Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: Audits
GAO-20-586, Aug 25, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3406
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it has already taken steps to address this recommendation by updating guidance to federal entities for the preparation of the fiscal year 2020 Agency Financial Reports or Performance and Accountability Reports. In addition, Treasury stated that it has drafted a memo to the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board to seek clarification of existing guidance related to reporting differences for federal entities that prepare financial reports according to FASB standards.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it has already taken steps to address this recommendation by updating guidance to federal entities for the preparation of the fiscal year 2020 Agency Financial Reports or Performance and Accountability Reports.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In commenting on our draft report, Treasury stated that it drafted a memo to the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board to seek clarification of existing guidance related to reporting differences for federal entities that prepare financial reports according to FASB standards.
GAO-19-410, May 31, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by December 31, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by April 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by December 31, 2022.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by June 30, 2021.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by November 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by November 30, 2020.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Office of Natural Resources Revenue
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, ONRR officials stated they were on track towards implementing the recommendation by March 31, 2021.
GAO-17-738, Sep 28, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services agreed with the recommendation and has developed a template and instructions for quarterly reporting from its divisions. The Department identified some performance measures that it will monitor on a quarterly basis, such as contracts closed on time and total backlog. Due to competing priorities and focus on the COVID-19 response, the Department plans to provide additional steps toward progress at the next reporting cycle.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Justice agreed with the recommendation and in early fiscal year 2020 enhanced its financial management system to allow the Bureaus to assess whether a contract needs to be closed out. The Department anticipates that the associated guidance, which includes performance measures, will be issued in late summer 2020.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of State agreed with the recommendation and is upgrading its system to improve data quality and enable the tracking and sharing of contract closeout information. The enhancements to the contracting system would allow the Department to establish a baseline and develop metrics to measure progress on closing contracts. The Department anticipates that the upgrades and data utilization will continue into fiscal year 2021.
GAO-16-805, Aug 25, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8612
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Commerce agreed with this recommendation. In response to this recommendation, Commerce indicated in an October 25, 2016 letter to GAO that it has developed a three-step approach which parallels the three distinct elements of the recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, Commerce needs to submit the said three-step plan, including associated timeframes for their completion, to the appropriate congressional committees. Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act defines "appropriate committees" to mean the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Ways and Means, and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives; and the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Finance, and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate. In a January 2018 email, a Commerce official indicated to GAO that the agency had reviewed the 19 IPSA audits filed by companies in 2016, and the agency plans to complete a review of the 16 IPSA audits filed in 2017 by the end of FY 2018. However, the official noted that the "Department will not undertake the development of recommendations and best practices while the SEC is revising its rule." Commerce cited SEC staff's recent updated guidance and ongoing reviews of the conflict minerals rule, among other things, as their primary reason. However, the SEC staff's updated guidance also clarified that the guidance "does not express any legal conclusion on the rule" and is "subject to any further action that may be taken by the Commission." Therefore, the rule is still in effect, according to SEC staff. We requested a status update in October 2019 and Commerce responded: "In National Association of Manufacturers v. United States SEC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135732 (2017), the District Court for the District of Columbia declared an element of the relevant SEC rule unconstitutional, necessitating that the SEC determine how that decision affects overall implementation of the Conflict Minerals rule. Until the SEC completes its deliberative process, makes such determination, and implements any necessary revisions to the rule, the Department does not intend to undertake additional work under Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act with regard to the assessment of the accuracy of the audits and other due diligence processes or recommendations regarding the audits. After which point, the Department will assess how the SEC determination and any revisions to the rule affect the Department's plans for implementing GAO's recommendation."
GAO-16-76, Apr 8, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to improve the accuracy of its calculation of coding intensity, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is reevaluating the design of the risk adjustment data validation audits to ensure their rigor in the context of all the payment error data acquired since the original design of the audits. As part of this work, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to use to select contracts for audit. As a result, in October 2018, CMS told GAO that rather than coding intensity, it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver beginning with audits for payment year 2014. Additionally, CMS was taking steps to modernize its audit system to improve reliability. For example, it initiated a project to explore how to directly receive electronic medical record documentation. As of January 2020, the agency is continuing to reevaluate the design of these audits. Unless CMS takes this and other actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to modify the selection of MA contracts for audit, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the initial RADV audit design was based on a limited set of payment error data available at the time. As part of efforts to improve the audits, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to select contracts for audit. In October 2018, CMS told GAO that it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver-rather than coding intensity-beginning with audits for payment year 2014. As of January 2020, the agency is using the revised methodology on the 2014 and 2015 payment year audits. They expect to conclude this process in late fiscal year 2020 and 2021, respectively. Unless CMS completes actions to improve the RADV contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification. HHS reaffirmed its commitment to identifying and correcting improper payments in the MA program. It has begun taking steps to improve the timeliness of the contract-level RADV audit process, such as aligning the time frames in CMS's contract-level RADV audits with those of the national RADV audits. Once completed, CMS needs to provide evidence that the actions taken by the agency have enhanced the timeliness of CMS's contract-level RADV process.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS is working to improve the timeliness of the agency's contract-level risk adjustment data validation appeals process, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is actively considering options for expediting the appeals process. For example, CMS is considering the appropriate number of days for rendering reconsideration decisions while allowing for a complete and thorough adjudication. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO they expect to issue a final rule in January 2021 that will establish uniform timelines to expedite the appeals process. Specifically, they plan to require that a findings determination be made within 60-90 days of an arbiter's receipt of each party's arguments at each stage of an appeal. Unless CMS takes such actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: CMS has attempted to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the Medicare Advantage program, as GAO recommended in April 2016. After failing to receive any proposals when CMS first issued a request for proposals (RFP) in 2014, CMS issued a request for information to industry in December 2015, which included a draft Statement of Work to solicit feedback, gauge interest, and conduct market research regarding CMS entering into a contract with a recovery audit contractor to identify underpayments and overpayments associated with diagnosis data submitted to CMS by Medicare Advantage Organizations. CMS reported that it subsequently issued another RFP in 2016 and did not receive any proposals for a second time. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO that the functions of the Part C recovery Audit programs are being performed through other program integrity mechanisms. CMS subsequently reported in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification that CMS believes the proposed scope of the Part C RAC has been subsumed by RADV and CMS will demonstrate that the RADV program satisfies this recommendation. Until CMS completes efforts to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process and demonstrates that it has satisfied the requirement to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the MA program, CMS will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
GAO-14-732, Sep 18, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-7968
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: IRS has taken actions to implement GAO's September 2014 recommendation, but the definition IRS provided is not likely to help it analyze results from audits of the very large partnerships that GAO's report covered. In September 2017, IRS defined large partnerships as those with assets of $10 million or more, without regard to the number of partners. With changes to the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 partnership audit procedures and enactment of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (BBA) (sections 1101 and 1102 of Public Law 114-74), IRS officials said that the number of partners is no longer a critical factor when defining a large partnership. IRS is correct that the number of partners is no longer relevant to this statutory definition of large partnership. The recently eliminated Electing Large Partnerships audit procedures had defined large partnerships as those with 100 or more direct partners in a taxable year. Even so, IRS's new definition of large partnerships is limited compared to large corporations. IRS has defined eight asset categories for tracking large corporation audit results while it has one for large partnerships, which vary widely based on asset amounts and complex structures. As GAO reported, during tax years 2002 through 2011, the number of large partnerships with 100 or more direct and indirect partners as well as $100 million or more in assets more than tripled to 10,099, some of which had assets exceeding $5 billion. In tax year 2011, more than two-thirds of these large partnerships had at least 100 or more pass-through entities as direct and indirect partners. Until IRS develops a more expansive definition of large partnerships, IRS may have challenges analyzing the results from its audits of large partnerships. As of January 2020, IRS had revised its activity codes to create a category for its large partnership definition as well as created a reporting and monitoring structure for its new definition to track the results from auditing large partnerships. IRS also created reports to regularly track audit results (e.g., dollar amounts, hours, number of returns, campus versus field locations) for this one category. IRS officials said they plan to use the reports to analyze audit results to identify opportunities to better plan and use resources in auditing large partnerships but this outcome may not be possible with the statutory changes governing partnerships. Given the challenges involving such audits, IRS officials said they have started efforts to better select partnership returns for audits based on compliance risk. They said these efforts will extend at least through fiscal year 2021. Thus, IRS does not yet know whether the audit results will be sufficient to analyze ways to better plan and use IRS audit resources as well as to analyze noncompliance risk for its new definition. IRS's analysis may not be able to achieve these ends with only one asset category to cover the wide range of asset amounts above $10 million.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of January 2020, IRS created a reporting and monitoring structure for its new large partnership definition to track the results from auditing large partnerships. IRS also created reports to regularly track audit results (e.g., dollar amounts, hours, number of returns, campus versus field locations) for this one category. IRS officials said they plan to use the reports to analyze audit results to identify opportunities to better plan and use resources in auditing large partnerships but this outcome may not be possible with the statutory changes governing partnerships. Thus, IRS does not yet know whether the audit results will be sufficient to analyze ways to better plan and use IRS audit resources as well as to analyze noncompliance risk for its new definition. IRS's analysis may not be able to achieve these ends with only one asset category to cover the wide range of asset amounts above $10 million. Given these and other challenges involving such audits, IRS officials said they have started efforts to better select partnership returns for audits based on compliance risk. They said these efforts will extend at least through fiscal year 2021.
GAO-13-21, Dec 20, 2012
Phone: (617)788-0534
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: In a status update from OMB received on March 6, 2020, OMB stated that it agrees that agencies should respond to comments on final major rules, for which the agency has discretion, that are issued without a prior notice of proposed rulemaking. OMB says it will continue to prioritize this issue during review of regulations under EO 12866, and that it is currently considering whether additional guidance is appropriate and will consult with the staff of the Administrative Conference of the United States on this issue.
GAO-13-48, Nov 25, 2012
Phone: (206)287-4820
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No legislation enacted as of February 2020. However, CMS has taken some administrative actions, which are underway, to improve its oversight of non-DSH supplemental payments. In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. Among other things, the proposed rule would require states to report on non-DSH supplemental payments on a facility-specific basis, as well as specify data sources, data standards, and acceptable methods for demonstrating compliance for non-DSH supplemental payment calculations. GAO plans to continue to monitor congressional action and the status of the proposed rule, as well as review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which they improve state reporting of non-DSH supplemental payments, clarify permissible methods for calculating non-DSH supplemental payments, and require audits to verify that states use permissible methods to calculate non-DSH supplemental payments.
GAO-12-830R, Jul 26, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open
Comments: During our audit of the American Battle Monuments Commission's (Commission) fiscal year 2011 financial statements, we found that the Commission had not performed independent physical inventory of equipment owned by the Commission at the various cemeteries across the world. We found that although the Commission had a policy to perform biennial physical inventory counts of all equipment over $500, this policy was not adhered to during fiscal year 2011. Further, the policy did not explain how to plan, execute, and analyze the results of an inventory count. As a result, we recommended that the Secretary of the Commission instruct the appropriate officials to establish and implement written procedures for conducting all physical inventory counts of equipment. These procedures, at a minimum, should outline the processes for (1) planning and executing the physical inventory count and (2) analyzing and documenting the results. During our follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to implement procedures to address this recommendation but have not dedicated resources to it yet. We will continue to follow-up on this recommendation.
Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
Status: Open
Comments: During our audit of the American Battle Monuments Commission's (Commission) fiscal year 2011 financial statements, we found that the Commission had not performed independent physical inventory of equipment owned by the Commission at the various cemeteries across the world. We found that although the Commission had a policy to perform biennial physical inventory counts of all equipment over $500, this policy was not adhered to during fiscal year 2011. As a result, we recommended that the Secretary of the Commission direct the appropriate officials to establish a mechanism to monitor implementation of existing Commission policy to perform biennial physical inventory counts of all items of equipment with an obligated balance of $500 or more. During our fiscal year 2012 audit, we found that although the Commission had performed a comparison of the equipment on hand to the data recorded in SharePoint (document management web application to share documents internally), an independent physical inventory was not performed. We determined that the Commission had not established a mechanism for performing an inventory of assets. During our follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to implement procedures to address this recommendation but have not dedicated resources to it yet. We will continue to follow-up on this recommendation.
GAO-12-669, Jun 26, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information. As of September 2019, VA and DOD officials have not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information. As of September 2019, VA and DOD officials have not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.
GAO-12-623, Jun 7, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and said that it would establish a process to review the mission and requirements for the Selective Service System. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 established the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service (i.e., the Commission) to, among other things, review the military selective service process. The Commission is to submit a report to the President and Congress no later than March 2020 with recommendations concerning the need for a military draft and means by which to foster a greater ethos of public service among American youth. Further, the Commission was directed to conduct hearings and meetings open to the public in various locations throughout the country to provide maximum opportunity for public comment and participation in order to help develop its recommendations. In January 2019, the Commission released an Interim Report. The Interim Report shared what the Commission learned throughout its first year, explored options the Commission is considering to increase service participation among all Americans, and outlined issues involved in the Commission's review of the military selective service process. In March 2020, the Commission issued its final report, and it recommended that (1) the Congress require the Secretary of Defense to update the personnel requirements and timeline for obtaining draft inductees in the event of an emergency requiring mass mobilization and (2) the President direct the Secretary of Defense to include in future Quadrennial Defense Reviews and National Defense Strategies a section on the state of the Selective Service System and the ability of the United States to rapidly mobilize personnel in the event of an emergency. The Commission's report reinforced our recommendation; however, until DOD takes action to respond to our recommendation to take actions to establish a process to periodically review the mission and requirements of the Selective Service System, this recommendation should be left open.
GAO-12-608, Jun 5, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: No actions taken as of January 2020. We continue to monitor for new legislation.
GAO-12-442, Apr 23, 2012
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2016, DOD published Directive 8521.01E, Defense Biometrics, which directs the Secretary of the Army to measure the health and performance of the DOD Biometrics Enterprise and generate results for the Biometrics Principal Staff Assistant and the DOD Biometrics Executive Committee. OUSD(AT&L) and Army officials also noted that the department is required to obtain a favorable evaluation from the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) and the Army Test and Evaluation Command in order to obtain approval for extending the service life of DOD's authoritative biometric system. These officials note that the tests and evaluations required for such approval will include an assessment of transmission and response times against approved requirements for the biometrics system. However, Marine Corps officials highlighted continued biometrics data transmission and synchronization issues with a currently fielded biometric capability that uses some of the same technology we identified issues with during the course of our review. In Summer 2017, DOD informed GAO that the department will soon issue a report to address these issues, so GAO is keeping this recommendation open until such time as DOD's report becomes available for GAO review.
GAO-12-176, Dec 15, 2011
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, IRS had not developed a new measure for refund timeliness. In early 2019, Treasury announced that it would discontinue reporting the refund timeliness measure beginning with fiscal year 2019 because it was based on paper returns, which account for approximately 10 percent of returns. Nevertheless, as of January 2020, IRS continues to use this measure internally to monitor performance. During the 2019 tax filing season, taxpayers filed about 90 percent of returns electronically, and as a means to set taxpayer expectations, IRS publicly reported that about 90 percent of taxpayers owed a refund received it in less than 21 days. Accordingly, we continue to believe that IRS's sole performance measure of issuing paper-filed refunds within 40 days is outdated and does not acknowledge advances in technology that allow IRS to issue refunds faster. We agree with IRS that the environment has changed considerably since we made this recommendation--the growth in identity theft refund fraud has increased the need for additional scrutiny of tax refunds, which can add to the time needed to process tax returns. IRS can take into account its concerns and set a performance measure and goal that would be both challenging and obtainable. Without a measure and goal to assess refund timeliness that includes both paper and electronically filed returns and is reflective of IRS's current capabilities, IRS is missing opportunities to provide optimum levels of taxpayer service while also ensuring that taxpayers receive accurate refunds. As such, we believe that our recommendation remains valid.
GAO-11-696, Jul 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-5837
Agency: Federal Reserve System: Board of Governors
Status: Open
Comments: We most recently sought information from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in July 2018 regarding the status of the recommendation but did not receive any new information. Therefore, the recommendation remains open.
Agency: Federal Reserve System: Board of Governors
Status: Open
Comments: We most recently sought information from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in July 2018 regarding the status of the recommendation but did not receive any new information. Therefore, the recommendation remains open.
Agency: Federal Reserve System: Board of Governors
Status: Open
Comments: We most recently sought information from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in July 2018 regarding the status of the recommendation but did not receive any new information. Therefore, the recommendation remains open.
GAO-11-381, Jun 17, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9338
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. EPA, as of September 2019, had not resumed data verification audits to routinely evaluate the quality of the data states provide to the agency. The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Prime and the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal (CMDP) will replace the data verification audits in the future. EPA has made SDWIS Prime available through incremental interim releases to state drinking water agencies for exploring and testing but does not expect to fully release it until mid-2020. However, as of August 2019, SDWIS Prime was unavailable while EPA awaited progress on the SDWIS Modernization Project plan. According to EPA, the CMDP will enable utilities and laboratories to report data electronically to primacy agencies with fewer errors and in a more efficient manner; but it is not clear when it will be fully operational. According to data provided by EPA in September 2019, 10 states were using CMDP to varying degrees. EPA information identified another 6 states that plan to transition to CMDP between September and December 2019, 2 states that plan to transition in 2020, and 12 others that may transition in the future. In the meantime, EPA indicated that the agency will complete nine file reviews in 2019 to verify data in agencies that do not currently use CMDP. EPA's actions may improve its ability to oversee states' implementation of the act and provide more complete and accurate information on compliance, but because EPA's systems to replace data verification audits are not yet fully in place, we are keeping this recommendation open.
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: As of July 2020 there has been no change in the status of this recommendation. EPA is developing the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Prime, with several efforts underway as of September 2019 as we noted under recommendation 1, but until it is fully operational, EPA will not be able to work with states to establish a national goal for the quality of monitoring violations. EPA noted in 2017 that it expected SDWIS Prime to enable the agency and primacy agencies to better understand the nature of system violations and consider developing goals for monitoring and reporting violations. However, according to EPA, SDWIS Prime will not be released until mid-2020. EPA indicated plans to modify the Annual Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Program Review requirements but the agency states that it is dependent on approval by the Office of the Inspector General. Despite the ongoing delays to address the call in the recommendation for establishing new goals, we are keeping this recommendation open while EPA continues its efforts to implement SDWIS Prime.