Recommendation: The Council should further clarify and document its roles and responsibilities with regard to USICH matters requiring the Council's approval, the role of the Council Chair, and actions within the Executive Director's delegated authority. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: United States Interagency Council on Homelessness
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: HUD's Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs should conduct quality assurance checks on the PIT count methodology data it requires CoCs to submit and take actions as appropriate to ensure that HUD's standards for conducting valid and reliable PIT counts are met. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: HUD's Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs should provide more detailed instructions on using probability sampling techniques to complete the PIT count, such as by updating its Point-in-Time Count Methodology Guide to instruct CoCs on reporting measures of error and bias in PIT count results. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: HUD's Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs should assess and enhance the usefulness of its assistance to CoCs' data collection efforts. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should provide additional information, such as best practices, about how VA medical centers and service providers participating in Coordinated Entry can collaborate with local partners on key activities (for example, making referrals and sharing data) and ensure that this information and other resources are accessible to VA medical center staff and service providers. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for DOL's Veterans' Employment and Training Service should document its data quality validation processes for performance data for the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program and disseminate these processes to service providers. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: VA's Under Secretary for Health should clearly communicate with local VA staff and service providers about how it measures performance and how to obtain and provide feedback about performance measures. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
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 Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, provide updated guidance for the oversight of privatized military housing, to include oversight objectives for each service to monitor the physical condition of privatized homes over the remaining duration of the ground leases. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD (S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance requiring the military departments to monitor work order completion for housing privatized under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative based on a combination of resident input, timeliness of work order completion, and number of repeat work orders for the same repair. The guidance also required increased tracking of MHPI project work orders by installation staff. Moving forward, the ASD(S) plans to issue quarterly program review guidance that establishes oversight objectives for the military departments to monitor the physical condition of MHPI housing over the duration of their project ground leases, formalizing the requirement that the data be monitored by the Chief Housing Officer. DOD expects this to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should take steps, in collaboration with the Army's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 2

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Secretary of the Army has taken several steps toward addressing this recommendation. For example, the Army published the Portfolio and Asset Management Handbook creating a multi-tiered assessment approach of performance metrics to measure the health of each privatized home through inspection, assessment, satisfaction, and feedback. The Army and the private housing partners revised the Incentive Fee Performance Management Plan, placing increased emphasis on resident satisfaction and work order/maintenance management. The Army also put Commanders in charge, ensuring Army leadership at every Army installation is tracking housing quality and safety. In late 2020, the Army plans to review and evaluate these actions and make a determination by 31 Jan 2021 if any changes or revisions are needed to best implement the recommendation. As such, we will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Air Force should take steps, in collaboration with the Air Force's private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 3)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Air Force is engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the Air Force tasked each of the Military Housing Offices to inspect all move-in, move-out, and change of occupancy maintenance events and all emergency, urgent, and life, health, and safety work orders, which is outlined in Air Force guidance. The Air Force is also engaging in several ongoing actions. In response to a memo to the military departments to provide consistency of performance incentive fees, the Air Force was negotiating with the privatized housing project owners to update performance incentive fee metrics in accordance with ASD directed categories and weightings. As of August 2020, agreements had been finalized with 2 partners and work was ongoing with the remaining partners. In addition, the Air Force was working with the project owners to deploy Satisfacts, a survey tool to independently measure resident satisfaction with projects' work order performance, across all Air Force projects with an expected completion by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of these recommendations.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should take steps, in collaboration with the Navy and Marine Corps' private housing partners, to review the indicators underlying the privatized housing project performance metrics to ensure they provide an accurate reflection of the condition and quality of the homes. (Recommendation 4)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy and Marine Corps are engaging in several steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, the Navy and Marine Corps have developed a centralized electronic data warehouse, which receives data from privatized housing partner maintenance systems to display work order and survey performance dashboards. By February 2021, the Navy expects to complete the development of metrics displayed by the data warehouse to include key service call performance metrics and resident feedback data. The Navy and Marine Corps are also developing a web-based monitoring matrix tool housing officials can use to evaluate the performance of privatized housing partners. The tool is intended to provide improved tracking capabilities and improved accessibility to information, thus providing more consistent oversight and improved advocacy service members and their families. The Navy is also working to hire 247 additional Navy and Marine Corps housing staff to review and analyze private partner provided recurring maintenance and customer satisfaction reports in an effort to strengthen oversight and monitoring, with an estimated completion of September 2020. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor the status of these and other efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments and private housing partners, establish minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for work order data collection for comparability across installations and projects and to track trends over time. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: e Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD stated that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, plans to issue a policy directing the military departments to establish, to the maximum extent practical, minimum data requirements and consistent terminology and practices for MHPI housing unit work order collection to aid in comparability across installations and projects, and for tracking trends over time. However, DOD noted that the department cannot mandate changes to existing MHPI project legal documents. DOD estimates that this effort will be completed by December 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment require the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by the private housing partners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)), as the Chief Housing Officer, issued guidance directing the military departments to exercise proper oversight to ensure Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) projects perform in accordance with legal agreements, to include due diligence in monitoring and auditing project maintenance records and other project performance data. The guidance also required military departments to review their entire portfolios of MHPI projects to ensure accurate and appropriate work order management processes. In response to the new guidance, DOD noted that the military departments put in place appropriate oversight measures and undertook the required reviews, though the investigations of project business practices were ongoing in some cases. As another step, the ASD(S) plans to issue guidance directing the military departments to establish a process to validate data collected by their respective MHPI Project Owners to better ensure the reliability and validity of work order data and to allow for more effective use of these data for monitoring and tracking purposes. DOD expects this to be completed by the end of September 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, develop a process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data from the military departments to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation based on the fact that the draft report listed the incorrect office as the source for addressing the deficiency, but subsequently changed its response to concur after the recommendation was directed to the appropriate office in the final report. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) plans to issue guidance establishing a department-wide process for collecting and calculating resident satisfaction data to ensure that the data are compiled and calculated in a standardized and accurate way effective with the survey collection effort in Fiscal Year 2021. The department expects this effort to be completed by October 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment provides additional explanation of the data collected and reported in future reports to Congress, such as explaining the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data, among other things. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) would provide additional explanation of the MHPI resident satisfaction data collected and reported in future annual Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) reports to Congress, effective with the annual report covering fiscal year 2019. DOD noted that the additional information will include, among other things, an explanation of the limitations of available survey data, how resident satisfaction was calculated, and reasons for any missing data. As of August 2020, the annual MHPI report covering fiscal year 2018 was in final coordination and the department noted that the report would addresses a vast majority, but not all, of the requirements identified in our recommendation. DOD noted that the additional information would be provided in the next annual MHPI report. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Army should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Army housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Army housing office officials. (Recommendation 9)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its response, DOD noted that the Army developed a "Plain Language" briefing as required by the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that included the Army Housing Office's roles, responsibilities, location, and contact information at each privatized housing project site. DOD noted that the intent of the briefing was to ensure that all residents were aware of their ability to directly contact Army Housing Office and/or the Garrison Commanders. DOD stated that the briefing was disseminated to all of the Military Housing Offices, who are using it in newcomer briefings, and stated that the briefing would be provided to all current residents of privatized military housing, but that measure would not be tracked due to attrition. In addition, DOD noted that Headquarters, Department of the Army was tasking Army Materiel Command to develop a more detailed plan to communicate to residents the difference between the Army Housing Office and the private housing partner. The Army's intent is to not only capture residents upon their arrival at an installation, but making the services of the MHO known over the duration of a resident's time on at installation. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Navy should develop and implement a plan to clearly and systematically communicate to residents the difference between the military housing office and the private partner. At a minimum, these plans should include the Navy housing office's roles, responsibilities, locations, and contact information and should ensure that all residents are aware that they can directly contact Navy housing office officials. (Recommendation 11)

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

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Navy has taken various steps to address this recommendation, with additional steps planned. For example, the Navy has ensured that each installation has a specific issue resolution process description marketing flyer available, both in hard copy and on the public housing websites, with a reminder that residents can contact both the privatized housing property manager and the Navy housing office with any issues. Moreover, every housing unit has been provided with a refrigerator magnet reminding residents that they can and should contact the Navy housing office if they have any issues with their home. In addition, the Navy and Marine Corps have established a requirement to contact each privatized housing resident not later than 15 days after move-in and again 60 days after move-in to provide an opportunity to request assistance and remind them of available support. Moving forward, the Navy has an ongoing effort to require private housing companies to market the same messaging as the service issue resolution processes for the MHOs that they support, for consistent advocacy messaging to the tenants. The information will be added to PPV partner websites, printed material and resident handbooks. The Navy also plans to use its annual survey to tracks resident satisfaction and awareness of the Navy's issue resolution process, with expected completion by October 2020. In addition, the Marine Corps has identified a near-term initiative to procure name tags for all MHO employees to wear, identifying themselves as distinct and separate from privatized housing property management company, which will be standardized across all USMC installations. The Marine Corps also plans to develop a standard welcome aboard package to include magnets and other items with key point of contact information. The Marine Corps expects these efforts to be completed by the end of September 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, in collaboration with the military departments, assess the risks of proposed initiatives aimed at improving the privatized military housing program on the financial viability of the projects. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In its August 2020 response, DOD noted that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, as the Chief Housing Officer, planned to issue a policy establishing the assessment of Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) project financial viability as part of quarterly program reviews as a long-term requirement. The department noted that the program review data would be augmented by input from the MHPI companies, who are assessing the likely impact of proposed initiatives in conjunction with their third party lenders. The department expected this effort to be completed by December 2020. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should define and document roles and responsibilities for identifying opportunities to promote more efficient shared service usage through business process analyses, including defining roles for monitoring and implementing actions recommended because of these analyses. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will more specifically define who is responsible for identifying and implementing opportunities for achieving efficiencies with service usage, including roles for the business process analyses the Working Capital Fund division conducts from time to time. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD, in conjunction with OCFO, should ensure that the results of the WCF Division's business process analyses are assessed to better understand how these analyses contribute to the WCF's established goal to support the efficient delivery of enterprise goods and services. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and will add the results of the Working Capital Fund division's business process analyses as a performance metric to its Working Capital Fund performance scorecard. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should ensure that the WCF Committee conducts periodic reviews of WCF business lines, as authorized in the WCF Committee Charter, to ensure effective management, strong performance, and customer satisfaction. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of the Secretary
Status: Open

Comments: In a letter dated May 19 2020, HUD's Chief Financial Officer stated that HUD concurred with this recommendation and is in the process of implementing this recommendation. According to the letter, reviews of Working Capital Fund business lines are conducted as a part of regular Working Capital Fund Committee meeting discussions. However, the Committee plans to hold formal review sessions dedicated to reviewing the business lines. HUD expects to complete this action by December 31, 2020. When we can confirm what actions HUD has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of GSA should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy (1) to incorporate into its guidance approaches or practices that agencies could use to assess utilization of and the ongoing need for property—approaches such as recommendations for periodic justifications, data analytics, and utilization reviews—and (2) to develop a plan and timelines for communicating the guidance to agencies government-wide. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: General Services Administration: Office of the Administrator
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2020, GSA indicated in its 180-day letter that it had published on its website draft guidance in response to the Federal Personal Property Management Act of 2018. In addition, GSA identified several actions it planned to take in the coming months, such as publishing a comprehensive plan and timelines to address GAO's recommendation, publishing a request for information in the Federal Register to seek comments and suggestions, and engaging additional subject matter experts and related associations and standards group to improve upon the draft guidance. GAO will continue to monitor GSA's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The SEC Chair should direct the Directors of the Division of Corporation Finance, Division of Enforcement, Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, and Office of Credit Ratings to develop written policies and processes to systematically assess the effectiveness of staff procedures (procedures applicable to staff who perform examinations of registered entities, enforcement investigations, and reviews of corporate financial securities filings). Examples of elements SEC could include in the policies and processes are the steps necessary to conduct such assessments, including time frames in which the assessments should be performed and reviewed; assignment of responsibilities related to the assessments; requirements for documenting assessments; and steps for staff to take to mitigate and report deficiencies identified as a result of the assessments. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, SEC updated its Reference Guide for Compliance with Section 961 of the Dodd-Frank Act to require the Division of Corporation Finance, Division of Enforcement, Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, and Office of Credit Ratings to develop and maintain written policies and processes for conducting systematic assessments of the effectiveness of procedures applicable to the staff who perform examinations of registered entities, enforcement investigations, and reviews of corporate financial securities filings. The added requirement for each division and office to develop policies and processes is a positive step toward addressing this recommendation. However, until the divisions and offices establish such policies and processes, this recommendation remains open. SEC staff stated that the divisions and offices are currently working on developing their individual frameworks for assessing staff procedures and will likely be done by the end of fiscal year 2020. We will continue to monitor these efforts.

Recommendation: The Director of the Division of Corporation Finance should ensure that all internal supervisory controls include documentation requirements, detailed procedures, identified follow-up actions, implementation time frames, and assignment of control execution responsibility, in accordance with SEC guidance and federal internal control standards for implementing control activities through documented policies. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission: Division of Corporation Finance
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, SEC staff said that the Division of Corporation Finance is working to address this recommendation through its normal Risk and Control Matrix review process. Staff said that SEC would have an update for GAO in the Fall 2020. We will update the status of the recommendation when the Division of Corporation Finance provides documentation showing the implementation of responsive actions.

Recommendation: The Director of the Division of Enforcement should ensure that all internal supervisory controls include documentation requirements, detailed procedures, identified follow-up actions, implementation time frames, and assignment of control execution responsibility, in accordance with SEC guidance and federal internal control standards for implementing control activities through documented policies. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission: Division of Enforcement
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, SEC staff said that the Division of Enforcement is working to address this recommendation through its normal Risk and Control Matrix review process. Staff said that SEC would have an update for GAO in the Fall 2020. We will update the status of the recommendation when the Division of Enforcement provides documentation showing the implementation of responsive actions.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations should ensure that all internal supervisory controls include documentation requirements, detailed procedures, identified follow-up actions, implementation time frames, and assignment of control execution responsibility, in accordance with SEC guidance and federal internal control standards for implementing control activities through documented policies. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission: Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, SEC staff said that the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations is working to address this recommendation through its normal Risk and Control Matrix review process. Staff said that SEC would have an update for GAO in the Fall 2020. We will update the status of the recommendation when the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations provides documentation showing the implementation of responsive actions.

Recommendation: The Director of the Office of Credit Ratings should ensure that all internal supervisory controls include documentation requirements, detailed procedures, identified follow-up actions, implementation time frames, and assignment of control execution responsibility, in accordance with SEC guidance and federal internal control standards for implementing control activities through documented policies. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission: Office of Credit Ratings
Status: Open

Comments: As of May 2020, SEC staff said that the Office of Credit Ratings is working to address this recommendation through its normal Risk and Control Matrix review process. Staff said that SEC would have an update for GAO in the Fall 2020. We will update the status of the recommendation when the Office of Credit Ratings provides documentation showing the implementation of responsive actions.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should develop and implement a plan with GSA that outlines the actions needed to fully recover the TMF Program Management Office's operating expenses with administrative fee collection in a timely manner. (Recommendation 1)

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of OMB should work with GSA to clarify the requirement in the TMF guidance that agencies follow the cost estimating process outlined in Circular A-11 (that references GAO's cost estimating guidance discussed in this report), when developing the proposal cost estimate. (Recommendation 2)

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

Comments: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor OMB's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of General Services should develop and implement a plan with OMB that outlines the actions needed to fully recover the TMF Program Management Office's operating expenses with administrative fee collection in a timely manner. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of General Services should work with OMB to clarify the requirement in the TMF guidance that agencies follow the cost estimating process outlined in Circular A-11 (that references GAO's cost estimating guidance discussed in this report), when developing the proposal cost estimate. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of General Services should develop detailed guidance for completing the Technology Modernization Fund project cost estimate template, including information on the data elements and the fields required to be completed, in order to help ensure the accuracy and completeness of the provided information. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In comments on our report, the General Services Administration (GSA) concurred with our recommendation but has not yet taken any actions to implement our recommendation. We will continue to monitor GSA's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of FTA to identify and develop controls, such as methods to more easily identify transit expenses within applications submitted by larger entities, such as a city, county, or state government, to address the risk of duplicate funding. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation
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 Homeland Security should direct the Administrator of FEMA to identify and develop controls, such as methods to more easily identify transit expenses within applications submitted by larger entities such as a city, county, or state government, to address the risk of duplicate funding. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: We recommend that the FEMA Administrator comprehensively assess operations to identify any additional updates to its management controls—such as policies, procedures, or training—that could enhance future response and recovery from large-scale and severe wildfires. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Status: Open

Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation. On 7/28/2020, FEMA provided updates on three separate efforts to help states carry out sheltering and housing missions and a larger effort to standardize its continuous improvement process. FEMA officials said they have begun deploying sheltering and housing field teams to disaster affected areas, as necessary, to develop strategies. Officials described efforts to update direct housing guidance and expect to incorporate results of a JFO-level review into a new version (3) of the guidance by June 2021. Officials also described efforts to administer a pilot program for state-administered direct housing grants for temporary housing and permanent construction authorized by the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (pilot authority expires October 2020). FEMA expected the grant program would help states, territories, and tribes build capacity and capability to administer disaster housing missions in a manner that proactively addresses hazards (including wildfires) that are common within a particular jurisdiction. According to officials, FEMA developed guidance for this effort in November 2019 and shared the draft with OMB for interagency review in December 2019. Upon issuance of the guidance, FEMA planned to begin assisting with developing housing strategies and administrative plans required to qualify for a grant, following a presidentially-declared major disaster declaration. (FEMA did not provide an update on the status of this state administered housing mission in the July 2020 update.) FEMA officials also reported that FEMA has finalized National Collection Analysis Priorities (NCAP) to guide disaster assessment efforts across all FEMA Regions by establishing focus areas for continuous Improvement activities. The priorities are to be regularly reviewed by all Associate Administrators, directing continuous improvement analysts at Headquarters and in the Regions to examine select issues at all disaster operations and report findings on a quarterly basis. FEMA is then to brief senior leadership quarterly (which officials said happened in December 2019 and March 2020). Officials also said they provided a 2019 summary of findings highlighting the most common findings across disasters for senior leader consideration. FEMA did not specify whether any of these efforts resulted in updates to policy, procedures, or training specific to wildfire disasters. Note: in its management letter response to the report, FEMA reported plans for the development of a project to analyze and improve capabilities and identify areas of innovation in response to a wildfire disaster. Neither of its two updates to date (4/2020 and 7/2020) have referenced this project. To respond to this recommendation, DHS will need to demonstrate that it has completed a broad-based review of management controls--policies, procedures, and training--and taken action to ensure than any changes necessary to ensure the applicability of those controls to response and recovery for large-scale and severe wildfires.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FHA should clearly define DASP objectives and develop measurable targets for all program objectives. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open

Comments: HUD issued Standard Operating Procedures for these sales on October 17, 2019. We will continue to follow up with the agency on how it defines the DASP objectives and its development of measurable targets for the program objectives.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FHA should use performance data to develop criteria for when to hold DASP sales. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open

Comments: HUD issued a Standard Operating Procedure for these sales on October 17, 2019. However, HUD has not yet developed criteria for when to hold a DASP sale based on performance criteria.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FHA should monitor individual purchasers' compliance with FHA's modification requirements and ensure the purchasers submit the data needed to evaluate the sustainability of modifications. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open

Comments: HUD issued s Standard Operating Procedure for these sales on October 17, 2019. However, HUD has not yet addressed purchasers' compliance with FHA's modification requirements to ensure that purchasers submit the data needed to evaluate the sustainability of modifications. We will continue to follow up on the agency's response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Commissioner of FHA should develop a methodology to assess the range of possible outcomes for loans when setting DASP reserve prices. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development: Federal Housing Administration
Status: Open

Comments: HUD issued a Standard Operating Procedure for these sales on October, 17, 2019. The procedures address reserve pricing but we will continue to follow up with the agency on any plans to develop a methodology to assess the range of possible outcomes when setting the reserve prices.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should ensure that the Director of the Census Bureau develops and obtains management approval of mitigation and contingency plans for all risks that require them. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of May 2020, the Bureau's program risk registers included a clear indication of the status of mitigation plans; however, the Bureau's portfolio risk register did not, without which there was not a clear indication of which portfolio risk mitigation plans had been approved by management. As of August 2020, the Bureau's portfolio risk register also included a clear indication of mitigation plan status. At that time, we reviewed the Bureau's program and portfolio risk registers to determine whether the Bureau had developed and obtained management approval of mitigation and contingency plans for all risks that required them. We found six risks that met the Bureau's requirements for a contingency plan but did not have an approved contingency plan in place. We notified the Bureau and asked them to ensure that approved mitigation and contingency plans were in place for all risks that required them. We will continue to monitor the Bureau's actions to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Commerce should ensure that the Director of the Census Bureau updates the Bureau's decennial risk management plan to require that risk mitigation and contingency plans, including the risk register descriptions and separate plans, have the seven key attributes for helping to ensure they contain the information needed to manage risk. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, the Bureau updated its decennial risk management plan and, in doing so, implemented this recommendation for six of the seven key attributes we identified. The missing attribute was monitoring plans: a description in each mitigation and contingency plan of how the agency will monitor the risk response-with performance measures and milestones, where appropriate-to help track whether the plan is working as intended. According to Bureau officials, rather than requiring this attribute, they instead noted it as a lesson learned for the 2030 Census and documented it in their knowledge management tool. In August 2020, we requested documentation of these actions. Once received, we will assess whether these actions suffice to close the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should conduct a comprehensive review of the physical inspection process. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should resume calculating the sampling error associated with the physical inspection score for each property, identify what changes may be needed for HUD to use sampling error results, and consider those results when determining whether more frequent inspections or enforcement actions are needed. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should develop comprehensive and organized documentation of REAC's sampling methodology and develop a process to ensure that documentation is maintained going forward. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should track on a routine basis whether REAC is conducting inspections of multifamily housing properties in accordance with federal guidelines for scheduling and coordinate with the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Multifamily Housing to minimize the number of properties that can cancel or reschedule their physical inspections. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should design and implement an evaluation plan to assess the effectiveness of the Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity pilot in ensuring timely and quality inspections for properties in hard-to-staff geographic areas. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Multifamily Housing and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should expedite implementation of the recommendations from the Rapid Response and Resolution Team. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should follow through on REAC's plan to create a process to verify candidate qualifications for contract inspectors—for example, by calling references and requesting documentation from candidates that supports their completion of 250 residential or commercial inspections. The plan should also consider whether certain types of inspections—such as Federal Emergency Management Agency inspections and U.S. Army Office of Housing inspections—satisfy REAC's requirements. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should develop a process to evaluate the effectiveness of REAC's training program—for example, by reviewing the results of tests or soliciting participant feedback. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should revise training for quality assurance inspectors to better reflect their job duties. Revised training should be documented, include expanded subject matter training, and address skills that may not be included in training for contract inspectors—for example, instructing contract inspector candidate trainings and coaching and providing feedback. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should develop continuing education requirements for contract and quality assurance inspectors. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should develop and implement a plan for meeting REAC's management targets for the timeliness and frequency of collaborative quality assurance reviews and quality control inspections. The plan should include consideration of resources of and demands on quality assurance inspectors, including the effect of natural disasters and other special assignments. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should ensure that Quality Control's policies and procedures for overseeing quality assurance inspectors are implemented. (Recommendation 12)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Real Estate Assessment Center should review quality assurance inspector performance standards and revise them to better reflect the skills and supporting behaviors that quality assurance inspectors need to effectively contribute to REAC's mission. (Recommendation 13)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Multifamily Housing should report to Congress on why the agency has not complied with the 2017 and 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Acts requirement to issue notices to properties when the REAC score is 60 or below, including seeking any statutory flexibilities or exceptions believed appropriate. (Recommendation 14)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions should annually collect and evaluate HFAs' risk assessments, which include HFAs' risk levels. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: According to Treasury, as of March 2019, the agency had requested that each Housing Finance Agency evaluate its controls and update its Risk and Control Matrix to ensure that it reflects the risk assessment level of each control that has been assessed and to provide this information to Treasury. Treasury stated that it would evaluate the risk assessments to verify that the appropriate risk level had been assessed and that proper segregation of duties exists. As of August 2020, Treasury had not demonstrated that it had annually collected or evaluated HFA's risk assessments.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office should ensure that the office more fully documents its processes for scoring and awarding lead grants and its rationale for award decisions. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD's Lead Office had taken steps to implement this recommendation. For example, they updated the 2018 Application Review Guide with some criteria that could be used to score grant applications. However, the 2019 Application Review Guide did not contain similar criteria. To fully implement this recommendation, the agency will need to follow through and adopt criteria to score grant applications on a consistent basis.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office should ensure that the office periodically evaluates its processes for scoring and awarding lead grants. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD's Lead Office began to take steps to implement this recommendation. For example, in the upcoming weeks and months, the Lead Office staff plan to meet to review the most recent round of grant applications and determine whether any changes need to be made to the scoring criteria for future years. To fully implement this recommendation, HUD's Lead Office staff will need to provide evidence the office is periodically evaluating and changing processes to score and award grants, as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office and the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) should collaborate to establish a plan to mitigate and address risks within HUD's lead paint compliance monitoring processes. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us the agency had taken steps to implement the recommendation, including requiring PHAs to submit appropriate documentation regarding public housing units' compliance with lead paint regulations and updating an internal checklist for on-site compliance reviews that HUD staff conduct. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in response to our recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of HUD's Lead Office and the Assistant Secretary for PIH should collaborate to develop and document procedures to ensure that HUD staff take consistent and timely steps to address issues of public housing agency noncompliance with lead paint regulations. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us procedures were in draft form and under internal review and were not expected to be finalized until spring 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should request authority from Congress to amend the inspection standard to identify lead paint hazards in the Housing Choice Voucher program as indicated by analysis of health effects for children, the impact on landlord participation in the program, and other relevant factors. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In response to this recommendation, HUD's fiscal year 2021 budget justification requested funds to test an alternative lead paint testing method in HUD's Housing Choice Voucher program. To fully implement our recommendation, HUD needs to continue to take steps to analyze potential effects of alternative lead paint testing methods, and use the results to inform its decisions about requesting new authority from Congress.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office should develop performance goals and measures to cover the full range of HUD's lead efforts, including its efforts to ensure that housing units in its rental assistance programs are lead-safe. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, HUD officials told us they still were exploring whether current data systems could be used to count the number of lead-safe housing units in HUD's rental assistance programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's effort to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office, in conjunction with PD&R, should finalize plans and develop a time frame for evaluating the effectiveness of the Lead Safe Housing and Lead Disclosure Rules, including an evaluation of the long-term cost effectiveness of the lead remediation methods required by the Lead Safe Housing Rule. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, HUD officials told us they planned to use data from the forthcoming update to the American Healthy Homes Survey to better estimate the prevalence of lead paint hazards in federally assisted housing which would provide an indication of the effectiveness of the lead paint rules. However, officials told us the findings from the updated survey likely would not be available until summer 2020.

Recommendation: The Director of the Lead Office should complete statutory reporting requirements, including but not limited to its efforts to make housing lead-safe through its lead grant programs and rental-assistance programs, and make the report publicly available. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In November 2019, HUD officials told us they planned to issue a report to Congress on the agency's lead efforts in early 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment revises its guidance on privatized military housing to include a requirement that the military departments incorporate measures of future sustainment into their assessments of privatized housing projects. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report. In its response, the department stated that it was working with the military departments to determine appropriate measures of future sustainment and would revise its guidance to require the military departments to incorporate measures of future sustainment into their assessments of privatized housing projects. In May 2019, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment stated that DOD anticipates being able to issue this guidance sometime in calendar year 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment takes steps to resume issuing required reports to Congress on the financial condition of privatized housing in a timely manner. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report and stated that it was working to further streamline the reporting format and data collection process to ensure more timely reporting to Congress. Subsequently, in September 2018 DOD issued its report to Congress on the financial condition of privatized housing covering fiscal years 2015 and 2016, and in May 2019 DOD issued the report covering fiscal year 2017. An official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment noted in May 2019 that the next report will cover updated reporting requirements from the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019. The official said that DOD was in the process of reviewing its schedule to determine when it will be able to submit the report covering fiscal year 2018, with the expectation that the submission will be made in December 2019 or no later than March 2020. The official added that collection, reconciliation, and coordination of the information in the report remains the biggest challenge to timely submittal, as well as other privatized housing-related work requirements. Because it is unclear whether future reports reflecting the updated reporting requirements will be submitted in a timely manner, we will continue to monitor DOD's response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment reports financial information on future sustainment of each privatized housing project in its reports to Congress. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report and stated that it would ensure that financial information on future sustainment of each privatized housing project would be included in the report to Congress on privatized housing covering fiscal year 2017. However, the report covering fiscal year 2017 was issued in May 2019 and did not include financial information on the future sustainment of each privatized housing project. We will continue to monitor any actions DOD takes to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment provides guidance directing the military departments to assess the significance of the specific risks to individual privatized housing projects resulting from the reductions in the basic allowance for housing and identify courses of action to respond to any risks based on their significance. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report. In its response, the department stated that it would issue guidance to the military departments to annually report on their assessment of the specific risk of changes in the basic allowance for housing to individual privatized housing projects and identify any courses of action to respond to the risks based on their significance. In May 2019, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment stated that DOD anticipates being able to issue this guidance sometime in calendar year 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment finalizes guidance in a timely manner that clearly defines the circumstances in which the military departments should provide notification of project changes and which types of project changes require prior notification or prior approval. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report. In its response, the department stated that DOD has coordinated draft guidance with the military departments which it expected to issue in fiscal year 2018. However, in May 2019, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment stated that the guidance has been delayed due to other pressing requirements and DOD now anticipates being able to issue this guidance sometime in calendar year 2019.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment revises its guidance on privatized military housing to require the military departments to define their risk tolerances regarding the future sustainability of their privatized housing projects. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its response to our report. In its response, the department stated that it would revise its privatized housing guidance to require the military departments to define their risk tolerances regarding future sustainability of privatized housing projects. In May 2019, an official from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment stated that DOD anticipates being able to issue this guidance sometime in calendar year 2019.

Recommendation: HUD's Assistant Secretary for Housing should improve the accuracy of RAD leverage metrics--such as better selecting inputs to the leverage ratio calculation and clearly identifying what the leverage ratio measures--and calculate a private-sector leverage ratio. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: This recommendation remains open. HUD has described an ongoing evaluation of its leverage metrics. We will continue to review HUD's progress and post updates as appropriate.

Recommendation: HUD's Assistant Secretary for Housing should determine how it can use available program-wide data from public housing and Section 8 databases, in addition to resident logs, for analysis of the use and enforcement of RAD resident protections. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: This recommendation remains open. HUD plans to develop a methodology to track residents through individual HUD systems such as Public Housing program, RAD and Section 8 program databases. We will continue to review HUD's progress in implementing this recommendation and provide updates as appropriate.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) should complete workforce planning for the MTW demonstration to help ensure that PIH has sufficient staff with appropriate skills and competencies to manage an expanded demonstration, including reviewing reports and carrying out compliance reviews in a timely manner. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that PIH was continuing its workforce planning efforts, including assessing the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to implement the MTW expansion.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should more fully document the process for annually assessing compliance with the five demonstration requirements. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they had drafted written protocols for assessing compliance with the five demonstration requirements that would be finalized by May 2019.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should develop and implement a process to track how MTW demonstration funds are being used for other allowable activities, including local, nontraditional activities. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they were still determining the most cost effective way to track MTW demonstration funds being used for local, nontraditional activities.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should identify and implement changes to PIC to capture household data for households served through local, nontraditional activities. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that HUD planned to add fields for capturing data on households served through local, nontraditional activities to the next generation of PIC for expansion MTW agencies, which would be implemented in the summer of 2020. Officials said HUD is currently in the process of determining how the next generation of PIC will be rolled out for existing MTW agencies.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should develop and implement a process to monitor MTW agencies' reserves. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they planned to monitor existing MTW agencies' Housing Choice Voucher reserves by revising their annual reporting requirements to require them to report their plans for and use of reserves.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should clarify HUD's rent-reform definition for the MTW demonstration as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of rent-reform, work-requirement, and time-limit policies on tenants. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that PIH would clarify the definition of rent reform for existing MTW agencies in a document responding to frequently asked questions on the annual reporting requirements and for expansion agencies in the operations notice that it was finalizing for the expansion of the MTW program.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should set parameters for HUD's definition of self-sufficiency for the demonstration, either by providing one definition or a range of options from which agencies could choose, as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of rent-reform, work-requirement, and time-limit policies on tenants. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they planned to provide a range of suggested options for defining self-sufficiency in a document responding to frequently asked questions about the annual reporting requirements for MTW agencies.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should revise HUD's guidance to MTW agencies to make it clear which elements are required in impact analyses, annual reevaluations, and hardship policies and the information required for each element as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of rent-reform, work-requirement, and time-limit policies on tenants. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they planned to make it clear which elements are required in impact analyses, annual reevaluations, and hardship policies in the operations notice HUD was finalizing for the expansion of the MTW program. Further, HUD officials stated that the 2016 Appropriations Act that extended the standard agreement for the existing 39 MTW agencies limits HUD's ability to revise its guidance for these agencies to make it clear which elements are required in impact analyses, annual reevaluations, and hardship policies and the information required for each element. However, they stated that guidance related to the hardship policy and annual reevaluations has been updated to include more specific parameters for what an agency must submit to HUD. As we stated in our report, this guidance is set forth outside the standard agreement, which HUD already has revised without changes to the standard agreement. Therefore, we continue to believe that HUD could revise its guidance for the existing agencies to clarify which elements are required for these documents and the information each element should include.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should develop written guidance for existing MTW agencies that requires a hardship policy for public housing time limits and encourages an impact analysis, annual reevaluation, and hardship policy for work-requirement and time-limit policies for public housing and voucher programs as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of these policies on tenants. (Recommendation 9)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they had updated their most recent annual reporting requirements for MTW agencies to require a hardship policy for public housing time limits and that they were working on finalizing guidance to existing MTW agencies encouraging an impact analysis, annual reevaluation, and hardship policy for work-requirement and time-limit policies for public housing and voucher programs.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should require an impact analysis, annual reevaluation, and hardship policy for work-requirement and time-limit policies new MTW agencies adopt for their public housing and voucher programs as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of these policies on tenants. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that the operations notice they were finalizing for the expansion of the MTW program would require an impact analysis, annual reevaluation, and hardship policy for work-requirement and time-limit policies new MTW agencies adopt for their public housing and voucher programs.

Recommendation: The Assistant Secretary for PIH should develop and implement a plan for analyzing the information that agencies report on the effect of rent-reform, work-requirement, and time-limit policies on tenants as part of a framework for monitoring the effect of these policies on tenants. (Recommendation 11)

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In February 2020, HUD officials stated that they planned to develop separate analysis plans for existing and expansion MTW agencies due to differences in the types of performance information HUD can require them to report under their MTW agreements.

Recommendation: Congress should consider amending the National Housing Act to specify the economic conditions the MMI Fund would be expected to withstand without substantial risk of drawing on permanent and indefinite budget authority, and require FHA to specify and comply with a capital ratio consistent with these conditions. In specifying the economic conditions, Congress should take into account FHA's statutory operational goals and role in supporting the mortgage market during periods of economic stress. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congress had not yet acted on this matter for consideration.

Recommendation: To ensure that the financial benefits of EULs that the Department of Veterans' Affairs reports in its annual Consideration Report on the EUL program are transparent and reliable, the Secretary should revise its Enhanced-Use Leasing Post Transaction Handbook (Handbook 7454) and specify that VA will: (1) Report consistently the enhanced services benefits from its EULs separately from other financial benefits that directly affect VA's budget, and (2) Include an explanation in its reporting on estimated EUL enhanced services that its estimates may not adequately capture all benefits of the EUL project and that certain costs associated with providing such benefits that are incurred by parties outside VA are not included in the analysis.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, VA stated that the handbook was out for concurrences and received significant feedback/edits. VA is currently working through those edits and plans on submitting the revised version for internal concurrences in the next two weeks. VA said it will follow back up with GAO to provide a status on the handbooks approval and subsequent publishing

Recommendation: To increase the likelihood that its IT investments develop reliable cost estimates, the Secretary of HUD should finalize, and ensure the implementation of, guidance that incorporates the best practices called for in the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2017, HUD reported that the department concurred with the recommendation and noted that the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) intended to establish cost estimation guidance for IT projects within its IT Management Framework Guide, incorporating appropriate best practices from the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide. In March 2019, HUD reported that, with contractor assistance, the department had begun to develop a standard methodology for investment lifecycle cost estimation; however, the methodology had not been fully institutionalized across all investments, and a policy for cost estimation had not been developed. Lacking an updated IT Management Framework and cost estimation policy, OCIO took additional interim action in the most recent budget cycle to reduce cost estimation risk by having the Chief Technology Officer standardize the cost estimates for IT investments. HUD continues to take action intended to address this recommendation; however, OCIO has not yet finalized a cost estimation methodology or the associated policy for IT investments or established a timeframe for implementing cost estimation practices departmentwide.

Recommendation: To reduce uncertainty and provide FHFA sufficient direction for carrying out its responsibilities as conservator of the enterprises, Congress should consider legislation that establishes objectives for the future federal role in housing finance, including the structure of the enterprises, and a transition plan to a reformed housing finance system that enables the enterprises to exit conservatorship.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 16, 2020, Congress has not taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in the department's financial management systems modernization efforts, the Secretary of HUD should direct the Chief Financial Officer to work with the Chief Information Officer in managing subsequent initiatives to define a high-level depiction of the IT systems anticipated in the future state, a description of the operations that must be performed and who must perform them, and an explanation of where and how the operations are to be carried out.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our draft report, HUD neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations, but noted that it planned to improve management practices and IT governance for future modernization efforts. In April 2019, HUD reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer and Office of the Chief Financial Officer had collaborated through an IT technical assessment initiative, identifying four primary financial management modernization initiatives remaining from the New Core Program. In July 2020, HUD officials, including the Deputy Chief Financial Officer, provided a roadmap that defined a high-level depiction of the financial management systems anticipated in the future state. However, the department had not yet completed more detailed plans that (1) identify operations that must be performed and who must perform them and (2) explain where and how operations are to be carried out. We will continue to monitor HUD's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in the department's financial management systems modernization efforts, the Secretary of HUD should direct the Chief Financial Officer to work with the Chief Information Officer in managing subsequent initiatives to develop comprehensive plans for scope, schedule and cost.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our draft report, HUD neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations, but noted that it planned to improve management practices and IT governance for future modernization efforts. In April 2019, HUD reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer and Office of the Chief Financial Officer had identified a need to pursue financial management systems modernization. As of July 2020, the department had begun taking action to address this recommendation. Specifically, HUD planned to integrate loan and property management into its current financial management shared service and had begun planning for how to modernize its budget formulation and cost accounting systems. For the budget formulation effort, HUD had developed high-level plans for the scope of the program, planned an implementation schedule, and estimated on the cost for implementation and operating and maintaining the system for two years. We will continue to monitor HUD's efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To address weaknesses in the department's financial management systems modernization efforts, the Secretary of HUD should direct the Chief Financial Officer to work with the Chief Information Officer in managing subsequent initiatives to ensure requirements are fully documented and traceable.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our draft report, HUD neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations, but noted that it planned to improve management practices and IT governance for future modernization efforts. In March 2017, the department reported that the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Information Officer intended to partner on future departmental financial management systems modernization efforts to fully document requirements and trace requirements to the functionality in the modernized system. In April 2019, HUD reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer and Office of the Chief Financial Officer had identified a need to pursue financial management systems modernization in 4 areas previously identified for the New Core program. As of July 2020, HUD was in the early phases of planning for modernization in these areas. According to officials from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the department intended to address this recommendation for budget formulation modernization by developing applicable plans and artifacts for managing requirements from the department's project planning and management framework. However, that effort has not yet started. We intend to continue to follow up on HUD's actions.

Recommendation: The Secretary of HUD should also direct the Deputy Secretary to ensure that the Chief Information Officer takes action to improve IT governance control activities used for monitoring programs and identifying needed corrective actions, and strengthen investment oversight by improving coordination with stakeholders and alignment among IT modernization efforts.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments on our draft report, HUD neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendations, but noted that it planned to improve management practices and IT governance for future modernization efforts. Since 2016, HUD has revised its IT governance boards, which provide oversight of all its IT investments, including financial management initiatives, several times. While the department has not yet completed those improvement efforts, HUD updated its project planning and management framework to tailor requirements and artifacts for different program types. According to an official from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, updates to the requirements for shared services projects incorporated lessons learned from the New Core program. In April 2019, HUD reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer and Office of the Chief Financial Officer had identified a need to pursue financial management systems modernization in 4 areas previously identified for the New Core program. Officials from both offices have described improvements in their coordination and collaboration on efforts to plan for modernization. We intend to continue to follow up on HUD's actions to ensure that planned improvements to governance and oversight mechanisms are effectively implemented and institutionalized.

Recommendation: In order to more fully implement key practices and meet requirements and to better institutionalize standards and practices, the Secretary of HUD should establish a process and schedule for regularly reviewing, revising, and updating HUD's human capital strategic plan, strategic workforce plan, and succession plan.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating human capital, workforce, and succession plans.

Recommendation: In order to more fully implement key practices and meet requirements and to better institutionalize standards and practices, the Secretary of HUD should establish a process and schedule for reviewing and updating policies and procedures to help ensure that policies and procedures for key management functions remain current and complete.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In response to our recommendation, HUD developed an internal management calendar and associated standard operating procedures. The purpose of the management calendar is to document recurring processes of program offices across the agency, assist in planning and managing the agency's deliverables to ensure that critical deadlines are met, and provide information on ongoing reporting requirements occurring across the agency. We will determine whether HUD has fully implemented our recommendation when the agency provides documentation showing how the management calendar is used for updating policies and procedures for key management functions.

Recommendation: To ensure that FHFA has adequate authority to ensure the safety and soundness of the enterprises and to clarify its supervisory role, Congress should consider granting FHFA explicit authority to examine third parties that do business with and play a critical role in the operations of the enterprises.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has not taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To better ensure that taxpayer funds are being used effectively, Congress should consider permanently rescinding any Treasury-deobligated excess MHA balances that Treasury does not move into the Hardest Hit Fund.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: No legislative action identified, as of July 22, 2020. Congress has not yet taken any action to rescind excess MHA balances, as recommended in GAO's March 2016 report. According to Treasury, it took action on July 27, 2018, to deobligate $4.0 billion MHA program funds beyond the $2 billion that it had previously deobligated and transferred to the Troubled Asset Relief Program-funded Hardest Hit Fund in February 2016. As a result of Treasury's deobligated action, Congress now has the opportunity to rescind and use the funds for other priorities.

Recommendation: To help ensure the Bureau focuses its resources on those activities that show promise for substantially reducing enumeration cost, in advance of the 2016 Census Test and later tests, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the Under Secretary of the Economics and Statistics Administration and the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau to, ensure systematic capture of information about fieldwork cases that experience problems by including information in enumerator training about where to record the issues, who to contact, what details to include, and the importance of doing so.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Commerce concurred with this recommendation. The Census Bureau informed us in December 2015 that no later than the end of December 2015, it would document how these matters have been addressed in the enumerator training (or in help screens on their mobile device) planned for the 2016 Census Test, and that it would use results and observations from that test to further refine such information for future tests and for the 2020 Census. The Bureau provided us with related training materials for the 2016 Test, yet we made similar observations during the 2016 test and the 2018 End-to-End test. For the Bureau to be informed on any additional training needs or other operational decisions for 2020, it will need to continue to expand its efforts in collecting information on enumerator-reported problems per our 2015 recommendation. In April 2020, Bureau officials said that it was not likely they would be able to incorporate additional changes for the 2020 Census field operations. With the Bureau's more recent April announcement to further delay field operations due to the Covid-19 outbreak, we are continuing to ask the Bureau if there is opportunity to address this recommendation. To fully implement this recommendation, the Bureau needs to identify what information it finds valuable to have from its enumerators, such as the incidence of specific technical problems with the survey instrument or mobile device and ensure that enumerators and their first-line supervisors are made aware of the importance of recording such information and how to do so.

Recommendation: To enhance the effectiveness of its preparations for conducting a retrospective review of its QM regulations, HUD should develop a plan that identifies the metrics, baselines, and analytical methods to be used. Furthermore, to account for and help mitigate the limitations of existing data and the uncertain availability of enhanced datasets, HUD should include in its plan alternate metrics, baselines, and analytical methods that could be used data were to remain unavailable.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2017, HUD noted that it does not currently collect data on the annual percentage rate (APR) for each loan that would allow for a perfect comparison to the average prime offer rate. According to HUD, its Office of Housing has on its long-term list of systems priorities to collect specific information from the Uniform Closing Data that could be used to conduct such a comparison. However, HUD stated that it has not received adequate funding to meet these systems enhancements. According to HUD, it is considering the feasibility and potential utility of alternative data sources or the use of a proxy in an appropriate methodology. For instance, whether it may be possible to approximate the APR based upon the note rate and information on closing costs that is collected in the current data system, or alternatively, whether the APR could be obtained or approximated through matching Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data for FHA loans. In a September 2020 email, HUD officials stated that HUD has certain unique considerations for review of its own QM rule as compared to the other federal agencies covered in the GAO report. HUD officials explained that HUD's QM rule implemented certain changes intended to conform with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) rule and constituted only a small subset of FHA's overall requirements related to underwriting and loan characteristics. According to HUD officials, HUD's QM rule was intended to make conforming changes to FHA's requirements, as statutorily required, in order to bring them into greater alignment with the new CFPB-promulgated QM rule requirements. They stated that HUD assesses FHA loan performance on an ongoing basis through a variety of mechanisms including the annual audit requirement and monitoring of the overall market and mortgage portfolio. According to the HUD officials, these mechanisms are used to assess the need for adjustments in underwriting criteria and mortgage insurance premiums as well as to assess the health and risks to safety and soundness of the MMIF Fund. HUD officials said that given these considerations, there is no specific stand-alone full evaluation of the HUD QM rule planned at this time.

Recommendation: To help determine the effectiveness of BRAC homeless assistance conveyances, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations to require that conveyance statuses be tracked. These regulatory updates could include requiring DOD to track and share disposal actions with HUD and requiring HUD to track the status following disposal, such as type of assistance received by providers and potential withdrawals by providers.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations to require that conveyance statuses be tracked, which could include requiring DOD to track and share disposal actions with HUD and requiring HUD to track the status following disposal. In a December 2017 follow up, DOD stated that it plans to address our recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. DOD added that it will work closely with the military Departments and HUD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To help determine the effectiveness of BRAC homeless assistance conveyances, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations to require that conveyance statuses be tracked. These regulatory updates could include requiring DOD to track and share disposal actions with HUD and requiring HUD to track the status following disposal, such as type of assistance received by providers and potential withdrawals by providers.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations to require that conveyance statuses be tracked, which could include requiring DOD to track and share disposal actions with HUD and requiring HUD to track the status following disposal. HUD stated that it is willing to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations to track the conveyances of property for homeless assistance, but noted that it will require DOD agreement to do so because the regulations are joint. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include specific guidance that clearly identifies the information that should be provided to homeless assistance providers during tours of on-base property, such as the condition of the property.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include specific guidance that clearly identifies the information that should be provided to homeless assistance providers during tours of on-base property, such as the condition of the property. DOD stated that while it already provides generic information about the property, the LRAs and interested homeless assistance providers can undertake facility assessments following the tours. However, DOD did not provide additional detail or explanation about how it would provide information about the condition of the property or access to it. In a December 2017 follow up, DOD stated that it plans to address our recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. DOD added that it will work closely with the military Departments and HUD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include specific guidance that clearly identifies the information that should be provided to homeless assistance providers during tours of on-base property, such as the condition of the property.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include specific guidance that clearly identifies the information that should be provided to homeless assistance providers during tours of on-base property, such as the condition of the property. HUD stated that it will update its BRAC guidebook, website, and presentations to provide clarifying information for homeless assistance providers regarding what information should be included during tours of on-base property. HUD also noted in its response that this will require DOD and military department agreement to implement and that the provision of information about the condition of on-base property and access to that property is under the purview of the military department. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include information for homeless assistance providers to use for preparing their notices of interest.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include information for homeless assistance providers to use in preparing their notices of interest. In its response, DOD stated that the existing regulatory guidance is adequate for providers' expressions of interest, given that these expressions evolve as the redevelopment planning effort proceeds and they learn more about the property. In a December 2017 follow up, DOD officials stated that they will not take action because they believe this is a community-driven action. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include information for homeless assistance providers to use for preparing their notices of interest.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include information for homeless assistance providers to use in preparing their notices of interest. HUD stated that it will update its BRAC guidebook, website, and presentations to provide clarifying information for homeless assistance providers to use in preparing their notices of interest. HUD also stated that it considered the current regulations and BRAC guidebook sufficient to inform providers as long as LRAs did not place additional requirements, which may create an undue burden for providers. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include guidance for legally binding agreements and clarification on the implications of unsigned agreements.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD partially concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include guidance for legally binding agreements and clarification on the implications of unsigned agreements. DOD did not commit to taking any actions to provide this information and instead noted that any action should ensure that a legally binding agreement does not bind DOD to disposal actions it is unable to carry out. Nothing in the recommendation requires DOD to sign an agreement it cannot carry out. DOD further noted that the purpose of the legally binding agreement is to provide remedies and recourse for the LRA and provider in carrying out an accommodation following property disposal. In a December 2017 follow up, DOD stated that it plans to address our recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. DOD added that it will work closely with the military Departments and HUD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include guidance for legally binding agreements and clarification on the implications of unsigned agreements.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include guidance for legally binding agreements and clarification on the implications of unsigned agreements. HUD stated that it will update its BRAC guidebook, website, and presentations to provide clarifying information for homeless assistance providers to use in preparing legally binding agreements and on the implications of unsigned agreements. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include specific information on legal alternatives to providing on-base property, including acceptable alternative options such as financial assistance or off-base property in lieu of on-base property, information about rules of sale for on-base property conveyed to homeless assistance providers, and under what circumstances it is permissible to sell property for affordable housing alongside the no-cost homeless assistance conveyance.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include specific information on legal alternatives to providing on-base property, including acceptable alternative options such as financial assistance or off-base property in lieu of on-base property, information about rules of sale for on-base property conveyed to homeless assistance providers, and under what circumstances it is permissible to sell property for affordable housing alongside the no-cost homeless assistance conveyance. In its response, DOD stated that providers may only be considered through specific expressions of interest in surplus BRAC property, and these suggested alternatives may only be considered within the context of what is legally permissible given the specific circumstances at each installation. Further, DOD noted in its response that HUD may provide examples of alternatives to on-base property that have been approved to date as part of a local accommodation to offer examples for LRAs and providers. In a December 2017 follow up, DOD officials stated that they will not take action because they believe this is a community-driven action. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To assist homeless assistance providers and LRAs in completing the steps of the BRAC homeless assistance process within required time frames, to provide additional information to reduce unfulfilled expectations about the decisions made in executing the homeless assistance agreements, and to promote a greater dissemination of this information, the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, for each of the following four elements, should update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations; establish information-sharing mechanisms, such as a website or informational pamphlets; or develop templates to include specific information on legal alternatives to providing on-base property, including acceptable alternative options such as financial assistance or off-base property in lieu of on-base property, information about rules of sale for on-base property conveyed to homeless assistance providers, and under what circumstances it is permissible to sell property for affordable housing alongside the no-cost homeless assistance conveyance.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to update the BRAC homeless assistance regulations, establish information-sharing mechanisms, or develop templates to include specific information on legal alternatives to providing on-base property, including acceptable alternative options such as financial assistance or off-base property in lieu of on-base property, information about rules of sale for on-base property conveyed to homeless assistance providers, and under what circumstances it is permissible to sell property for affordable housing alongside the no-cost homeless assistance conveyance. HUD stated that it will update its BRAC guidebook, website, and presentations to clarify that the use of off-base property and financial assistance are acceptable alternate means of homeless assistance accommodation in base redevelopment plans and to include examples of alternatives to on-base property that have been approved to date. HUD also stated that this will require DOD and military department agreement to implement. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To help improve the timeliness of the HUD review process, the Secretary of Housing Urban Development should develop options to address the use of staff resources dedicated to the reviews of bases during a BRAC round, such as assigning temporary headquarters staff or utilizing current field HUD staff.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD generally concurred with the recommendation to develop options to address the use of staff resources dedicated to the reviews of bases during a BRAC round, such as assigning temporary headquarters staff or utilizing current field HUD staff. HUD stated that it temporarily assigned headquarters staff and utilized field office staff during the 2005 round of BRAC. HUD also stated that, in the event of another BRAC round the size of 2005, it would encourage Congress to allocate funding for appropriate temporary staff resources to assist the department in meeting important timelines. In a March 2018 follow up, HUD stated it will address GAO recommendations regarding the BRAC homeless assistance process when Congress provides BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD added it would be premature to make any changes to current implementing policies or regulations which could be impacted by new BRAC authorizing legislation. HUD stated it will work closely with the military departments and DOD staff in the process of revising the implementing regulation. As of May 2019, Congress has not authorized another round of BRAC.

Recommendation: To ensure that HUD fully implements and sustains effective IT governance practices, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the Deputy Secretary and the department's Chief Information Officer to place a high priority and ensure that the executive-level investment review board meets as outlined in its charter, documents criteria for use by the other boards, and distributes its decisions to appropriate stakeholders.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD has not provided information demonstrating that the department has addressed this recommendation. HUD reported that it established a new executive-level investment review board (i.e. the Executive Operations Committee) that replaced the board discussed in our report. The department also provide evidence of the board's initial governance activities, including providing criteria to guide board decision-making in January 2017. However, the board has not continued to meet and act in accordance with its charter. In April 2019, HUD reported that it was updating its governance process and charters and stated an intent to ensure that executive-level decision making is clearly defined including when a decision needs to be made, at what level that decision needs to be made, what criteria should be used, and how that decision will be communicated. HUD has not yet provided evidence that the updated governance process and charter have been finalized and implemented.

Recommendation: To ensure that HUD fully implements and sustains effective IT governance practices, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the Deputy Secretary and the department's Chief Information Officer to place a high priority and fully establish and maintain a complete set of governance policies, establish time frames for establishing policies planned but not yet developed, and update key governance documents to reflect changes made to established practices.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: The department has taken steps to address this recommendation. In 2015, HUD updated its Project Planning and Management policy. Since that time, the department has developed additional policies (e.g., IT risk management policy), revised policies for the IT management framework and Agile development, and reported that it reviewed OCIO's existing policies in September 2018. In October 2018, HUD provided a copy of the draft of the revisions to its IT Management Framework (dated February 2018) and OCIO reported plans to continue developing and maintaining IT policies for each of the framework's elements and to review policies for currency annually on the anniversary date of the policy. As of March 2019, HUD reported that a central repository had been developed to store, track and monitor policy reviews. GAO is seeking additional evidence from the newly implemented policy review process.

Recommendation: To ensure that HUD fully implements and sustains effective IT governance practices, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the Deputy Secretary and the department's Chief Information Officer to place a high priority and fully establish an IT investment selection process that includes (1) articulating how reviews of project proposals are to be conducted; (2) planning how data (including cost estimates) are to be developed and verified and validated; (3) establishing criteria for how cost, schedule, and project risk are to be analyzed; (4) developing procedures for how proposed projects are to be compared to one another in terms of investment size (cost), project longevity (schedule), technical difficulty, project risk, and cost-benefit analysis; and (5) ensuring that final selection decisions made by senior decision makers and governance boards are supported by analysis, consider predefined quantitative measures, and are consistently documented.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: HUD has provided information demonstrating that the department has addressed elements of this recommendation. In 2015, HUD reported that it had begun using a new tool to support its IT selection process. In May 2018, the department provided a demonstration of its HUD PLUS tool, including how it had used the tool to automate its selection process. The officials demonstrated how the tool is being used to review proposed projects. They reported that segment sponsors are responsible for validating data submitted but have not provided evidence that the department has developed guidance for that process. The officials demonstrated how the tool supports analysis of investment costs, schedule, and risk. They also demonstrated how the tool helps the Office of the Chief Information Officer compare investments based on cost and showed how decision makers access information and can perform analysis for all projects in the system. Department officials have not yet provided evidence that HUD has improved each of the areas noted in our recommendation. OCIO reported in April 2019 that it intends to: conduct the selection process on a more frequent basis and allow more time for annual budget considerations, improve performance metrics, and further incorporate cost-benefit analysis. OCIO also reported that it intends to better incorporate its management and oversight of the portfolio into a more formal "re-select" process. OCIO also reported that HUD was updating its governance policies to detail the criteria, data, and process used to select investments and targeting action to close this recommendation in 2019.

Recommendation: To establish an enterprise-wide view of cost savings and operational efficiencies generated by investments and governance processes, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the Deputy Secretary and Chief Information Officer to place a higher priority on identifying governance-related cost savings and efficiencies and establish and institutionalize a process for identifying and tracking comprehensive, high-quality data on savings and efficiencies resulting from IT investments and the IT governance process.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The department has taken steps to address this recommendation. Specifically, in April 2016, HUD provided examples of cost savings that the department had identified by "scrubbing" existing contracts during the budget formulation process, along with copies of a template that it designed and used to help identify such savings. In May 2018, department officials provided a demonstration of the HUD PLUS tool, including screens staff could use to report cost savings and avoidances related to specific projects--although they reported that HUD was not yet using that functionality. In April 2019, OCIO reported that HUD was updating its governance process and charters to ensure that executive-level decision making will be clearly defined. OCIO also reported an intent to implement Technology Business Management to, among other things, improve and expand the tracking of investments. HUD expects these two efforts to facilitate better tracking of the savings and efficiencies resulting from IT decisions. The department has not yet provided evidence that it has established guidance supporting a repeatable process for tracking enterprise-wide IT related cost savings and operational efficiencies, including those related to HUD's governance decisions.

Recommendation: To ensure effective management and modernization of HUD's IT environment, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the department's Chief Information Officer to define the scope, implementation strategy, and schedule of its overall modernization approach, with related goals and measures for effectively overseeing the effort.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In July 2018, the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) reported that the goal of the Chief Technology Officer's technical assessment of HUD's IT environment was to identify gaps and develop an implementation strategy and approach to establish a modernization roadmap. As of March 2020, OCIO reported that it had completed the technical assessment to identify gaps in IT. The department has also taken action to define an overall modernization approach, including the scope, implementation strategy, and schedule for modernizing its IT environment and systems. However, as of March 2020, HUD had not yet established measures for overseeing its modernization efforts.

Recommendation: When such revisions are made, the Director of OMB should work with the Performance Improvement Council to test and implement these provisions.

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

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has not yet taken action to address this recommendation. According to information provided by OMB and PIC staff in June 2015, although OMB revised its guidance as we recommended, it did not work with the PIC to test implementation of these provisions. Instead, they told us that both PIC and OMB staff ensure agencies are implementing these provisions of their guidance when reviewing agency priority goal (APG) quarterly update submissions. However, our analyses of agencies' APG updates since that time has continued to find that implementation of these provisions is mixed. We will continue to monitor progress.

Recommendation: In addition, as OMB works with agencies to enhance Performance.gov to include additional information about APGs, the Director of OMB should ensure that agencies adhere to OMB's guidance for website updates by providing a description of how input from congressional consultations was incorporated into each APG.

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

Comments: As of October 2020, OMB has taken limited actions to address this recommendation. In July 2017, OMB staff said that they planned on highlighting the requirement for congressional consultation as they updated the 2018-2019 APGs, which were first published in February 2018 and were updated quarterly. However, our periodic analyses of Performance.gov showed that neither the updated version of the site, nor the reporting templates for individual APGs, contained a space for providing a description of input from Congress. In its July 2020 guidance, OMB directed agencies to highlight congressional input, if such input was relevant to setting a specific goal, in the APG overview section of the template. We will continue to monitor progress.

Recommendation: In order to demonstrate compliance across the program with the statutory limit on funds that can be used for administration, the Secretary of HUD should direct the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development to develop a process for generating annual reports on compliance across the program, including making any requisite changes to IDIS to better ensure that the agency has complete and analyzable data to support such reporting.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, a HUD official told us that the agency did not have the funding necessary to make any changes to IDIS. According to this official, HUD was willing to create the recommended across-program report, but did not have the information technology funding required to make other, higher-priority changes to IDIS (such as fixing identified defects) or the change GAO recommended.

Recommendation: To better ensure that air ventilation systems in manufactured homes perform as specified and meet the HUD Code, HUD should develop an appropriate method to test and validate the performance of the ventilation system as part of the HUD certification process.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2017, HUD stated that it has not developed a test to validate the performance of the whole-house ventilation specification. HUD reported that the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) did not agree with the testing validation recommendations. As of March 2018, HUD continues to move forward in updating its standards, including a test for whole house ventilation. However, as part of the overall HUD effort to review regulations, HUD officials stated they are currently conducting a review of current and planned federal regulations for manufactured housing with the goal to facilitate the affordability of manufactured housing and to promote durable, safe, and cost effective construction techniques for manufactured homes. As a result, HUD does not anticipate moving forward with any manufactured housing regulations until it completes its review. We continue to believe that developing such a test will better ensure that air ventilation systems in manufactured homes perform as specified and meet the HUD Code and will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. Since we reported in 2012 that the department had established metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes but not a method for measuring the metrics, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan in April 2018. This plan included outcome metrics; however, the department had not documented a method for measuring the metrics. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy, by September 2020.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

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

Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, the department had not provided documentation demonstrating that it had established metrics and a method for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

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

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of the Army had taken steps to address this recommendation, but much more remains to be done. Specifically, in December 2013, the department developed its Army Business Management Strategy, which included metrics to measure the number of business systems retired over five years and cost savings and avoidance through use of the Army's business enterprise architecture. However, as of January 2020, the department had not demonstrated that it had documented the steps to measure the metrics. In January 2020, the department's chief architect stated that the department was in the process of establishing a baseline architecture. We will continue to monitor the Army's efforts to establish an architecture and an approach for measuring architecture outcomes in accordance with our recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Energy demonstrated that it had taken steps to implement the recommendation. Specifically, in March 2020, the department developed a draft plan to measure business architecture performance. We will monitor the department's efforts to finalize and implement its plan.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was continuing to evaluate processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had established an approach for measuring the potential benefits in the plan. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not yet implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration had not implemented this recommendation. In August 2019, SBA developed an enterprise architecture program performance guide and value measurement plan. According to the plan, the agency plans to measure cost savings/avoidance and reduction of duplication. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has documented the steps to be followed to measure the outcomes. Specifically, it did not demonstrate that it had established a method to measure the cost savings/avoidance or the number of duplicate investments reduced.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not demonstrated that it has established a documented method and metrics for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Agriculture
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2020, the Department of Agriculture demonstrated that it had established an approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes; however, it had not yet measured and reported them. The department conducted a survey in February 2020 that collected information such as the number of legacy systems that were identified and subsequently decommissioned, and the number of applications that have been eliminated as a result of application rationalization through use of enterprise architecture. The department stated that it will release the second survey in the first quarter of fiscal year 2021, and the differences in the responses between the first and second surveys will be presented to the CIO Council to show the impact of enterprise architecture. The department did not state when it plans to report the results. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. In April 2018, the department issued an Enterprise Architecture Value Measurement Plan; however, the department has not demonstrated that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. In January 2020, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) stated that the department recently appointed a new CIO (acting) and was in the process of revisiting all strategic planning initiatives and implementation to ensure they are congruent with the IT strategic vision and objectives. The Office of the CIO also said it was hiring a new Chief Enterprise Architect, which would impact previous initiatives and strategies. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2019, the Department of Defense Office of the Chief Information Officer stated that it would establish a documented approach to measuring enterprise architecture outcomes defined in the DOD Digital Modernization Strategy by September 2020, and report outcomes by December 2021.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

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

Comments: The Department of the Navy has not demonstrated that it has implemented our recommendation. In November 2017, the department described steps it had taken to address the recommendation. However, as of January 2020, it had not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2020, the Department of Energy had not implemented the recommendation. In May 2020, the department described steps it had taken to develop its enterprise architecture. For example, it said that the department had established a Technical Reference Model, which supports processes and criteria for selecting and reviewing software across the department's headquarters. The department said it used the reference model to identify software products that could be eliminated or consolidated to achieve cost savings. However, as of August 2020, the department had not provided documents demonstrating that it had measured and reported architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the status of the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor has not addressed the recommendation. In August 2020, the department stated that it was evaluating processes for reviewing and assessing enterprise architecture value.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2020, the Department of Veterans Affairs stated that it plans to measure enterprise architecture performance by the end of March 2020. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Department of State
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, the Department of State developed an enterprise architecture plan, which identified several benefits that may be achieved by executing the plan. These benefits included, for example, lower support and acquisition costs and reuse of technology and investments. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had measured and reported outcomes attributed to its architecture. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In December 2019, the agency stated that its chief architect and technical architecture staff were working to reformulate the enterprise architecture program and described several goals and activities that were underway. The agency also stated that the program was examining industry best practices on architecture metrics to determine which would be best for EPA's enterprise architecture program. As metrics are adopted to assess the value of the architecture program, the program will work them into the agency-wide process for performance metrics. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2019, NASA's Associate Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Service and Integration said the agency was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture policy directive and procedural requirements. He anticipated that they would be completed in October 2020.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Small Business Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, the Small Business Administration (SBA) had not implemented this recommendation. SBA's Office of the CIO stated that it achieved IT cost savings and avoidance as a result of IT infrastructure service and support reduction and data center optimization in fiscal years 2014 through the third quarter of fiscal year 2019. In a March 2020 memo to GAO, the Chief Information Officer explained that the agency's enterprise architecture team reviewed IT acquisition requests, which led to reducing duplicative IT investments and resulted in the cost savings and avoidance. However, the agency did not demonstrate that it had reliably measured the cost savings and avoidance. Specifically, it did not provide documentation demonstrating how it calculated most of the savings it reported.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, a Senior Analyst in the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance stated that, as of January 2020, OPM's Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) had established an approach for developing an enterprise architecture. The liaison also stated that, since May 2019, the office of the CIO had established bi-weekly checkpoints with leadership and stakeholders to monitor and report progress and to document established metrics. However, the agency has not provided documentation demonstrating that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development should ensure that enterprise architecture outcomes are periodically measured and reported to top agency officials.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services had not implemented this recommendation. Specifically, it had not demonstrated that it had measured architecture metrics that it had established in its April 2014 Enterprise Roadmap. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, and to assist agencies in measuring and reporting outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture, the Director of OMB should ensure that the planned December 2012 guidance for enterprise architecture value measurement and reporting includes (1) sufficient details on the method and metrics that agencies could use to measure their architecture program's value and (2) a requirement for agencies to include in their April 2013 enterprise roadmap submissions a measurement method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics, and report on the outcomes and benefits achieved through enterprise architecture.

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

Comments: As of December 2019, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not fully addressed our recommendation. In March 2013, the office required agencies to submit annually an Enterprise Roadmap, which was to include an appendix on enterprise architecture outcomes. To prepare the appendix, the office provided agencies with a template to document architecture metrics and measurement methods. The template included examples of outcome metrics and a field where agencies were to document measurement methods. However, OMB did not provide details on the methods that agencies could use to measure architecture outcomes or require that agencies include the steps to be followed for measuring outcomes. In March 2019, OMB said that it was working with agencies to determine approaches for measuring and reporting outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture. However, as of December 2019, OMB had not demonstrated that it had fully addressed the recommendation. We will continue to follow up with OMB on its efforts to implement the recommendation.

Recommendation: To strengthen accountability and transparency in FHA's management of the Fund, Congress may wish to consider clarifying (1) the definition of the Fund's capital ratio--specifically, whether the denominator of the ratio was intended to be the amortized insurance-in-force; (2) the definition of the phrase "established target subsidy rate" used in HERA; and (3) the nature and extent of information that FHA should be reporting on subsidy rates pursuant to HERA, recognizing that subsidy rates are generally only reestimated once a year under current budget processes.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2019, Congress had not acted on this matter for consideration.

Recommendation: To the extent that the CDBG program continues to be the primary vehicle used to provide post-disaster assistance for permanent housing, Congress may wish to consider providing more specific direction regarding the distribution of disaster-related CDBG assistance that states are to provide for homeowners and renters. If Congress wishes to change the proportion of assistance directed to homeowners and rental property owners in future recovery efforts, Congress could, for example, require states to demonstrate to HUD that they are adequately addressing the needs of both homeowners and renters with their CDBG allocation and other resources as a condition for receiving funds. Alternatively, Congress could direct HUD to develop a formula that accounts for the housing needs of both homeowners and renters. Such a formula could be used by states to determine the proportions of their disaster CDBG funds that should be used for housing, specifically rental housing. Further, the formula could also reflect the anticipated production levels of other programs that provide permanent housing assistance, such as the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: Since 1993, Congress has appropriated Community Development Block-Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding in the wake of numerous presidentially-declared disasters, including, most recently, $2.431 billion in Public Law 116-20, the majority of which amount is for disasters that occurred in 2018 and 2019. Similar to previous CDBG-DR appropriations, the CDBG-DR appropriation in Public Law 116-20, enacted June 6, 2019, neither requires states to demonstrate to HUD that they adequately addressed the needs of both homeowners and renters nor, alternatively, directs HUD to develop a formula that accounts for the housing needs of both homeowners and renters. A bill introduced and reported out of committee in the 115th Congress, HR 4557, required HUD to disapprove a state action plan that detailed a grantee's use of funds if, among other reasons, the plan did not provide an equitable allocation of resources among homeowners, renters, and persons experiencing homelessness. A draft bill, whose provisions were essentially identical to HR 4557, was the focus of a hearing during the 116th Congress.

Recommendation: To strengthen formal collaboration efforts, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the appropriate program offices, to develop a plan to ensure that data collected on the various programs of the agencies related to affordable housing and transit are sufficient to measure the agencies' performance toward goals and outcomes established in the HUD-FTA action plan and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities.

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open

Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.

Recommendation: To strengthen formal collaboration efforts, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the Administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the appropriate program offices, to develop a plan to ensure that data collected on the various programs of the agencies related to affordable housing and transit are sufficient to measure the agencies' performance toward goals and outcomes established in the HUD-FTA action plan and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities.

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration
Status: Open

Comments: On November 30, 2009, we received a response from HUD stating that actions were planned or underway to address this and the other recommendation in this report. As of July 2019, we are reviewing additional documentation provided by DOT and HUD on actions they have taken.