Recommendation: The Administrator for USAID should communicate to all missions and bureaus the expectation that they report data on all funding attributed to the key issue of indirect climate adaptation. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: United States Agency for International Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: Congress should consider establishing a pilot program with leadership from a defined federal organizational arrangement to identify and provide assistance to climate migration projects for communities that express affirmative interest in relocation as a resilience strategy. Such a pilot program could be designed for success by considering the key factors we identified in this report. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 19, 2020, no action had been taken to establish a pilot program to identify and provide assistance to climate migration projects.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment implements DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant DOD guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will oversee updates to relevant guidance related to supply processes and that they anticipate the updates to be complete by May 31, 2021. The department further noted that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will ensure updates are made to the acquisition policies, when and if appropriate. However, the department stated that its Adaptive Acquisition Framework currently provides all of the necessary flexibility required. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Army guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Army should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Army would update, as appropriate, Army guidance related to acquisition and supply upon updates to DOD's climate adaptation directive and other applicable DOD or federal regulations. However, DOD noted that it does not plan to update its acquisition guidance in response to our recommendation that DOD do so. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Navy guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Navy should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Department of the Navy had suggested that the recommendation be restated to recommend that the Department of the Navy ensure that its guidance and procedures are updated to align with DOD's directive on climate adaptation upon issuance of an updated directive. However, DOD has not identified any plans to update its directive on climate change adaptation. Thus, we continue to believe that the Department of the Navy should update its guidance related to acquisition and supply to incorporate the current guidance in DOD's climate adaptation directive, which it has not yet done. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should implement DOD Directive 4715.21 on climate change adaptation and resilience by updating, as appropriate, relevant Department of the Air Force guidance related to acquisition and supply processes to incorporate the directive's provisions pertaining to those processes. In doing so, the Secretary of the Air Force should consider providing guidance as to how departmental officials may leverage already existing information regarding private companies. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that the Air Force will work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the other military services to develop specific policies that address climate-related risks to DOD contractors. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretaries of the military departments, and any other governmental and private-sector partners, as appropriate, determine what approaches may be feasible in conducting mission assurance related assessments of commercially owned facilities. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that formal mission assurance assessments are limited in scope in order to provide additional rigor to protect DOD's most critical capabilities. However, the department stated that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy would work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment's Defense Contract Management Agency to better understand DOD's commercial dependencies. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, the Secretaries of the military departments, and any other governmental and private-sector partners, as appropriate, issue new or update existing guidance, based upon the determination of what approaches may be feasible, to clarify the steps that DOD officials involved in the mission assurance process may take to apply the mission assurance framework to commercially owned facilities, as appropriate, to include consideration of risks related to climate change and extreme weather. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. In its response, the department noted that it concurs with the need to clarify steps that officials may take to apply the mission assurance framework to defense critical infrastructure and critical defense industrial base commercially owned facilities, to include consideration of risks related to climate change and extreme weather. However, the department further noted that it does not concur with doing this for all commercial facilities because conducting such assessments for all commercially owned facilities falls outside the capacity and authority of DOD to conduct mission assurance assessments. However, we had not recommended they conduct such assessments for all commercial facilities. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should identify a federal entity or entities to be responsible for addressing the National Academies' recommendations for updating the methodologies used to estimate the federal social cost of carbon, including monitoring scientific research and ensuring that updates to the federal estimates consider such research as appropriate. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: OMB did not provide comments on this recommendation. As of July 2020, we are following up with the agency and will update the status of the recommendation when we receive requested information from OMB.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Smithsonian should develop written guidance for supervisors specific to how to address complaints of sexual harassment filed under the management process—which may include updating current written guidance for supervisors on handling misconduct, such as the Supervisor's Compass and Smithsonian Directives 212 and 213 (Chapter 752). (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Smithsonian Institution
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Smithsonian should establish a tracking mechanism for complaints of sexual harassment filed under the management process—including procedures for supervisors within the units to convey reports of sexual harassment to the central Smithsonian administration and/or OEEMA. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Smithsonian Institution
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Smithsonian should include affiliated persons in measures used to assess organizational climate at the Smithsonian—which may include incorporating affiliated persons into current efforts or developing additional measures specific to these persons. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Smithsonian Institution
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries should work with the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico councils, and other councils as appropriate, to develop documented processes for conducting allocation reviews. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.

Recommendation: The NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries should work with the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico councils, and other councils as appropriate, to specify how the councils will document their allocation reviews, including the basis for their allocation decisions, whether fishery management plan objectives are being met, and what factors were considered in the reviews. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Marine Fisheries Service
Status: Open

Comments: Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation and stated that NOAA's NMFS will work to implement it to the extent possible. We will continue to monitor NMFS' efforts to do so.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the NMB should document NMB's authorizations for its use of cloud services approved through FedRAMP and submit the authorizations to the FedRAMP Program Management Office. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation and said it would take action to address it, completing these actions by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the NMB should update NMB's security policies and procedures to include FedRAMP's authorization requirements. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation and said it would take action to address it, completing these actions by the end of fiscal year 2020.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the NMB should develop a written plan to document NMB's process for reviewing and monitoring the agency's annual appropriation to ensure that funds are used effectively. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation. Agency officials said they would take action to address it, but did not provide a time frame for completion.

Recommendation: The Chairman of the NMB should establish a process for the Board to effectively monitor and evaluate NMB's adherence to audit protocols and implementation of actions to address audit recommendations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Mediation Board
Status: Open

Comments: NMB agreed with this recommendation. Agency officials said they would take action to address it, but did not provide a time frame for completion.

Recommendation: The Director of Water Security of EPA, as Chair of the Water Sector Government Coordinating Council, should work with the council to identify existing technical assistance providers and engage these providers in a network to help drinking water and wastewater utilities incorporate climate resilience into their projects and planning on an ongoing basis. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In June 2020, EPA said that it will continue to work with its wide-ranging, existing technical assistance providers and coordinate with its stakeholders to identify additional providers as applicable. According to the agency, it is already taking action on the recommendation. While we agree that EPA should continue to work with its providers to improve technical assistance to utilities, our recommendation was for EPA to work with stakeholders to develop a network to provide coverage for the many drinking water and wastewater utilities across the country. EPA has not provided information to show that its plans will develop such a network. We will continue to monitor this recommendation to determine how the agency is working with stakeholders to build a network of providers.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR, in collaboration with relevant managers, should establish a policy that requires a schedule of tasks to be developed, documented, and updated throughout the lifetime of IT system projects. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they will be implementing a policy to ensure that project planning steps, including a schedule of tasks, will be included and documented for future IT projects.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should identify and assess risks in establishing and maintaining a permanent records retention program, and develop policies and procedures to ensure that risks are properly addressed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they have hired a contractor to assist with various risk management activities related to OCWR's permanent records retention program, including identifying and assessing risks and developing policies and procedures to address any risks.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should identify desired performance results, develop performance measures that demonstrate the degree to which the desired results were achieved, and report progress toward those results in OCWR's annual reports. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they are reassessing desired performance results, developing new performance measures to monitor progress towards those results, and will clearly report OCWR's progress in future annual reports.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should collect relevant data through a survey or other mechanisms, and use the information to evaluate the effectiveness of education and outreach efforts and the extent to which they are reaching all covered legislative branch populations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. According to OCWR officials, they are working with congressional oversight committees and covered legislative branch offices to obtain data through surveys or other methods that will enable them to evaluate the effectiveness and coverage of OCWR's education and outreach efforts.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should integrate IT planning and implementation into the agency's strategic planning process. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials stated that they intend to revise the agency's strategic plan, including integrating IT planning and implementation into the strategic planning process, after they gain more experience with the new procedures required by the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) Reform Act of 2018.

Recommendation: The Executive Director of OCWR should incorporate key strategic human capital management practices, such as developing strategies to recruit and retain staff with mission-critical skills, into the strategic planning process. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
Status: Open

Comments: The agency agreed with the recommendation. OCWR officials reported that they hired a contractor to better incorporate key management practices, such as developing strategies for recruiting and retaining staff with mission-critical skills, into OCWR's human capital plan and strategic planning process.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation should establish a schedule for standardizing and improving information on the boundaries of nonfederal NPL sites. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: In its June 2020 response, EPA stated that it had convened a working group comprising of Superfund and regional officials to collect and disseminate geospatial information for all NPL sites to help EPA analyze, communicate, and respond to the impacts of natural disasters and weather. EPA has not, however, provided a schedule for completing this effort.

Recommendation: The Administrator of EPA should clarify how EPA's actions to manage risks to human health and the environment from the potential impacts of climate change effects at nonfederal NPL sites align with the agency's current goals and objectives. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of June 2020, EPA has stated that it agrees with the recommendation but does not plan to take any action to respond to it because it believes its actions are aligned with agency goals and objectives. We continue to believe that clarifying this alignment to the agency's current goals and objectives is warranted.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation should provide direction on how to integrate information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk assessments at nonfederal NPL sites. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of June 2020, EPA stated that it will be issuing a memorandum that would provide direction on integrating information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk assessments at nonfederal NPL sites in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. At that time, we will review the memorandum to determine if it is responsive to our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation should provide direction on how to integrate information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk response decisions at nonfederal NPL sites. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of June 2020, EPA stated that it will be issuing a memorandum that would provide direction on integrating information on the potential impacts of climate change effects into risk response decisions at nonfederal NPL sites in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. At that time, we will review the memorandum to determine if it is responsive to our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should issue guidance on incorporating climate projections into installation master planning, including—at a minimum—what sources of climate projections to use, how to use projections involving multiple future scenarios, and what future time periods to consider. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it is in the process of developing guidance to incorporate projections for sea level change into DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria standard for installation master planning, using a DOD-vetted source of data. DOD also stated that it will continue to tailor additional sources of climate projections data to other planning requirements and integrate these into departmental criteria as appropriate. In February 2020, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment issued a memorandum with guidance on incorporating sea level change projections in installation master planning, and as of April 2020, was researching additional sources of climate projection data to tailor to other planning requirements. DOD estimated that it would complete implementation of this recommendation in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should issue guidance on incorporating climate projections into facilities project designs, including—at a minimum—what sources of climate projections to use, how to use projections involving multiple future scenarios, and what future time periods to consider. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation, and stated that it is in the process of developing guidance to incorporate projections for sea level change into Unified Facilities Criteria for facilities design, using a DOD-vetted source of data. DOD also stated that it will continue to tailor additional sources of climate projections data to other engineering requirements and integrate these projections into its criteria as appropriate. In February 2020, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment issued a memorandum with guidance on incorporating sea level change projections into facilities designs, and as of April 2020, was researching additional sources of climate projection data to tailor to other planning requirements. DOD estimated that it would complete implementation of this recommendation in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should ensure that the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers works with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment; the Chief of Civil Engineers and Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command; and the Director of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center to update relevant Unified Facilities Criteria to require that installations consider climate projections in designing facilities projects and incorporate, as appropriate, DOD guidance on the use of climate projections in facilities project designs—including identification of authoritative sources of such projections, use of projections involving multiple future scenarios, and what future time periods to consider. (Recommendation 6)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Chief of Civil Engineers and Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command works with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Director of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center to update relevant Unified Facilities Criteria to require that installations consider climate projections in designing facilities projects and incorporate, as appropriate, DOD guidance on the use of climate projections in facilities project designs—including identification of authoritative sources of such projections, use of projections involving multiple future scenarios, and what future time periods to consider. (Recommendation 7)

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

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should ensure that the Director of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center works with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment; the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and the Chief of Civil Engineers and Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command to update relevant Unified Facilities Criteria to require that installations consider climate projections in designing facilities projects and incorporate, as appropriate, DOD guidance on the use of climate projections in facilities project designs—including identification of authoritative sources of such projections, use of projections involving multiple future scenarios, and what future time periods to consider. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of April 2020, DOD stated that the update of Unified Facilities Criteria to implement this recommendation was pending the issuance of additional guidance by DOD on the use of such projections in project designs, as recommended by GAO. DOD estimated it would complete the actions to implement this recommendation in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) should clarify whether an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 plan may incorporate material ESG factors into the investment management for a qualified default investment alternative (QDIA). (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. On April 23, 2018, while DOL was reviewing our report, the agency issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2018-01 regarding retirement plans' use of ESG factors. While this new bulletin specifically mentions the use of ESG factors in a QDIA and reiterates the conditions under which an investment option may generally be considered a QDIA, it focuses on the use of ESG factors for collateral benefits rather than on cases where ESG factors are considered in investment decisions because they have been determined by fiduciaries to be material to financial performance. For example, the new field assistance bulletin states that the QDIA regulations do not suggest that fiduciaries should select a QDIA based on collateral public policy goals. ESG factors can be used to address material risks, which might otherwise be ignored, and there is interest in considering such factors within a QDIA. The use of ESG factors in this manner can be distinct from pursuing collateral public policy goals. Additional clarification from DOL that explicitly addresses plans' use of financially material ESG factors in investment options designated as a QDIA could enhance the agency's effectiveness in assisting plan fiduciaries with understanding and fulfilling their obligations under ERISA. In June 2019, DOL stated that it would be appropriate to engage with stakeholders before reaching any conclusions about the necessity or appropriateness of issuing further guidance in this area. Additional information about DOL's efforts to engage with stakeholders, including the outcome of such efforts and rationale for any conclusions reached would help determine the effectiveness of the agency's actions.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for EBSA should provide further information to assist fiduciaries in investment management involving ESG factors, including how to evaluate available options, such as questions to ask or items to consider. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: DOL neither agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation. GAO believes that while DOL's new field assistance bulletin provides information on the limitations of using ESG factors for pursuing collateral benefits, additional clarifying information could help sponsors conduct due diligence in considering whether ESG factors are material to an investment's financial performance and, if so, how to address those material risks. DOL's written comments recognize that additional clarification could be appropriate, depending on responses to the new field assistance bulletin from the public. We appreciate the consideration of the need for additional information, particularly as some have noted the new field assistance bulletin could create a chilling effect that leads fiduciaries to avoid considering ESG factors that could address material risks in their investments, to the detriment of plan participants' best interests. In June 2019, DOL stated that it would be appropriate to engage with stakeholders before reaching any conclusions about the necessity or appropriateness of issuing further guidance in this area. DOL further stated that the agency added a new project to the Spring 2019 regulatory agenda related to proxy voting. Additional information about DOL's new project on proxy voting and efforts to engage with stakeholders, including the outcome of such efforts and rationale for any conclusions reached, would help determine the effectiveness of the agency's actions.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should provide, concurrent with any future climate change funding reports to Congress, funding information for federal programs with fiscal exposure to climate change. This information should include costs to repair, replace, and improve the weather-related resilience of federally-funded property and resources; costs for federal flood and crop insurance programs; and costs for disaster assistance programs. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In a July 2018 letter, OMB reiterated its disagreement with this recommendation, as described in the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section of the report. OMB also stated that it does not anticipate providing funding information for federal programs with fiscal exposure to climate change concurrent with future climate change reports to Congress. We continue to believe that OMB would have better assurance that it was providing policymakers with the information necessary to make climate change spending trade-offs, if in addition to the funding information for science, technology and international assistance it has previously reported to Congress, OMB also reported funding information for programs whose costs were likely to increase due to climate change impacts. In July 2019, the Disclosing Aid Spent to Ensure Relief Act or the DISASTER Act passed the House and was referred to the Senate. If enacted, this legislation would require OMB to annually report to Congress on all disaster-related assistance provided by the federal government, which includes all federal obligations related to disaster response, recovery, mitigation efforts, and administrative costs associated with these activities for specified agencies and programs. As of October 2020, the legislation has not progressed in the Senate. We will provide updated information regarding this recommendation when it becomes available.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should provide, concurrent with any future climate change funding reports to Congress, a detailed analysis of federal climate change programs it considers to be fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In a July 2018 letter, OMB reiterated its disagreement with this recommendation, as described in the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section of the report. OMB also stated that it does not anticipate providing a separate, detailed analysis of federal climate change programs that it considers to be fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative. We continue to believe that because OMB collects and reports information on federal climate change funding, OMB is uniquely situated to conduct an assessment of potentially fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative programs across the full range of agencies engaged in climate change activities and that by providing this information to Congress in conjunction with future funding reports, OMB could help decision makers more effectively target limited resources. As of October 2020, OMB has not provided a climate change funding report to Congress since the issuance of our April 2018 report.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should work with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to issue a requirement to their installations to systematically track the costs associated with extreme weather events and climate change. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should work with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to issue a requirement to their installations to systematically track the costs associated with extreme weather events and climate change. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should work with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to issue a requirement to their installations to systematically track the costs associated with extreme weather events and climate change. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should take steps to administer the Screening Level Vulnerability Assessment Survey, or a similar instrument, to all relevant locations. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should take steps to administer the Screening Level Vulnerability Assessment Survey, or a similar instrument, to all relevant locations. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should take steps to administer the Screening Level Vulnerability Assessment Survey, or a similar instrument, to all relevant locations. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD non-concurred with our recommendation. In August 2018, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations & Environment) stated that because DOD non-concurred with this recommendation, the department has no plans to implement it. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department intends to implement it. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will continue to follow up on it, if DOD decides to take relevant actions.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should implement DOD goals and plans by incorporating climate change adaptation into service-level guidance and required training for the development of installation-level plans, including master plans and natural resource plans, at all locations. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020 DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Air Force had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should implement DOD goals and plans by incorporating climate change adaptation into service-level guidance and required training for the development of installation-level plans, including master plans and natural resource plans, at all locations. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Navy had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should implement DOD goals and plans by incorporating climate change adaptation into service-level guidance and required training for the development of installation-level plans, including master plans and natural resource plans, at all locations. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, it was continuing to review DOD Directive (DODD) 4715.21 on climate resilience; DOD reissued the directive in August 2018. The directive requires the military departments to incorporate adaptation to climate change impacts into their planning for facilities. Further, DOD has incorporated adaptation into other guidance that applies to each of the departments. For example, with revisions to DOD's Unified Facilities Criteria for Master Planning and High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, as well the issuance of the guide "Climate Adaptation for DOD Natural Resource Managers," DOD has instructed the military departments' planners to incorporate adaptation into installation-level plans. Further, in 2020, DOD issued guidance that requires the military departments to use a DOD database on sea level changes in their planning for coastal infrastructure (sea level change is one impact of climate change). However, as of June 2020, the Army had not provided evidence of required training for installation-level planners that incorporates the DOD guidance discussed in this summary. Thus, the recommendation remains open and we will review evidence of such training if that evidence becomes available.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should integrate climate change data and projections into the Unified Facilities Criteria standards and periodically revise those standards based on any new projections, as appropriate. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should integrate climate change data and projections into the Unified Facilities Criteria standards and periodically revise those standards based on any new projections, as appropriate. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should integrate climate change data and projections into the Unified Facilities Criteria standards and periodically revise those standards based on any new projections, as appropriate. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Office of the Secretary of Defense continues to work with the military departments to evaluate how best to incorporate resilience measures into Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs), as appropriate. DOD also stated that UFCs are reviewed and revised on a rolling basis. As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence of climate change data and projections integrated into UFCs. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as UFCs are updated, we will assess the extent to which the revised versions addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy), the geographic combatant commands, the sub-unified commands, and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to consider climate change adaptation as they develop DOD's position for future negotiations with host-nation governments on cost-sharing activities, when relevant or appropriate. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review and update the processes and criteria governing host-nation cost-sharing negotiations to strengthen or incorporate resilience measures. Since each bilateral agreement is unique, these must be completed on a case-by-case basis. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated host-nation cost-sharing agreements, we will assess the extent to which they (or the processes and criteria governing them) address the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to issue guidance, as appropriate, that calls for more formal coordination mechanisms related to climate change adaptation, such as memorandums of understanding, between DOD installations and surrounding host-nation communities. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2017, DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. According to a July 2018 Corrective Action Plan provided by DOD, the Department is continuing to review guidance for establishing agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations. Further, DOD noted that any updates would occur on a "rolling basis." As of June 2020, DOD has not provided evidence that the department has engaged in such updates. Thus, the recommendation remains open and as we become aware of new or updated agreements between host-nation communities and DOD installations, we will assess the extent to which they (or the guidance governing them) address the recommendation.

Recommendation: The appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President, including the Council on Environmental Quality, Office and Management and Budget, and Office of Science and Technology Policy, should use information on the potential economic effects of climate change to help identify significant climate risks facing the federal government and craft appropriate federal responses. Such responses could include establishing a strategy to identify, prioritize, and guide federal investments to enhance resilience against future disasters. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Executive Office of the President
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 14, 2020, the Executive Office of the President has yet to take action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help reduce federal fiscal exposure by enhancing the resilience of infrastructure to extreme weather, the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST, in consultation with MitFLG and USGCRP, should convene federal agencies for an ongoing governmentwide effort to provide the best available forward-looking climate information to standards-developing organizations for their consideration in the development of design standards, building codes, and voluntary certifications.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 5, 2020, NIST has not convened a governmentwide effort to provide the best available forward-looking climate information to standards developing-organizations.

Recommendation: To help NMFS and the Councils incorporate climate information into the fisheries management process and better manage climate-related risks, the Secretary of Commerce should direct NOAA's Assistant Administrator for Fisheries to, in finalizing the regional action plans for implementing the NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy, (1) incorporate the key attributes associated with successful performance measures in the final performance measures developed for the plans and (2) assess whether agency-wide performance measures may be needed to determine the extent to which the objectives of the Strategy overall are being achieved, and develop such measures, as appropriate, that incorporate the key attributes of successful performance measures.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce and NOAA agreed with this recommendation. In October 2019, NOAA provided GAO with a written update on actions taken in response to this recommendation, including the development of agency-wide metrics for the NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy. In September 2020, NOAA informed GAO that it plans to update the performance metrics for the regional action plans to include our key attributes in 2021. We will continue to monitor NOAA's progress on this effort and will review the updated performance metrics to assess the extent to which the agency has addressed our recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance and to promote more consistent oversight of efforts within the department to address the incidence of hazing, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to regularly monitor the implementation of DOD's hazing policy by the military services.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. In February 2018 DOD issued a policy on harassment prevention and response in the armed services that defined hazing as one form of harassment, and required each military department secretary to provide a plan to implement the policy. As of October 2020, DOD stated that it had assessed that the military services had fully implemented DOD's hazing policy by September 2020. This determination was based on an assessment of military service implementation plans for DOD's harassment prevention and response policy, which includes prevention of hazing. Through ongoing work on hazing in the military, we continue to monitor the extent to which DOD has regularly monitored the extent to which the military services have implemented its hazing policy.

Recommendation: To promote greater visibility over the extent of hazing in DOD to better inform DOD and military service actions to address hazing, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, in collaboration with the Secretaries of the Military Departments, to evaluate prevalence of hazing in the military services.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. As of September 2017, DOD had added questions to its survey of servicemembers that would facilitate an evaluation of hazing prevalence but had not yet conducted the evaluation. In October 2020, DOD stated that it need to conduct additional analysis on its survey data and on a hazing/bullying metric developed for DOD by the RAND Corporation, and estimated it would implement this recommendation by October 2023.

Recommendation: To promote greater visibility over the extent of hazing in the Coast Guard to better inform actions to address hazing, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should evaluate the prevalence of hazing in the Coast Guard.

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

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. In 2017 the Coast Guard surveyed servicemembers on hazing and stated that it planned to, but had not yet conducted an evaluation of prevalence. However, in July 2018, the Coast Guard stated that no further analysis was planned for the 2017 survey data. The Coast Guard stated that a second survey was planned for 2019, but did not identify any plans to evaluate the prevalence of hazing in the Coast Guard. As of October 2020, the Coast Guard has not provided a requested update on the status of the implementation of this recommendation or indicated any ongoing plans to implement it.

Recommendation: To help inform decision makers on the SAMP's progress as well as the decision regarding the extension of the SAMP's term, the Secretary of Defense should direct the SAMP to define timelines and measures to assess its progress in completing its major tasks.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation, stating that the department will submit its Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act report on military programs and controls regarding professionalism to Congress on September 1, 2015, thereby satisfying the requirements of this recommendation. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to further inquiries regarding any actions it has taken to implement this recommendation. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To increase assurance that commanders are conducting command climate assessments in accordance with statutory requirements and departmental guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to modify existing guidance or develop new guidance to comply with requirements set forth in the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act and internal DOD guidance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that existing Army practice is consistent with the intent of departmental guidance for command climate survey utilization. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to further inquiries regarding any actions it has taken to implement this recommendation. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better inform the department's approach to senior officers' professional development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to assess the need for and feasibility of implementing 360-degree assessments for all general and flag officers.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that it concurs with the recommendation to assess the need for and feasibility of implementing 360-degree assessments, or 360-degree-like feedback assessments, where they are not already being performed, but that it believes that it should only do so for general and flag officers at the three star ranks and below. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. At that time, DOD also stated that it believes in a holistic approach to developing and assessing professionalism, noting, as an example, the Joint Staff's use of staff assistance visits and Senior Leader "roundtables" to complement the use of 360-degree assessments. In April 2018, DOD stated that each military department and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had implemented a 360-degree assessment requirement for all general and flag officers. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to inquiries regarding documentation in support of these actions. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to assess its progress in addressing ethics and professionalism issues, the Secretary of Defense should direct the SAMP, through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, or SAMP's successor organization(s), to identify information sources and develop intermediate goals and performance metrics. At minimum, these performance metrics should be clear, quantifiable, and objective, and they should include a baseline assessment of current performance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred, with comment, with this recommendation, noting that the office of the Senior Advisor for Military Professionalism is a temporary office established by Secretary Hagel for a two year term ending no later than March of 2016. DOD confirmed its position with regard to this recommendation on October 19, 2015. In April 2018, DOD identified activities it had undertaken in the spirit and intent of the recommendation. As of September 16, 2020, DOD has not responded to inquiries for documentation in support of these actions and the related development of intermediate goals and performance metrics. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the resilience of the nation's infrastructure to climate change, the Executive Director of the United States Global Change Research Program or other federal entity designated by the Executive Office of the President should work with relevant agencies to identify for decision makers the "best available" climate-related information for infrastructure planning and update this information over time.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Status: Open

Comments: The Executive Office of the President did not comment on this recommendation. As of January 2020, no federal entity has identified the best available climate-related information for infrastructure planning.

Recommendation: To improve the resilience of the nation's infrastructure to climate change, the Executive Director of the United States Global Change Research Program or other federal entity designated by the Executive Office of the President should work with relevant agencies to clarify sources of local assistance for incorporating climate-related information and analysis into infrastructure planning, and communicate how such assistance will be provided over time.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and Technology Policy: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Status: Open

Comments: The Executive Office of the President did not comment on this recommendation. As of January 2020, no federal entity has comprehensively clarified sources of local assistance for incorporating climate-related information and analysis into infrastructure planning.