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: Crime
GAO-20-528, Jul 8, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-388, May 12, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-2964
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
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.
GAO-20-333, Apr 2, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-8612
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-6, Oct 25, 2019
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: DOJ has taken a number of steps to address this recommendation, including creating a campus-specific brochure that highlights the Community Relations Service's (CRS) hate crimes prevention and response resources for campus stakeholders. CRS is also in the process of developing a comprehensive guide with best practices for and tools to aid in the planning and implementation of Campus SPIRIT programs and a "spotlight" article for the Department's hate crimes website. DOJ noted that the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) is developing hate crimes-specific training curriculum to provide technical assistance to law enforcement agencies, including those on campus. These are important steps to implement this recommendation, but because these resources are currently under development, this recommendation remains open.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: DOJ outlined steps it will take to work with campus-based law enforcement organizations such as the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, the International Association of Chiefs of Police's University and College Police Section, and the National Association of Student Affairs Professionals. This includes participating in a conference in June 2020 and contacting the groups to increase awareness of its hate crimes website. GAO has requested documentation to demonstrate this outreach has occurred.
GAO-19-643, Sep 25, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM agreed with our recommendation and stated it intends to revise its policy and develop a plan to complete required facility security assessments. As of November 2019, BLM had not yet completed its plan.
Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open
Comments: Park Service agreed with our recommendation and cited its efforts to develop a plan that includes training and tools so that park unit staff can conduct the required assessments. As of November 2019, Park Service had not yet completed its plan.
Agency: Department of the Interior: National Park Service
Status: Open
Comments: Park Service agreed with our recommendation to update its facility security assessment methodology to comply with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, Park Service had not yet updated its methodology.
Agency: Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management
Status: Open
Comments: BLM agreed with our recommendation and said it would revise its policy and develop a facility security assessment methodology that complies with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, BLM had not yet developed its methodology.
Agency: Department of the Interior: United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Status: Open
Comments: FWS agreed with our recommendation and cited its efforts to develop a facility security assessment methodology that complies with requirements in the ISC Standard. As of November 2019, FWS had not yet developed its methodology.
GAO-19-649, Aug 22, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-9627
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-216, Mar 21, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, OJP reported that it is building a logic model for the CEBR program that will provide the basis for addressing this recommendation. According to OJP, this logic model will more clearly align CEBR program goals and objectives with permitted program activities and associated performance measures. OJP had originally planned to finalize this logic model by March 2020 and share it--including any resulting changes in how program goals are articulated--with the CEBR stakeholder community in advance of the fiscal year 2021 grant cycle, beginning October 1, 2020. In June 2020, OJP reported that the CEBR program was transferred from OJP's National Institute of Justice to OJP's Bureau of Justice Assistance. As a result, OJP reported that plans to finalize and communicate the CEBR logic model have been postponed. GAO will follow-up with OJP in the winter of 2020-2021 to obtain documentation on the logic model and how they are communicating it. This will enable GAO to determine if the model--and OJP's efforts to communicate it to stakeholders--meets the intent of the recommendation by consistently documenting CEBR program-wide goals and clarifying intended results.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2019, OJP reported that it is reviewing each CEBR program performance measure as part of its process for creating a CEBR program logic model. According to OJP, the purpose of this review is to ensure the measures are meaningful and have the right attributes. In June 2020, OJP reported that, as appropriate, updated performance measures will be included in the fiscal year 2021 CEBR grant program solicitation--which they anticipate releasing in early 2021. GAO will follow-up with OJP in the spring of 2021 to obtain documentation of changes to performance measures, and to determine whether updated performance measures meet the intent of the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2020, OJP provided a memo sent by the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for OJP to OJP components, dated March 2020. This memo states that supervisors are to review and sign reports, and notes that secondary supervisors may review and sign reports as Final Reviewing Officials, but it is not mandatory. This is a positive step, but does not fully meet the intent of the recommendation because it is not clear if immediate supervisors have been delegated final signature authority. Specifically, there are two places for signature on the reports (1) "Signature and Title of Supervisor/Other Intermediate Reviewer," and (2) "Signature and Title of Agency's Final Reviewing Official" (certification). According to Office of Government Ethics' regulation and guidance, review and signature of a supervisor or other intermediate reviewer is optional, but review and signature of a Final Reviewing Official-who has been delegated authority to certify reports-is required. OJP's memo states that secondary supervisors may sign as Final Reviewing Officials (i.e. have been delegated this authority), but OJP's memo is not clear if immediate supervisors have also been delegated authority to certify reports as Final Reviewing Officials. To address this discrepancy and enable GAO to close this recommendation as "implemented," OJP needs to clarify who has been delegated authority to certify reports as Final Reviewing Officials.
Agency: Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2020, OJP reported that it plans to (1) issue guidance to all OJP funding recipients to remind them of lobbying disclosure requirements and provide instructions for how to submit the disclosures, and (2) implement an updated in-depth monitoring checklist whereby OJP can ensure applicable lobbying disclosure forms are collected and submitted to OJP. OJP stated that it plans to take these steps by October 1, 2020. GAO will follow-up in late 2020 to obtain and review all relevant documentation and ensure that these steps meet the intent of the recommendation.
GAO-17-300, Apr 6, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2019, DHS provided the National Counterterrorism Strategy as evidence that the department is including terrorism prevention as a necessary tool to meet its missions. While the strategy discusses terrorism prevention, it does not include specific activities or efforts, identify the agencies that will lead these efforts, or describe measurable outcomes for these efforts. In June 2019, DHS indicated that CVE-style prevention work would fall under a newly formed Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention under which it will be part of a broad counterterrorism strategy that DHS plans to have ready by this fall. We will continue to monitor DHS's progress in this area as it develops its plan.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, DOJ has not provided a response to our recommendation. In June 2019, DHS indicated that CVE-style prevention work would fall under a newly formed Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention under which it will be part of a broad counterterrorism strategy that DHS plans to have ready by this fall. We will continue to monitor DOJ's involvement in these efforts as DHS it develops its plan.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2019, DHS provided a commissioned review of CVE programs and activities that was expected to help identify ways to measure their effectiveness. The report provides a broad assessment of past activities and suggestions for measures and metrics going forward, but does not establish a process for agencies to measure the success of their activities or overall progress of CVE efforts. In June 2019, DHS indicated that CVE-style prevention work would fall under a newly formed Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention under which it will be part of a broad counterterrorism strategy that DHS plans to have ready by this fall. We will continue to monitor DHS's progress in this area as it develops its plan.
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 2019, DOJ has not provided a response to our recommendation. In June 2019, DHS indicated that CVE-style prevention work would fall under a newly formed Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention under which it will be part of a broad counterterrorism strategy that DHS plans to have ready by this fall. We will continue to monitor DOJ's involvement in these efforts as DHS develops its plan.
GAO-14-422, Jun 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9610
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2014, the Executive Office of the President issued the United States Counter Piracy and Maritime Security Action Plan, which includes an annex specific to activities in and around the Gulf of Guinea. While the plan outlines some of the planned indicators of effectiveness for activities in and around the Gulf of Guinea, the extent to which the agencies have assessed or plan to assess costs and benefits are not explicitly addressed. The plan states that the Counter Piracy Steering Group will coordinate, implement, and monitor the objectives outlined in the plan and will assess methods and agency activities to reduce risk and protect the maritime industry from acts of piracy and related maritime crime. The plan identifies an increase in investigating and prosecuting cases and a reduction in the trend of piracy and related maritime crime as tangible indicators of successful implementation of the plan. However, GAO's past work on piracy off the Horn of Africa recommended that, as part of a strategic approach, agencies (1) identify the costs of U.S. counterpiracy efforts including operational, support, and personnel costs; and (2) assess the benefits, and effectiveness of U.S. counterpiracy activities. The 2014 plan and its Gulf of Guinea annex do not include a discussion of these elements of a strategic approach. In August 2018, officials from the State Department noted that the Action Plan has not been updated because the drafting of the U.S. National Strategy for Maritime Security-which was being led by the National Security Council staff and would have addressed the Action Plan-was indefinitely suspended in June 2018. As of September 2019, neither the Strategy nor the Action plan have been updated. Including these elements of a strategic approach in the plan can help assess the effectiveness of current efforts, prioritize future efforts, and leverage resources. GAO will continue to monitor progress in this area.