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: Compliance
GAO-18-130, Apr 16, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-4456
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the DOD CIO developed a report on the first increment of version 3 of the department's information enterprise architecture (IEA). The report includes high-level descriptions of the current and target architectures, and high-level plans and schedules for transitioning from the current to the target architecture. The report states that because of the incremental approach to developing the architecture, the plans and schedules are notional and depend on several factors over which the DOD CIO has limited or no control, such as funding and changing world events, priorities, and technology. The report also describes plans to integrate the IEA with the department's business enterprise architecture. However, the report did not define a specific time frame for integrating the architectures. According to the report, for the next increment of the architecture, the department plans to develop compliance criteria and plans for developing an ontology, database, and tool suite. The department did not provide a time frame for completing the next increment. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In October 2019, the DOD CIO developed a report on the first increment of version 3 of its information enterprise architecture (IEA). The report described planned efforts related to integrating the IEA and the business enterprise architecture. However, the report did not define a specific time frame for when the department plans to integrate the architectures.
GAO-17-538, May 30, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6722
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: On November 16, 2017, FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposed to adopt a self-enforcing budget mechanism for the Lifeline program. However, as of January 2020, FCC has not yet adopted a decision on this proposal.
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: According to the FCC as of January 28, 2020, the agency does not currently have a schedule to implement this recommendation.
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: FCC's enforcement must remain flexible in order to be responsive to the ever changing variants that Universal Service Fund violations may take. According to the FCC, as with all Commission matters, the Chairman may indicate agency priorities in terms of subject matter, but the Chairman does not dictate which cases the Enforcement Bureau pursues. The Office of the Chairman, in consultation with the Enforcement Bureau, has articulated priorities with respect to enforcement activities in the Lifeline area including, but not limited to: 1. Detection and elimination of willful attempts to defraud the Lifeline Program by claiming support subsidies for ineligible or fictitious subscribers. 2. Detection and elimination of unlawful claims for enhanced support for Tribal areas. 3. Detection and elimination of carrier collections of multiple support subsidies for duplicative subscribers, regardless of the source of duplications. 4. Detection and elimination of carrier failures to de-enroll inactive or ineligible subscribers. The Enforcement Bureau has focused its enforcement efforts in line with these priorities and has taken a number of actions since the publication of GAO-17-538.
Agency: Federal Communications Commission
Status: Open
Comments: According to the FCC, the FCC is scheduled to complete implementing this recommendation in December 2021.
GAO-17-312, Apr 3, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has taken steps to improve the consistency of oversight of federal spending under section 1115 demonstrations. In November 2018, HHS officials reported that they have developed draft guidance, including a standard reporting tool for states, to better ensure consistent reporting of the elements needed to assess compliance with demonstration spending limits and was in the process of testing the tool with two states. In addition, the agency is developing standard operating procedures for agency staff to require consistent tracking of unspent funds under the spending limit. As of November 2019, HHS has not provided any updates. GAO will continue to monitor HHS's actions and once procedures are in place, GAO will assess whether they address our recommendation.
GAO-17-204, Mar 23, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-6912
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Status: Open
Comments: In March 2017, we found that USCIS does not track or monitor whether SAVE users have completed training and therefore does not have reasonable assurance that users have mastered SAVE policies and procedures prior to accessing the system. We recommended that USCIS develop and implement a mechanism to oversee agencies' completion of training on additional verification in accordance with SAVE provisions and program policies. The USCIS Verification Division reported that it planned to address providing additional training for SAVE users developed by December 31, 2017. The SAVE Program would then offer training events for agencies on the new material reflecting the agency user requirements for additional verification as well as system enhancements. In September 2017, the Verification Division implemented part one of this recommendation, a monthly webinar training session on user agency responsibilities and additional verification. This training can also be delivered to user agencies upon request. For part two of this recommendation, the SAVE program also developed training features to oversee agencies' completion of training. These training features are a system enhancement that will be incorporated into SAVE's overall modernization effort and was expected to be completed by September 30, 2019. In the interim, SAVE is implementing several other enhancements that will reduce the number of cases sent to additional verification, including the completion of modernized matching logic and initial verification screens and retiring less efficient access methods. In September 2019, SAVE officials told us that SAVE has reduced the number of cases sent to additional verification by retiring inefficient access methods and completing modernization of SAVE matching logic and initial verification screens. However, SAVE officials said they also determined that they must update the SAVE tutorial platform and content to account for these and other changes. Officials said that while SAVE is updated, the program continues to provide training, resources, and other support to user agencies to help ensure they are performing additional verification in accordance with SAVE MOA provisions and program policies. The new estimated completion date is February 28, 2021.
GAO-17-58, Feb 7, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Comments: In its February 26, 2018 report to Congress on actions NRC has taken in response to GAO recommendations, NRC continued to disagree with the recommendation to expand its existing data collection requirements or to transition such information from its existing NRC databases to the NSTS. NRC stated that, as required by 10 CFR Part 37, "Physical Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive Material," the NRC currently collects the number of shipments and mode of transport for domestic transfers, and the import and export of Category 1 quantities of radioactive material. Additionally, under the provisions of 10 CFR Part 110, "Export and Import of Nuclear Material," the NRC stated that it collects the number of shipments and mode of transport for the import and export of shipments containing Category 2 or higher quantities of radioactive material. The NRC stated that it is the agency's position that the current information collected provides the NRC with an understanding of the potential modes of transport for Category 1 and 2 quantities of radioactive material and existing regulatory requirements provide robust protection for all such modes. The NRC stated that it does not consider the proposed additional information collection activity to be of sufficient safety or security benefit to justify the associated regulatory actions it would require. In August 2019, and again in August 2020, the NRC reaffirmed its disagreement with this recommendation and that it did not intend to take action to implement it. Despite its disagreement with this recommendation, we will continue to monitor whether NRC takes any actions that would result in addressing the concern GAO raised.
GAO-16-750, Sep 22, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7215
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: In 2018, in consultation with technical experts, DOL revised its scheduling list methodology to address this recommendation. The agency's new scheduling approach aims to strike an appropriate balance for addressing recidivism and noncompliance. The new scheduling list methodology, deployed in FY 2019, examined closed cases for FY 2014 through 2018 and grouped them by industries using the 2-digit NAICS code. Within each year, OFCCP identified cases that closed with discrimination findings and included a conciliation agreement to make the victims whole. The percentage of cases with discrimination findings over the total number of cases closed for that year was computed for each industry. This process was repeated for each of the five fiscal years and identified Agriculture, Manufacturing, and Wholesale Trade as three industries with the highest rate of discrimination violations. One-third of 3,500 establishments on the fiscal 2019 scheduling list were selected from these three industries; the remainder of the list included establishments from other industries. Field offices began scheduling from this list in May 2019 and continue to do so. OFCCP will evaluate the efficacy of this methodology once all establishments on the list are scheduled and resulting cases are closed. The agency has made significant effort to revise its scheduling list methodology to reflect potential risk of noncompliance. However, the methodology relies on the results of prior scheduling lists that were nonrandom and did not produce a generalize sample of contractors. Consequently, the results of those scheduling lists do not allow OFCCP to draw accurate conclusions about noncompliance risk. While DOL has made considerable efforts to implement this recommendation, the process described does not necessarily identify those contractors with the greatest risk of not following equal employment opportunity and affirmative action requirements.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: Since 2018, OFCCP issued Directive 2018-07, AAP Verification Initiative, publicly committing to a comprehensive program to verify that federal contractors are complying with AAP obligations on a yearly basis. The program included development of an online portal whereby contractors would certify on a yearly basis compliance with AAP requirements; inclusion of a criterion in the neutral scheduling methodology increasing the likelihood of compliance reviews for contractors that have not certified compliance with the AAP requirements; compliance checks to verify contractor compliance with AAP requirements; requesting proffer of the AAP by contractors when requesting extensions of time to provide support data in response to a scheduling letter; and development of information technology to collect and facilitate review of AAPs provided by federal contractors. OFCCP senior leadership initiated a public campaign by emphasizing AAP certification as an agency priority in meetings with contractors and other external stakeholders. In addition, OFCCP also changed its criteria for granting extensions of time for the submission of support data in response to a scheduling letter and made it contingent upon timely submission of an AAP, within 30 days of receiving the scheduling letter. OFCCP reflected this change in an FAQ on its website. The Task Order to develop the portal expired on September 30, 2019 without fully completing the project. A new contract was awarded in September 2019 to continue this work and delivery of the completed portal is anticipated in the third quarter of fiscal year 2020. Concurrently, OFCCP anticipates obtaining approval from the Office of Management and Budget to collect annual certifications using this portal. When launched, the portal will allow all contractors to certify annually that they have developed and maintain compliant AAPs for each of their establishments or functional/business units. Those contractors who fail to certify, or who certify that they do not have compliant AAPs for each of their establishments or business/functional units, will be more likely to be scheduled for compliance evaluations. Further, OFCCP anticipates having contractors that are scheduled for compliance evaluations use the portal to submit their AAPs for review. While the agency has made considerable efforts to implement this recommendation, the processes described have not been fully implemented. Once implemented, GAO will close the recommendation.
GAO-14-114, Feb 3, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-2834
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: FMCSA did not agree with our recommendation, disputing the methodology and conclusions in our report. However, we continue to believe that addressing Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology limitations has merit and could help the agency better target FMCSA's resources to the carriers that pose the highest risk of crashing. For example, we found FMCSA requires a minimum level of information for a carrier to receive an SMS score; however, this requirement is not strong enough to produce sufficiently reliable scores. As a result, FMCSA identified many carriers as high risk that were not later involved in a crash, potentially causing FMCSA to miss opportunities to intervene with higher risk carriers. To fully implement this recommendation, FMCSA should revise SMS methodology to account for data limitations that limit comparisons so that the FMCSA is better positioned to identify and mitigate carriers that pose the greatest safety risks. FMCSA has recently developed and tested a new methodological approach that could potentially account for the limitations we identified. While FMCSA has not yet committed to deploying the new methodology, they hope to do so some time in 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) agreed with the basic principles that GAO addressed in this area, but disagreed with GAO's characterization of FMCSA's proposed Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) rule. In January 2016, FMCSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed a revised methodology for issuance of a safety fitness determination for motor carriers. Specifically, the new methodology would have determined when a motor carrier is not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles in or affecting interstate commerce based on the carrier's on-road safety data; an investigation; or a combination of both. However, in July 2018, in part due to a review of SMS by the National Academies of Science congressionally mandated evaluation of SMS, FMCSA announced that the enhancements previously proposed will not be completed.
GAO-11-836, Sep 23, 2011
Phone: (202) 512-3000
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2017, HRSA withdrew proposed guidance that included further specificity on the definition of 340B patient in response to the new administration's January 20 memorandum directing agencies to withdraw regulations that were pending before the Office of Management and Budget but had not yet been published in the Federal Register. In March 2018, HRSA told GAO that it continues to assess next steps with the Administration on the proposed omnibus guidance, which included the patient definition. In June 2019, HRSA reported that it is still working with the Department to determine next steps for this recommendation. In July 2020, HRSA reported that it conducted an evaluation of its audit process and other program integrity efforts and determined that guidance does not provide the agency with appropriate enforcement capability. Therefore, HRSA is not pursing new guidance under the Program at this time. The FY 2021 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2017, HRSA withdrew proposed guidance that included additional specificity regarding hospital eligibility in response to the new administration's January 20 memorandum directing agencies to withdraw regulations that were pending before the Office of Management and Budget but had not yet been published in the Federal Register. In March 2018, HRSA reported that it believes it is unable to implement this recommendation without additional legislative authority because the statute does not speak to the issue raised in the recommendation. HRSA also noted that the FY19 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority, and that if this proposal is enacted, it could regulate on hospital eligibility. In June 2019, HRSA reported that it is still unable to implement this recommendation without additional legislative authority, though the President's FY 2020 Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA with such authority. In July 2020, HRSA reported that it conducted an evaluation of its audit process and other program integrity efforts and determined that guidance does not provide the agency with appropriate enforcement capability. Therefore, HRSA is not pursing new guidance under the Program at this time. The FY 2021 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority.
GAO-11-809, Sep 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-3604
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that leadership accountability is essential to the success of the department's efforts to prevent sexual harassment. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and released an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO), to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate, at a minimum, compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing polices, plans, and programs. The updated instruction also directs the Commandant, Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), to tailor training materials to servicemember professional development levels and associated leadership duties and responsibilities. As of February 2020, DOD had not completed development of the compliance standards or training materials. We will monitor DOD actions on this issue.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD has updated its guidance on sexual harassment, including a requirement for sharing the results of command climate assessments with the next higher level of command, but has not yet implemented an oversight mechanism to verify and track commanders' compliance with requirements to conduct such assessments. DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it would implement the recommendation through revisions to its guidance. According to DOD, a 2013 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense on sexual assault prevention and response outlined requirements addressing leadership accountability for preventing sexual harassment. The memorandum included a requirement that the results of command climate surveys be provided to the next level up in the chain of command, and it directed service chiefs, through their respective military department secretaries, to develop methods to assess the performance of commanders in establishing command climates of dignity and respect. The Secretary of Defense also issued a memorandum addressing prevention and response of sexual harassment in 2014, and DOD updated its guidance on sexual harassment in 2015. In 2016, DOD stated that further revisions to guidance were forthcoming to provide a framework for oversight of sexual harassment. This framework, among other things, would address standards for holding leaders accountable for promoting, supporting, and enforcing sexual harassment policies. DOD issued a new DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, in February 2018 but has not implemented an oversight framework as of February 2020. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated that as part of its revised guidance it proposed to strengthen and institutionalize the responsibilities and authorities needed for successful implementation of the department's sexual harassment policies. In February 2018, DOD took action toward addressing this recommendation and issued an update to DOD Instruction 1020.03, Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces, that directs the Director, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, to ensure that DOD components' harassment prevention and response programs incorporate , at a minimum, (1) long-term goals, objectives, and milestones; (2) results-oriented performance measures to assess effectiveness; and (3) compliance standards for promoting, supporting, and enforcing policies, plans, and programs. As of February 2020, DOD has not developed and aggressively implemented an oversight framework, as we recommended. We will continue to monitor DOD's actions.
GAO-11-494R, Jun 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9521
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, Facilities Management and Security Services (FMSS) will update the Internal Revenue Manual to reflect the necessary guidance for service center guards and FMSS physical security specialists to know (1) whom the guards are to contact to report lighting outages and (2) how lighting outages are to be documented and tracked until resolved.
GAO-11-329, Mar 30, 2011
Phone: (202)512-4010
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, according to officials, USDA has proposed revisions to its regulations that will incorporate the usage of Systematic Alien Verification and Entitlements (SAVE) program. The proposed rule is under interagency review with the Office of Management and Budget. Publication of the final rule is planned to occur in fiscal year 2022 according to USDA officials. We will continue to monitor USDA's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, according to officials, USDA has conducted an analysis of occupancy data and information retained in program applications, to determine how funding can be allocated to better meet market demand, and support community revitalization and affordable housing needs. Officials planned to use the results of this analysis to revise USDA's Farm Labor Housing Notice for Solicitation of Applications. The notice is currently undergoing an internal clearance process, which USDA anticipates completing by fiscal year 2022. We will continue to track the agency's progress on this recommendation.
GAO-11-481, Mar 29, 2011
Phone: (202)512-5594
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has expanded IRS's math error authority in certain circumstances, but not as broadly as GAO suggested in February 2010. Section 208 of division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 114-113 enacted in December 2015) gave IRS the authority to use math error authority if (1) a taxpayer claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, or the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) during the period in which a taxpayer is not permitted to claim such credit as a consequence of either having made a prior fraudulent or reckless claim; or (2) a taxpayer omitted information required to be reported because the taxpayer made prior improper claims of the Child Tax Credit or the AOTC. While expanding math error authority is consistent with what GAO suggested in February 2010, GAO maintains that a broader authorization of math error authority with appropriate controls would enable IRS to correct obvious noncompliance, would be less intrusive and burdensome to taxpayers than audits, and would potentially help taxpayers who underclaim tax benefits to which they are entitled. If Congress decides to extend broader math error authority to IRS, controls may be needed to ensure that this authority is used properly such as requiring IRS to report on its use of math error authority. The Administration also requested that Congress expand IRS's math error authority as part of the Service's Congressional Budget Justification and Annual Performance Report and Plan for fiscal year 2021. Specifically, the Administration requested authority to correct a taxpayer's return in the following circumstances: 1) the information provided by the taxpayer does not match the information contained in government databases or Form W-2, or from other third party databases as the Secretary determines by regulation; 2) the taxpayer has exceeded the lifetime limit for claiming a deduction or credit; or 3) the taxpayer failed to include with his or her return certain documentation that is required to be included on or attached to the return. As of March 2020, the Congress had not provided IRS with such authority.
GAO-10-429, Apr 14, 2010
Phone: (202) 512-9039
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, Congress has not raised the amount of U.S. income paid by a foreign employer that is exempt from tax for nonresidents who meet the other conditions of the exemption.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, Congress has not eliminated the sailing permit requirement.
GAO-10-136, Nov 6, 2009
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury issued proposed regulations clarifying the definition of gross receipts on December 13, 2013 and solicited public comments. During the course of 2014, tax practitioners and business executives submitted comments criticizing the regulations and asking for them to be withdrawn. As of March 2020, Treasury has yet to issue final regulations that would include responses to these criticisms. The regulations would not become effective until the tax year beginning after the date on which the regulations are published in final form.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to clarify what types of activities are considered to be qualified support activities.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Treasury has not issued regulations to more clearly identify when commercial production of a qualified product is deemed to begin.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of December 2019, Congress had not enacted legislation to eliminate the regular computation option for the research tax credit or to add a minimum base to the ASC option, as GAO suggested in November 2009. The credit is designed to encourage business innovation by providing a subsidy for new research. Continued use of the regular computation credit option, which arbitrarily distributes subsidies across taxpayers, can distort investment decisions so that research spending and economic activity are not allocated to sectors that offer the highest returns to society. These misallocations may reduce economic efficiency and, thereby, diminish any economic benefits of the credit. Adding a minimum base for the ASC would reduce the revenue cost of the credit without affecting the average incentive it provides for research.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to update the historical base period that regular credit claimants use to compute their fixed base percentages.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken to eliminate base period recordkeeping requirements for taxpayers that elect to use a fixed base percentage of 16 percent in their computation of the credit.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: While legislation has been introduced to expand the research tax credit, as of March 2020, no action has been taken by Congress to clarify for Treasury its intent regarding the definition of gross receipts for purposes of computing the research credit for controlled groups of corporations. In particular, it may want to consider clarifying that the regulations generally excluding transfers between members of controlled groups apply to both gross receipts and QREs and specifically clarifying how it intended sales by domestic members to foreign members to be treated. Such clarification would help to resolve open controversies relating to past claims, even if the regular credit were discontinued for future years.
GAO-09-455, Aug 21, 2009
Phone: (202) 512-3000
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA's current payment rates do not explicitly consider WYO insurers' actual expenses and profit. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. However, GAO has reported that an annual analysis of the WYO insurers' actual expenses and profit could be regularly performed in relation to FEMA's existing payment methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they would complete an annual analysis of WYO data by the end of fiscal year 2020 and that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA can also take actions, in addition to any actions related to the rule, to develop method(s) for obtaining reasonable assurance that NAIC data is accurate and usable for setting payment rates before implementation of a new compensation methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: According to FEMA officials, FEMA is responding to this recommendation as part of its development of a final rule on WYO compensation practices, required by the Biggert-Waters Act. FEMA can also take actions, in addition to any actions related to the rule, to develop and implement data analysis strategies to annually test the quality of flood insurance data WYO insurers report to NAIC before implementation of a new compensation methodology. FEMA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Ruling on July 8, 2019 seeking comments by September 6, 2019 regarding possible approaches to incorporating actual flood insurance expense data into the WYO payment methodology. As of February 2020, FEMA officials said that they were reviewing comments received in response to the July 2019 notice.