Recommendation: To improve oversight of the collection of restitution, the Attorney General should develop and implement performance measures and goals for each USAO related to the collection of restitution, and measure progress towards meeting those goals. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported that Executive Office for United States Attorneys developed a core set of performance measures for evaluating collection activities. Further, DOJ officials reported that DOJ was in the process of developing an analytical tool to allow DOJ and U.S. Attorneys Offices' (USAOs) to assess USAO restitution collection efforts and results based on relevant factors. In November 2019, DOJ officials reported that DOJ had begun piloting the analytical tool and expected that it would be fully implemented by July 2020. However, in July 2020, DOJ officials reported that the technical challenges they encountered, as well as the impacts to government operations as a result of the 2019 COVID pandemic, have directly impacted their operations and resulted in delays. While DOJ's initial completion time frame was scheduled for October 2020, the challenges they have encountered have resulted in the timeline for implementation now expected to take place during the first quarter of FY 2021. We will continue to monitor DOJ's progress and time frames for implementation.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM, together with the CHCO Council, should track government-wide data to establish a baseline and analyze the extent to which the seven Title 5 special payment authorities are effective in improving employee recruitment and retention, and determine what potential changes may be needed to improve the seven authorities' effectiveness. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: OPM partially concurred with the recommendation and said that by August 2018, OPM would (1) track Governmentwide data to establish a baseline of agency use of the seven Title 5 special payment authorities by occupation with a focus on mission-critical occupations; and (2) work with the CHCO Council to determine what changes may be needed to improve the seven authorities' effectiveness. OPM said agencies are in the best position to analyze the extent to which special pay authorities, when used in conjunction with other human resources flexibilities, improve their ability to recruit and retain their employees. However, we noted that by working with the agencies through the CHCO Council, OPM would be better positioned to track government-wide data to analyze the extent to which Title 5 special payment authorities improve employee recruitment and retention. In December 2018, OPM told us that it established a baseline to measure changes over time, on an annual basis, regarding the use of the seven special payment authorities. OPM also stated that it is working with the CHCO Council to administer a survey to obtain agency input on how to improve the authorities' effectiveness. In May 2019, OPM provided documented analyses of the extent agencies use special payment authorities for various occupations, but provided no information on actions taken with the CHCO council as we recommended. More specifically, to fully implement the recommendation OPM needs to work with the CHCO Council to analyze changes in government-wide data and the extent to which the seven special payment authorities are effective. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM, together with the CHCO Council, should provide guidance on assessing effectiveness and tools--such as best practices or frequently asked questions--for the range of Title 5 special payment authorities. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM concurred with recommendation and said that by February 2019, it would (1) develop guidance on assessing the effectiveness for the range of Title 5 special payment authorities, and (2) work on any guidance or tools that the CHCO Council identifies that would improve their use of the special payment authorities. After our report was issued in December 2017, OPM also posted new templates on its website to help agencies provide required information and facilitate the request and approval process for waivers of the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of OPM should establish documented procedures to assess special payment authority requests requiring OPM approval and periodically review approval procedures to consider ways to streamline them. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: OPM concurred with the recommendation and, in December 2018, provided documented procedures for reviewing agency requests to waive the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives; and for reviewing agency requests for special rates and critical position pay. However, the procedures generally restated the types of information that agencies must submit and did not provide criteria to assess the information supporting requests. For example, the procedures for assessing special rates and critical position pay requests only referred to lists of required information items. Furthermore, the guidance on assessing agency requests to waive the normal payment limitations on recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives did not provide criteria, such as to assess the soundness of the methodology or reliability of underlying data for calculating payment amounts or the sufficiency of prior agency efforts to recruit and retain employees without having to resort to additional pay. Although the procedures documents OPM provided referred to periodic annual reviews of the procedures beginning in May 2019, the documents did not provide information on whether and how such reviews were to consider and identify ways to streamline the procedures. We will update the status of actions to implement this recommendation as OPM provides any additional documentation responsive to it, as we requested in September 2019 and further coordinated with OPM in June 2020.

Recommendation: To strengthen efforts to identify and address noncompliance with the EITC, ACTC, and AOTC, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should direct Refundable Credits Policy and Program Management (RCPPM) to take necessary steps to ensure the reliability of collections data and periodically review that data to (a) compute a collections rate for post-refund enforcement activities and (b) determine what additional analyses would provide useful information about compliance results and costs of post-refund audits and document-matching reviews.

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

Comments: No executive action taken as of December 2019. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disagreed with this May 2016 recommendation. IRS raised concerns about the cost of studying collections data for post-refund enforcement activities. GAO recognizes that gathering collections data has costs and the data have limitations, notably that not all recommended taxes are collected. However, use of these data -- once IRS is able to verify their reliability -- could better inform resource allocation decisions and improve the overall efficiency of enforcement efforts. By not taking necessary steps to ensure the reliability of that data and to link them to tax assessments to calculate a collections rate, IRS lacks critical information. Periodic reviews of collections data and analyses could help IRS officials more efficiently allocate limited enforcement resources by providing a more complete picture about compliance results and costs.

Recommendation: To address USPS's financial viability in the short term, Congress may wish to consider providing financial relief to USPS, including modifying its retiree health benefit cost structure in a fiscally responsible manner. Congress may also wish to consider any and all options available to reduce USPS costs, including revising the statutory framework for collective bargaining to ensure that binding arbitration takes its financial condition into account. At the same time, to facilitate making progress in difficult areas, Congress may wish to consider establishing (1) a panel of independent experts, similar to a BRAC-like commission, to coordinate with USPS and stakeholders to develop a package of proposed legislative and operational changes needed to reduce costs and address challenges to USPS's business model and (2) procedures for the review and approval of these proposals by the President and Congress. These proposals could focus on adapting delivery and retail services to declining mail volumes; making postal operations, networks, and workforce more cost-efficient; and generating new revenue.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action on this matter.