revise the SMS methodology to better account for limitations in drawing comparisons of safety performance information across carriers; in doing so, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to conduct a formal analysis that specifically identifies: (1) limitations in the data used to calculate SMS scores including variability in the carrier population and the quality and quantity of data available for carrier safety performance assessments, and (2) limitations in the resulting SMS scores including their precision, confidence, and reliability for the purposes for which they are used.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: FMCSA did not agree with our recommendation, disputing the methodology and conclusions in our report. However, we continue to believe that addressing Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology limitations has merit and could help the agency better target FMCSA's resources to the carriers that pose the highest risk of crashing. For example, we found FMCSA requires a minimum level of information for a carrier to receive an SMS score; however, this requirement is not strong enough to produce sufficiently reliable scores. As a result, FMCSA identified many carriers as high risk that were not later involved in a crash, potentially causing FMCSA to miss opportunities to intervene with higher risk carriers. To fully implement this recommendation, FMCSA should revise SMS methodology to account for data limitations that limit comparisons so that the FMCSA is better positioned to identify and mitigate carriers that pose the greatest safety risks. FMCSA has recently developed and tested a new methodological approach that could potentially account for the limitations we identified. While FMCSA has not yet committed to deploying the new methodology, they hope to do so some time in 2020.

Recommendation: To improve the CSA program, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FMCSA Administrator to ensure that any determination of a carrier's fitness to operate properly accounts for limitations we have identified regarding safety performance information.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) agreed with the basic principles that GAO addressed in this area, but disagreed with GAO's characterization of FMCSA's proposed Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) rule. In January 2016, FMCSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed a revised methodology for issuance of a safety fitness determination for motor carriers. Specifically, the new methodology would have determined when a motor carrier is not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles in or affecting interstate commerce based on the carrier's on-road safety data; an investigation; or a combination of both. However, in July 2018, in part due to a review of SMS by the National Academies of Science congressionally mandated evaluation of SMS, FMCSA announced that the enhancements previously proposed will not be completed.

Recommendation: To help improve the oversight and accountability of the military services' ROTC programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to coordinate with the military services to ensure that service ROTC guidance aligns with the updated DOD instruction.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in written comments on our report. An April 2016 letter from the Director of Accession Policy, MPP, ASD(M&RA) to the DOD OIG states that the services reviewed and adjusted their current procedures and metrics in advance of the projected DODI publication date. However, in August 2018, we requested documentation of the services' efforts outlined in the letter to the DOD OIG and to verify that the services had taken the requisite steps to address our recommendation--namely, that their ROTC guidance aligned with the updated DODI. As of June 2020, DOD had provided documentation of updated service ROTC guidance, aligning with the updated DODI, for the Department of the Navy and the Air Force. However, according to DOD, the relevant Army Regulation update remains in draft, and thus the recommendation remains open. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to implement this recommendation and will update it as more information becomes available.

Recommendation: To help improve the oversight and accountability of the military services' ROTC programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop and implement, in conjunction with the Secretaries of the military services, a strategy to periodically communicate with Congress and other key stakeholders on ROTC program performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in written comments on our report. The March 2018 version of DODI 1215.08 directs the services to provide criteria, annual assessments, and decisions about establishment/disestablishment of ROTC units to institution presidents. It also states that the ROTC resources summary report will be the basis for responding to congressional and public inquiries. In addition, updated service guidance from the Department of Navy includes a provision for annual communication with host institutions. The DODI did not include and DOD has not developed a strategy to periodically communicate with Congress on ROTC program performance, as we recommended. According to DOD, as of July 2020, a congressional communication plan has been developed for the ROTC program, including dates and topics for discussion. However, DOD has not yet provided documentation of this plan, and, thus, the recommendation remains open. We will continue to monitor DOD's efforts to implement this recommendation and will update it as more information becomes available.

Recommendation: To better ensure that CBP's Office of Field Operations' (OFO) staffing processes are transparent and to help ensure CBP can demonstrate that these resource decisions have effectively addressed CBP's mission needs, the Commissioner of CBP should document the methodology and process OFO uses to allocate staff to land ports of entry on the southwest border, including the rationales and factors considered in making these decisions.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2017, CBP's Office of Field Operations began working with a contractor to develop a comprehensive CBP position allocation methodology and tool. According to CBP officials, the purpose of this tool was to ensure a data driven, transparent process for allocating CBP resources--including staff--to land ports of entry on the southwest border. CBP officials stated that the contractor completed the tool in January 2018, CBP tested the tool in fiscal year 2018, and CBP planned to implement the tool in fiscal year 2019. However, CBP officials told us in September 2020 that a subsequent reorganization of the Office of Field Operations rendered the tool unusable without further modification. As a result, they used a manual method to allocate staff in fiscal year 2020 and plan to do the same in fiscal year 2021. As of September 2020, CBP officials planned to document the methodology and process they are now using to allocate staff to land ports of entry, including rationales and factors considered, by November 2020. This recommendation remains open.

Recommendation: To help SEC address identified personnel management challenges, and to help enhance the credibility of its performance management system, the Chairman of SEC should direct the COO and OHR to conduct periodic validations (with staff input) of the performance management system and make changes, as appropriate, based on these validations.

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: SEC management and the union agreed in November 2018 to implement a new performance management system and a new incentive bonus program in 2020. According to SEC officials, SEC plans to work with OPM to validate the new performance management system by conducting focus groups with staff at the midpoint of the 2020 appraisal period and surveying staff on the new system at the conclusion of the 2020 appraisal period. These plans are consistent with our 2013 recommendation that SEC should conduct periodic validations of its performance management system. In August 2020, SEC reported that it began implementation of the new 2-tier performance management program and will complete the annual rating cycle in December 2020, with feedback and appraisal closeout activities occurring in early calendar year 2021. According to SEC, OPM will assess the new program after calendar year 2020 performance cycle activities are completed. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress in validating the new performance management system.

Recommendation: To better ensure that air ventilation systems in manufactured homes perform as specified and meet the HUD Code, HUD should develop an appropriate method to test and validate the performance of the ventilation system as part of the HUD certification process.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2017, HUD stated that it has not developed a test to validate the performance of the whole-house ventilation specification. HUD reported that the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) did not agree with the testing validation recommendations. As of March 2018, HUD continues to move forward in updating its standards, including a test for whole house ventilation. However, as part of the overall HUD effort to review regulations, HUD officials stated they are currently conducting a review of current and planned federal regulations for manufactured housing with the goal to facilitate the affordability of manufactured housing and to promote durable, safe, and cost effective construction techniques for manufactured homes. As a result, HUD does not anticipate moving forward with any manufactured housing regulations until it completes its review. We continue to believe that developing such a test will better ensure that air ventilation systems in manufactured homes perform as specified and meet the HUD Code and will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: FSOC and OFR should clarify responsibility for implementing requirements to monitor threats to financial stability across FSOC and OFR, including FSOC members and member agencies, to better ensure that the monitoring and analysis of the financial system are comprehensive and not unnecessarily duplicative.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019, Treasury staff said that steps continue to be taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. In June 2019, the Senate confirmed a new OFR Director. Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We will continue to monitor progress in implementing these steps.

Recommendation: FSOC and OFR should clarify responsibility for implementing requirements to monitor threats to financial stability across FSOC and OFR, including FSOC members and member agencies, to better ensure that the monitoring and analysis of the financial system are comprehensive and not unnecessarily duplicative.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Financial Stability Oversight Council: Office of Financial Research
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2019 Treasury staff said that steps are being taken to clarify roles and responsibilities across FSOC and OFR for monitoring threats to financial stability. Treasury staff said that they are working with OFR to reorganize and restructure the organization to better fulfill its mission and support FSOC. That work is still underway as staff from both entities meet on a weekly basis and will include additional clarification of roles and responsibilities. The Senate confirmed a new OFR director in June 2019. In June 2017, Treasury published a report in response to the President's executive order (13772) on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System that recommended the structure and mission of the Office of Financial Research should be reformed to improve its effectiveness and to ensure greater accountability. We continue to monitor FSOC and OFR actions that would be responsive to clarifying responsibilities for monitoring threats to financial stability.

Recommendation: To improve leadership's commitment to preventing and responding to incidents of sexual harassment, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop a strategy for holding individuals in positions of leadership accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing the department's sexual harassment policies and programs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that leadership accountability is essential to the success of the department's efforts to prevent sexual harassment. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and released an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO), to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate, at a minimum, compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing polices, plans, and programs. The updated instruction also directs the Commandant, Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), to tailor training materials to servicemember professional development levels and associated leadership duties and responsibilities. As of February 2020, DOD had not completed development of the compliance standards or training materials. We will monitor DOD actions on this issue.

Recommendation: To improve implementation of the department's sexual harassment policies and programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the service secretaries to verify or track military commanders' compliance with existing requirements that commanders periodically determine their organizational health and functioning effectiveness by periodically assessing their equal opportunity climate through "command climate" assessments.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD has updated its guidance on sexual harassment, including a requirement for sharing the results of command climate assessments with the next higher level of command, but has not yet implemented an oversight mechanism to verify and track commanders' compliance with requirements to conduct such assessments. DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would implement the recommendation through revisions to its guidance. According to DOD, a 2013 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense on sexual assault prevention and response outlined requirements addressing leadership accountability for preventing sexual harassment. The memorandum included a requirement that the results of command climate surveys be provided to the next level up in the chain of command, and it directed service chiefs, through their respective military department secretaries, to develop methods to assess the performance of commanders in establishing command climates of dignity and respect. The Secretary of Defense also issued a memorandum addressing prevention and response of sexual harassment in 2014, and DOD updated its guidance on sexual harassment in 2015. In 2016, DOD stated that further revisions to guidance were forthcoming to provide a framework for oversight of sexual harassment. This framework, among other things, would address standards for holding leaders accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing sexual harassment policies. DOD issued a new DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, in February 2018 but has not implemented an oversight framework as of February 2020. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.

Recommendation: To enhance oversight of the department's program to help prevent and to address incidents of sexual harassment involving servicemembers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to ensure that the Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity develops and aggressively implements an oversight framework to help guide the department's efforts. At a minimum, such a framework should contain long-term goals, objectives, and milestones; strategies to accomplish goals; criteria for measuring progress; and results-oriented performance measures to assess the effectiveness of the department's sexual harassment policies and programs. Such a framework should also identify and include a plan for ensuring that adequate resources are available to carry out the office's oversight responsibilities.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that as part of its revised guidance it proposed to strengthen and institutionalize the responsibilities and authorities needed for successful implementation of the department's sexual harassment policies. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and issued an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate , at a minimum, (1) long-term goals, objectives, and milestones; (2) results-oriented performance measures to assess effectiveness; and (3) compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing policies, plans, and programs. As of February 2020, DOD has not developed and aggressively implemented an oversight framework, as we recommended. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of the IRS should direct the appropriate IRS officials to revise the post orders for the service center campuses (SCC) and lockbox bank security guards to include specific procedures for timely reporting exterior lighting outages to SCC or lockbox bank facilities management. These procedures should specify (1) whom to contact to report lighting outages and (2) how to document and track lighting outages until resolved.

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

Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, Facilities Management and Security Services (FMSS) will update the Internal Revenue Manual to reflect the necessary guidance for service center guards and FMSS physical security specialists to know (1) whom the guards are to contact to report lighting outages and (2) how lighting outages are to be documented and tracked until resolved.

Recommendation: The Congress may wish to consider broadening IRS's ability to use math error authority (MEA), with appropriate safeguards against misuse of that authority.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Congress has expanded IRS's math error authority in certain circumstances, but not as broadly as we suggested in February 2010. Section 208 of division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 114-113 enacted in December 2015) gave IRS the authority to use math error authority if (1) a taxpayer claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, or the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) during the period in which a taxpayer is not permitted to claim such credit as a consequence of either having made a prior fraudulent or reckless claim; or (2) a taxpayer omitted information required to be reported because the taxpayer made prior improper claims of the Child Tax Credit or the AOTC. In addition, Congress expanded math error authority for the First-Time Homebuyer Credit in November 2009. While expanding math error authority is consistent with what we suggested in February 2010, we maintain that a broader authorization of math error authority with appropriate controls would enable IRS to correct obvious noncompliance, would be less intrusive and burdensome to taxpayers than audits, and would potentially help taxpayers who underclaim tax benefits to which they are entitled. If Congress decides to extend broader math error authority to IRS, controls may be needed to ensure that this authority is used properly such as requiring IRS to report on its use of math error authority. The Administration also requested that Congress expand IRS's math error authority as part of the President's budget proposal for fiscal year 2021. Specifically, the Administration requested authority to correct a taxpayer's return in the following circumstances: 1) the information provided by the taxpayer does not match the information contained in government databases; 2) the taxpayer has exceeded the lifetime limit for claiming a deduction or credit; or 3) the taxpayer has failed to include with his or her return certain documentation that is required by statute. As of January 2020, the Congress had not provided IRS with such authority. We continue to believe that Congress should broaden IRS's math error authority with appropriate safeguards in order to help reduce the tax gap, which is the difference between tax amounts that taxpayers should have paid and what they actually paid .

Recommendation: To improve the Bureau's use of its master schedule to manage the 2020 decennial census, the Secretary of Commerce should require the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau to include estimates of the resources, such as labor, materials, and overhead costs, in the 2020 integrated schedule for each activity as the schedule is built, and prepare to carry out other steps as necessary to conduct systematic schedule risk analyses on the 2020 schedule.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Commerce neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. Regarding GAO's 2013 assessment of the Bureau's schedule (GAO-14-59), Bureau officials stated that they hoped to begin identifying the resources needed for each activity in their schedules by early 2014. Bureau officials announced they had completed the 2020 Census schedule in July 2016, and have since periodically described their intent to link resources to activities within their schedules. However, as of May 2018, when the Bureau had not taken these steps. Senior Bureau officials stated that it would require additional staffing in order to plan for and implement this recommendation. In July 2018 (GAO-18-589) we reported again on the status of the Bureau's scheduling, stating that when the Bureau has resource loaded its schedule, it will be able to use the schedule more effectively as a management tool. The Bureau took steps toward assigning resources to its master activity schedule for the 2020 Census, but effectively ran out of time to do so. Assigning resources to large complex schedules is easier to do early in schedule development process, as we recommended the Bureau do in 2009 for its 2020 Census schedule. This recommendation will remain open pending the Bureau taking steps in developing its 2030 schedule with appropriate resources linked to it.

Recommendation: To help implement a fair, effective, and credible performance management system for its civilian employees--whether NSPS or another--the Secretary of Defense should review and evaluate the effectiveness of the department's training.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 which repealed the National Security Personnel System required that DOD (1) take all actions necessary for the orderly termination of NSPS and (2) transition of all employees and positions from NSPS to legacy personnel systems or, if applicable, to the personnel systems that would have applied if NSPS had never been established. The law also mandated that the transition be completed by no later than January 1, 2012 and required DOD to establish a new performance management system, among other things. DOD began to implement a new performance management system in 2016. GAO staff met with DOD officials in October 2019 to discuss the status of the new system and any efforts to address these recommendations. DOD officials agreed to provide documentation related to these efforts, but, as of November 2019, have not yet done so. Further updates will be made once that documentation is received and reviewed.

Recommendation: To help implement a fair, effective, and credible performance management system for its civilian employees--whether NSPS or another--the Secretary of Defense should ensure that guidance is in place for conducting a postdecisional analysis that specifies what process the components should follow to investigate and eliminate potential barriers to fair and equitable ratings.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 which repealed the National Security Personnel System required that DOD (1) take all actions necessary for the orderly termination of NSPS and (2) transition of all employees and positions from NSPS to legacy personnel systems or, if applicable, to the personnel systems that would have applied if NSPS had never been established. The law also mandated that the transition be completed by no later than January 1, 2012 and required DOD to establish a new performance management system, among other things. DOD began to implement a new performance management system in 2016. GAO staff met with DOD officials in October 2019 to discuss the status of the new system and any efforts to address these recommendations. DOD officials agreed to provide documentation related to these efforts, but, as of November 2019, have not yet done so. Further updates will be made once that documentation is received and reviewed.

Recommendation: To help implement a fair, effective, and credible performance management system for its civilian employees--whether NSPS or another--the Secretary of Defense should include, as part of the department's monitoring of the implementation of its system, efforts to monitor and evaluate how the safeguards specifically are implemented by lower-level organizations across the department.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 which repealed the National Security Personnel System required that DOD (1) take all actions necessary for the orderly termination of NSPS and (2) transition of all employees and positions from NSPS to legacy personnel systems or, if applicable, to the personnel systems that would have applied if NSPS had never been established. The law also mandated that the transition be completed by no later than January 1, 2012 and required DOD to establish a new performance management system, among other things. DOD began to implement a new performance management system in 2016. GAO staff met with DOD officials in October 2019 to discuss the status of the new system and any efforts to address these recommendations. DOD officials agreed to provide documentation related to these efforts, but, as of November 2019, have not yet done so. Further updates will be made once that documentation is received and reviewed.

Recommendation: To better ensure the notice phase is achieving desired results at the lowest costs, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should provide IRS collection managers and executives accessible, reliable information on what the business rules are.

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

Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically share with appropriate staff business rules information, along with related results of periodic evaluations of the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of time frames for regularly sharing business rules information. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.

Recommendation: To better ensure the notice phase is achieving desired results at the lowest costs, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should periodically and regularly evaluate the business rules in terms of efficiency and effectiveness or other results and ensure the results are available to managers so the data and methodologies can be used or considered in future evaluations.

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

Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically evaluate the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices and share evaluation results with appropriate staff. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of any evaluation results or a date when IRS expects to complete the first such evaluation. Nor had IRS provided time frames for regularly conducting and sharing business rules evaluation results. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.

Recommendation: To support the triennial review program's goal of having grantees consistently meet more federal requirements, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FTA to ensure that additional outcome and quality performance measures are balanced with the existing measures for assessing the timeliness of the triennial review program so that one priority is not emphasized at the expense of others.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) anticipates adding a performance measurement, called reduction in repeat findings, that relates to assessing the quality of the review. This has been added to FTA's new Quality Review program focused on improving its Triennial Review program.

Recommendation: To help states identify and address quality-of-care concerns among individuals with developmental disabilities receiving Medicaid HCBS waiver services, the Administrator of CMS should encourage states to (1) include death as a critical incident and conduct mortality reviews if they do not already do so and (2) broaden their mortality review processes if they already include death as a critical incident and conduct mortality reviews.

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

Comments: As of August 2020, CMS had taken some steps to address this recommendation but additional actions are needed to fully implement it. In June 2018 CMS issued a Medicaid update to states explaining that CMS strongly encourages them to include unexpected deaths in their definition of reportable critical incidents. CMS also stated in the update that states should conduct a preliminary review of all beneficiary deaths and investigations should focus on those deaths determined to be unexpected. Further, CMS has shared with states best practices for state mortality reviews that include, for example, the use of an interdisciplinary review committee and taking actions to address identified quality of care problems. CMS also developed a webinar training (Incident Management 101) to help states improve their incident management systems for the Medicaid HCBS waiver. The webinar outlines the key elements of building a comprehensive incident management system (e.g., establishing a process for conducting investigations of incidents, tracking and trending incidents to help prevent and mitigate incidents from occurring) and reiterates CMS's expectation that states identify and address unexplained deaths on an ongoing basis in order to meet the waiver's health and welfare assurance. In late 2018, CMS planned to include in its revised waiver application questions to determine practices regarding states' review and evaluation of unexpected deaths. In September 2019, CMS officials notified us that it will provide an updated status report on this recommendation in November 2019. As of August 2020, CMS officials have not provided us information regarding its revised waiver application and technical guide. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive this information.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of the federal investment in surface transportation, meet the nation's transportation needs, and ensure a sustainable commitment to transportation infrastructure, Congress may wish to consider reexamining and refocusing surface transportation programs to be responsive to these principles so that they institute tools and approaches to that emphasize the return on the federal investment.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet acted on this recommendation. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), signed into law in December 2015, is due to be reauthorized in fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of the federal investment in surface transportation, meet the nation's transportation needs, and ensure a sustainable commitment to transportation infrastructure, Congress may wish to consider reexamining and refocusing surface transportation programs to be responsive to these principles so that they address the current imbalance between federal surface transportation revenues and spending.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, Congress has not yet acted on this recommendation. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), signed into law in December 2015, did not address the current imbalance between federal surface transportation revenues and spending. The Act is due to be reauthorized in fiscal year 2021.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Interior should direct the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs to develop a framework for OIA employees to use in conducting site visits to help ensure objectives are achieved, to assure that relevant information is shared with responsible officials, and to allow more efficient and effective monitoring of issues.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: On May 24, 2017, the Department of Interior (DOI) sent out an email to its staff showing the dissemination of the new format required for completing trip reports by the staff of the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA). The new format requires staff to include travel justification (i.e., purpose/objective, location, and travel period) and trip report (i.e., meetings, site visits, results, and next steps, as applicable.) The intent of the recommendation is for DOI to have a framework that includes (1) status of required single audit reports; (2) the progress of actions to resolve reported internal control weaknesses; and (3) current needs for technical assistance, capacity building, and staff level expertise. Further, the intent of GAO's recommendation is that this information be integrated into a comprehensive monitoring process. We did not see these elements included in DOI's new format. At present, the agency has been unable to provide additional information that supports the development of a framework for conducting sites visits that incorporates procedures about how information will be shared and monitored. In August 2020, the agency informed us that it has taken additional corrective actions some time ago and is in the process of trying to locate the supporting documentation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To ensure that policymakers and the public have the necessary information to make informed decisions and to improve the progress toward exercising greater scrutiny of tax expenditures, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, should resume presenting tax expenditures in the budget together with related outlay programs to show a truer picture of the federal support within a mission area.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: No executive action taken as of February 2020. OMB had not presented tax expenditures in the fiscal year 2021 budget together with the related outlay programs. OMB did not agree that GAO's September 2005 recommendation is necessary and stated that presenting information on tax expenditures together with related outlay programs is not useful for budgeting and that such a presentation is not part of the congressional budget process. However, the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires a list of tax expenditures, including special tax credits, deductions, exclusions, exemptions, deferrals, and preferential tax rates. Whereas OMB favors reporting tax expenditures separately from the rest of the budget, GAO has reported that an integrated presentation is also useful to show the relative magnitude of tax expenditures compared to spending and credit programs across mission areas. OMB previously presented tax expenditure sums alongside outlays and credit activity for each budget function in the federal budget from fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2002, but discontinued the practice. Tax expenditures resulted in $1.32 trillion in forgone revenue in fiscal year 2019 and have been roughly approximate to federal discretionary spending levels in recent years.

Recommendation: To ensure that policymakers and the public have the necessary information to make informed decisions and to improve the progress toward exercising greater scrutiny of tax expenditures, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, should require that tax expenditures be included in the PART process and any future such budget and performance review processes so that tax expenditures are considered along with related outlay programs in determining the adequacy of federal efforts to achieve national objectives.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: OMB made some progress in including tax expenditures along with related outlay programs in the executive branch's budget and performance review processes, as GAO recommended in September 2005. However, as of December 2019, OMB had not developed a systematic approach for conducting such reviews, and OMB staff told GAO that they were not pursuing the effort because of competing priorities, as well as capacity and resource constraints. Prior to that time, OMB had made some progress on the action. The President's fiscal year 2012 budget stated that the administration would work toward examining the objectives and effects of the wide range of tax expenditures in the budget. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) requires OMB and the agencies to identify the relevant tax expenditures that contribute to each crosscutting priority goal. Beginning with its August 2012 update to Circular No. A-11 with guidance for implementing GPRAMA and continuing in subsequent annual updates, OMB has directed agencies to identify tax expenditures that contribute to each of their agency priority goals. Beginning with the July 2013 update, OMB expanded its guidance to include identifying these contributions to agency strategic objectives. In both its July 2013 and July 2014 guidance, OMB stated that it planned to work with the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and agencies to facilitate alignment of tax expenditure information with agency priority goals and strategic objectives. However, in its June 2015 update of this guidance, OMB removed the language about working with Treasury and agencies to align tax expenditures with agency goals. OMB's December 2019 guidance still requires agencies to identify tax expenditures that contribute to their agency priority goals and strategic objectives.

Recommendation: To ensure that policymakers and the public have the necessary information to make informed decisions and to improve the progress toward exercising greater scrutiny of tax expenditures, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, should develop and implement a framework for conducting performance reviews of tax expenditures. In developing the framework, the Director should (1) determine which agencies will have leadership responsibilities to review tax expenditures, how reviews will be coordinated among agencies with related responsibilities, and how to address the lack of credible performance information on tax expenditures; (2) set a schedule for conducting tax expenditure evaluations; (3) re-establish appropriate methods to test the overall evaluation framework and make improvements as experience is gained; and (4) to identify any additional resources that may be needed for tax expenditure reviews.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Treasury did not submit comments on this report and deferred to OMB. OMB agreed that this recommendation had promise and also said that tax expenditure evaluations were the responsibility of Treasury, which had access to the necessary data. As of February 2020, when the President's fiscal year 2021 budget was released, the Director of OMB had not developed a framework for reviewing tax expenditure performance, as GAO recommended in June 1994 and again in September 2005. Since their initial efforts in 1997 and 1999 to outline a framework for evaluating tax expenditures and preliminary performance measures, OMB and the Department of the Treasury have ceased to make progress and retreated from setting a schedule for evaluating tax expenditures. The President's fiscal year 2012 budget stated that developing an evaluation framework is a significant challenge due to limited data availability and analytical constraints of isolating the effect of any single program. The administration planned to focus on addressing some of these challenges so it can work toward crosscutting analyses that examine tax expenditures alongside related spending programs. However, OMB and Treasury have not reported on progress on this recommendation since the President's fiscal year 2012 budget. In December 2019, OMB said its Office of Economic Policy is responsible for the framework outline. OMB said it was exploring options to further develop its evaluation framework, which would include working with Treasury. The budget released in February 2020 did not provide an update on these evaluation framework efforts.

Recommendation: To ensure that policymakers and the public have the necessary information to make informed decisions and to improve the progress toward exercising greater scrutiny of tax expenditures, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, should develop and implement a framework for conducting performance reviews of tax expenditures. In developing the framework, the Director should (1) determine which agencies will have leadership responsibilities to review tax expenditures, how reviews will be coordinated among agencies with related responsibilities, and how to address the lack of credible performance information on tax expenditures; (2) set a schedule for conducting tax expenditure evaluations; (3) re-establish appropriate methods to test the overall evaluation framework and make improvements as experience is gained; and (4) to identify any additional resources that may be needed for tax expenditure reviews.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: No executive action has been taken. As of February 2020, when the President's fiscal year 2021 budget was released, the Director of OMB had not developed a framework for reviewing tax expenditure performance, as GAO recommended in June 1994 and again in September 2005. Since their initial efforts in 1997 and 1999 to outline a framework for evaluating tax expenditures and preliminary performance measures, OMB and the Department of the Treasury have ceased to make progress and retreated from setting a schedule for evaluating tax expenditures. The President's fiscal year 2012 budget stated that developing an evaluation framework is a significant challenge due to limited data availability and analytical constraints of isolating the effect of any single program. The administration planned to focus on addressing some of these challenges so it can work toward crosscutting analyses that examine tax expenditures alongside related spending programs. However, OMB and Treasury have not reported on progress on this recommendation since the President's fiscal year 2012 budget. As of December 2019, OMB said its Office of Economic Policy is responsible for the framework outline. OMB said it was exploring options to further develop its evaluation framework, which would include working with Treasury. The budget released in February 2020 did not provide an update on these evaluation framework efforts.

Recommendation: To ensure that policymakers and the public have the necessary information to make informed decisions and to improve the progress toward exercising greater scrutiny of tax expenditures, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, should require that tax expenditures be included in the PART process and any future such budget and performance review processes so that tax expenditures are considered along with related outlay programs in determining the adequacy of federal efforts to achieve national objectives.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2005, the Department of the Treasury responded that this recommendation did not relate to Treasury. OMB made some progress in including tax expenditures along with related outlay programs in the executive branch's budget and performance review processes, as GAO recommended in September 2005. However, as of December 2019, OMB had not developed a systematic approach for conducting such reviews, and OMB staff told GAO that they were not pursuing the effort because of competing priorities, as well as capacity and resource constraints. The President's fiscal year 2012 budget stated that the administration would work toward examining the objectives and effects of the wide range of tax expenditures in the budget. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) requires OMB and the agencies to identify the relevant tax expenditures that contribute to each crosscutting priority goal. Beginning with its August 2012 update to Circular No. A-11 with guidance for implementing GPRAMA and continuing in subsequent annual updates, OMB has directed agencies to identify tax expenditures that contribute to each of their agency priority goals. Beginning with the July 2013 update, OMB expanded its guidance to include identifying these contributions to agency strategic objectives. In both its July 2013 and July 2014 guidance, OMB stated that it planned to work with the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and agencies to facilitate alignment of tax expenditure information with agency priority goals and strategic objectives. However, in its June 2015 update of this guidance, OMB removed the language about working with Treasury and agencies to align tax expenditures with agency goals. OMB's December 2019 guidance still requires agencies to identify tax expenditures that contribute to their agency priority goals and strategic objectives.