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: Farming
GAO-20-711R, Sep 16, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-20-555, Jul 28, 2020
Phone: (202)512-3149
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-20-243, Feb 19, 2020
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2020, USDA officials agreed with our recommendation and stated that the department is evaluating options for the development of performance metrics and inclusion of these metrics and related information as part of the regular and recurring reviews by the department's Deputy Secretary who is identified as the Chief Operating Officer.
GAO-19-391, Jun 21, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of June 2020, EPA indicated that its proposed completion date is October 2020. EPA published joint and individual agency accomplishments in each of the six priority areas listed as contributing efforts on EPA's webpage (https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/winning-reducing-food-waste-federal-interagency-strategy). In addition, EPA indicated that it is coordinating with government and other stakeholders through: (1) monthly high-level check-in calls for senior USDA and FDA officials, in which the meeting chair rotates among agencies; (2) twice a month (or as needed) staff work group meetings, led by the recently appointed USDA food loss and waste liaison, to explore potential activities aligned with the six priority areas in the interagency strategy to reduce food loss and waste; and (3) participation in quarterly meetings with relevant stakeholders, such as ReFED, the Food Waste Reduction Alliance (FWRA), and Further with Food, to coordinate efforts and learn of opportunities to collaborate on reducing food loss and waste. We will continue to follow up with the agency. When we confirm what additional actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of December 2019, we are following up with the agency. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. As of December 2019, we are following up with the agency. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
GAO-19-103, Mar 12, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is evaluating the agency's response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, GAO is evaluating the agency's response to this recommendation.
GAO-19-166, Jan 17, 2019
Phone: (202) 512-3149
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of State has revised its integrated country strategy guidance to inform posts that they have the option to include a climate risk assessment annex when they change or update their strategies. State noted that they plan to disseminate this guidance to posts in 2020.
GAO-19-26, Nov 2, 2018
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: BLS noted that it had completed the pilot Household Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (HSOII) in December of 2018 and stated that BLS will be analyzing the quality of the data in the second and third quarters of 2019 and publishing a report at the end of 2019. To evaluate the feasibility of measuring injuries and illnesses to workers under 18, BLS stated it will conduct a literature review on questionnaire design for respondents under age 18, and reviewing the evidence on the quality of data collected through proxy reporting, e.g. adults reporting on injuries/illnesses for their children. The agency also reported that it will issue an assessment of the suitability of the existing HSOII instrument to gather data on working children at the end of fiscal year 2019. We will consider closing this recommendation after receipt and review of this final assessment report.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The agency agreed with this recommendation. The agency noted that it has existing performance measures that separately track the number of employer outreach events and the number of events involving child labor. The agency stated that, in response to GAO's recommendation, it will introduce a new measure in FY2020 that is specific to child labor-related outreach in the agricultural industry. The agency said that for the remainder of FY2019, the agency will develop the new measure, establish a baseline, and set an appropriate target for child labor-related outreach in the agricultural industry. The agency also said staff would be trained on the new measure in early 2020. We will close this recommendation once the agency institutes this new metric.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: WHD agreed that it could develop either an internal performance metric or new planning guidance and reporting requirements to ensure that WHD's child labor enforcement efforts focus on industries, establishments, and time periods in which children are likely to be working or injured. Although planning guidance and reporting requirements can encourage field office staff to focus more on child labor, we believe it is important to include a measurement of WHD's overall child labor enforcement approach as part of any new planning guidance and reporting requirements. We will consider closing this recommendation when WHD develops such performance metrics.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: To implement this recommendation, WHD and OSHA have agreed to establish a working group by the second quarter of FY2019, which will aim to maximize efficient information sharing between the two agencies. Specifically, this working group will update the existing WHD-OSHA Memorandum of Understanding, assess the results of referrals between WHD and OSHA, and make recommendations regarding the need for data collection and review. We will close this recommendation when these efforts are complete and supporting documentation has been provided.
GAO-17-501, Jul 26, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not taken action to implement this matter.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, the Department of Agriculture has not taken action to implement this recommendation.
GAO-17-225, Apr 13, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, the agency has not taken action. When we obtain information from the agency, we will update the status of this recommendation.
GAO-17-192, Mar 2, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS stated that FDA published a notice in the Federal Register In September 2016 requesting information from the public about how to establish appropriately targeted durations of use for therapeutic products affected by Guidance for Industry #213 with no defined duration of use. According to HHS, FDA evaluated the comments received and plans to develop a strategy to address this issue. In July 2019, HHS stated that FDA published a Request for Applications on April 1, 2019 for study proposals to help establish more targeted or defined durations of use for approved medically important antimicrobial drugs used in the feed of food-producing animals. There are currently no such products approved for use in water with an undefined duration of use. According to HHS, due to significant scientific and technical challenges, FDA anticipates that this initiative will require substantial time to fully implement so the primary objective is to update product dosage regimens to better target when and for how long the drug may be used.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS stated that FDA recognizes that a limited number of medically important antimicrobial products, available in dosage forms other than feed or water (e.g., injectable), continue to be marketed as OTC products and the agency intends to work with the sponsors to put these products under veterinary oversight. In July 2019, HHS stated that FDA released a broad 5-year plan in September 2018 outlining steps to support stewardship of medically important antimicrobials in veterinary settings. As part of that plan, FDA intends to publish a draft strategy, likely in the form of draft guidance for industry, to bring all dosage forms (such as injectables and tablets) of medically important antimicrobial drugs under veterinary oversight. The draft strategy will also provide a framework, including proposed timelines, for transitioning from over-the-counter to prescription marketing status for all approved medically important antimicrobial drugs that are not yet subject to veterinary oversight. FDA plans to issue this draft strategy no later than the end of fiscal year 2019. In conjunction with issuing the draft strategy, FDA intends to publish a list of affected new animal drug applications.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2017, as part of the agency's formal comments, HHS initially neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation. Subsequently, in a September 2017 letter, HHS agreed with this recommendation. In July 2018, HHS noted that FDA has taken steps to develop performance measures and targets. According to HHS, FDA issued a final rule in May 2016 revising annual reporting requirements for drug sponsors of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals to obtain estimates of sales broken out by major food-producing species (i.e., cattle, swine, chickens, and turkeys). Additionally, in August 2017, FDA published a paper proposing the use of a biomass denominator to adjust annual data on the volume of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals in the United States. According to HHS, this adjusted estimate will provide insight into broad shifts in the volume of antimicrobials sold for use in food-producing animals. FDA is also funding two grants for antimicrobial use data collection. These collection efforts are intended to provide part of the baseline information on antimicrobial use practices in the four major food-producing animal groups (i.e., cattle, swine, chickens, and turkeys), which is a critical element in measuring overall impact of the agency's judicious use strategy. FDA expects these data collection efforts to provide important information on methodologies to help optimize long-term strategies to collect and report such antimicrobial use data. In addition, FDA has been working in close collaboration with USDA, including providing input on recent surveys administered by USDA to collect information on antimicrobial use on farms. In July 2019, according to HHS, FDA agrees that performance measures and targets are needed to help gauge the success of antimicrobial stewardship efforts. While the agency continues to work on developing such measures and targets, FDA reported a decrease in domestic sales and distribution of all medically important antimicrobials intended for use in food-producing animals (e.g. decreased by 33 percent from 2016 through 2017). HHS noted that the reduction in sales volume is an important indicator that ongoing efforts to support antimicrobial stewardship are having a significant impact even though sales data do not necessarily reflect antimicrobial use.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: USDA agreed with this recommendation. In August 2018, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) stated that it is working closely with USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and HHS' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to develop a framework for deciding when on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities are warranted. In September 2019, according to APHIS officials, the lead agencies, including APHIS, FSIS, and CDC, have agreed that it is imperative that cross sector partners from a range of animal agriculture industries be included in developing the framework that was requested in GAO's final report. A framework for making decisions regarding on-farm antimicrobial resistance investigative activities simply will not work without including industry sector partners in the development of the framework, according to APHIS officials. Due to the logistics of getting all of the cross sector partners together, APHIS is unable to schedule the next meeting in the series to develop the Pre-Harvest Framework until December 2019. APHIS anticipates that it will take the remainder of fiscal year 2020 to work through additional meetings with partners and finalize this framework.
GAO-16-241, Mar 15, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. For example, there was no indication whether stakeholders internal to the department had continued to meet to discuss the 2014 Organic Survey results and how to move forward with future survey questions to obtain additional data, such as data needed to better understand the economic impacts of unintended mixing with GE crops. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: In its August 2016 Statement of Action on our report, USDA did not provide any new information on actions it has taken, if any, to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that USDA should survey producers growing identity-preserved crops regarding their potential economic losses from unintended GE presence, as is being done for organic producers. As we previously reported, U.S. acreage planted to identity-preserved crops is significantly greater than that planted to organic crops; yet, little is known about the economic costs to identity-preserved farmers of unintended mixing. As of September 2020, USDA did not have an update regarding the implementation of this recommendation. We will continue to follow up on USDA's efforts.
GAO-16-220, Feb 10, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open
Comments: As of October 2019, USDA had taken relevant and positive actions but had not yet fully implemented GAO's February 2016 recommendation for monitoring wild, native bees. According to a senior USDA official, a Native Bee Monitoring Steering Committee composed of representatives from four USDA agencies is developing a response to the recommendation. According to the official, the steering committee has taken or plans to take several steps regarding a monitoring plan. First, the steering committee held a stakeholder listening session in June 2017 to obtain public opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring program is important, (2) the type of information and data needed to adequately conduct monitoring, and (3) how the public would like to see the monitoring data used. Highlights of the input received at the listening session and the goals of the national monitoring plan were discussed in a symposium held in November 2017 at the National Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting. USDA gathered additional recommendations from symposium participants based on monitoring programs for other declining species of concern, such as birds, bats, and butterflies. Second, the steering committee drafted a prospectus that will delineate activities being conducted by relevant federal agencies with responsibilities for surveying species of concern, including plans to coordinate activities and outline individual roles and responsibilities towards facilitating a national monitoring plan. According to the senior official, the committee worked with USDA officials to ask other federal agencies associated with the Pollinator Task Force to summarize their current and future activities in support of monitoring native bee populations. The committee completed its report entitled The Current State of Federal Agency Coordination in Monitoring Native Bee Health in January 2019. Third, the steering committee held a "Scientists' Summit" in April 2018 at the National Conservation Training Center. The purpose was to obtain scientific expert opinion regarding (1) why a native bee monitoring strategy is needed; (2) what such a monitoring strategy would measure and be used for; (3) standard minimum protocols that would improve data quality and sharing; and (4) databases that could be used to house data from a monitoring strategy. Participants included university and governmental experts on bees, statisticians, modelers and ecologists, and conservation biologists assessing other species in decline. Workshop discussion leaders subsequently drafted for publication in a scientific journal a whitepaper with recommendations on a U.S. national native bee monitoring strategy. However, as of October 2019, according to senior USDA officials, the white paper had not yet been accepted for publication. We support the agencies' efforts to date to implement the recommendation. However, we believe that the agencies must take additional steps to improve the effectiveness of federal efforts to monitor wild, native bee populations and will continue to monitor their actions. In 2020, according to a senior USDA official, a National Native Bee Monitoring Research Coordination Network is being formed to address GAO's recommendation to develop a federal monitoring plan for wild, native bees, with the project expected to begin in spring 2020. Some USDA officials told us that without a team to coordinate a monitoring plan, individual agency efforts may be ineffective in providing the needed information in trends on wild, native bees in the United States. The project is scheduled to be completed in 3 years.
GAO-15-356, Mar 18, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of May 2020, Congress has not acted on this matter.
GAO-15-28, Oct 29, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, a FEMA official stated that FEMA intends to implement the recommendation in full eventually, but it is unlikely that it will happen as a cohesive effort in 2020, given other ongoing flood insurance reforms. As of August 2020, the status of this recommendation remains unchanged.
GAO-12-256, Mar 13, 2012
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not taken action to implement this matter.