Recommendation: As part of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's plans to implement a new data system, the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission should assess the feasibility of developing the agency's capacity to systematically analyze retaliation charge data, including the protected activities associated with these charges. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
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 identify the information about family members apprehended together that its components collectively need to process those family members and communicate that information to its components. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: According to DHS, in June 2020, DHS's Office of Immigration Statistics launched a Family Status Data Standards Community of Interest (COI) under the purview of the DHS Immigration Data Integration Initiative. In August 2020, DHS reported that the Family Status COI includes subject matter experts and data system managers from DHS components, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The COI's mandate includes drafting common DHS-wide and interagency data standards (common codes, common definitions, common formats) for all topics related to family status, including codes to identify the reasons for family separation, members apprehended together, and unaccompanied children. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Identifying and communicating department-wide information needs with respect to family members who have been apprehended together should help provide DHS with greater assurance that its components are identifying all individuals who may be eligible for relief from removal from the United States based on their family relationships.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that, at the time of apprehension, CBP collects the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members apprehended together. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) will work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on the Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. As of August 2020, DHS reported that DHS OIS continues to work with relevant components and offices to ensure all required information is collected at the time of apprehension on Form I-213 when processing family members apprehended together. DHS expects to complete these actions by September 30, 2020. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should ensure that CBP documents the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members apprehended together on the Form I-213. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that, upon implementation of the steps the department plans to take in response to our second recommendation, CBP will issue guidance to the field to ensure that CBP agents and officers document the information that DHS components collectively need to process family members. In August 2020, DHS reported that component agencies continue to collaborate to define the process of family members apprehended together, as will be reflected on CBP Form I-213. DHS estimates issuing this guidance by March 31, 2021. Collecting information about the relationships between family members apprehended together and documenting that information on the Form I-213 could help address fragmentation among DHS components and improve the information available to other agencies.immigration or other proceedings.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Homeland Security should evaluate options for developing a unique identifier shared across DHS components' data systems to link family members apprehended together. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open

Comments: In commenting on a draft of our report, DHS reported that its Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) plans to work with relevant components to develop a unique shared identifier linking family members apprehended together. According to DHS, DHS OIS launched the Family Status Community of Interest (COI) in June 2020, and the COI has since established a bi-weekly meeting schedule. The COI's initial focus is on standard codes describing the reasons for family separations. Upon completing the family separation reason standard, DHS reported that the COI will prioritize developing common codes to identify family members apprehended together. DHS estimates completing these actions by March 31, 2021. Evaluating options for developing a shared unique family member identifier across components that would allow each component access to certain information about family members apprehended together would help bridge the information gaps about family relationships between components caused by DHS's fragmented data systems.

Recommendation: The FEC, in consultation with DOJ, should review guidance addressing coordination with DOJ, to include the MOU, and once a quorum of commissioners is in place, update that guidance as appropriate based on the review. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Federal Election Commission
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: The Attorney General, in consultation with the FEC, should review guidance addressing coordination with the FEC, to include the MOU, and once a quorum of commissioners is in place, update that guidance as appropriate based on the review. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open

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

Recommendation: To provide greater transparency in the reporting of FOIA litigation costs, Congress could consider requiring Justice to provide a cost estimate for collecting and reporting information on costs incurred when defending lawsuits in which the plaintiffs prevailed.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, Congress has not yet considered if it plans to amend FOIA regarding the reporting of costs for defending lawsuits in which the plaintiffs prevailed.

Recommendation: Congress could consider amending the act to require Justice to reflect in its Litigation and Compliance reports, changes in the award of attorneys' fees and costs resulting from the appeals process and settlement agreements between agencies and plaintiffs, if deemed to be cost-effective.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of February 2020, Congress has not yet considered if it plans to amend FOIA to require Justice to make changes to its Litigation and Compliance reports.

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: Depending on the outcome of the litigation, the Secretary of Labor should take steps to ensure the agency will be positioned to conduct a meaningful retrospective review consistent with the Executive Order at an appropriate time. These steps should be taken in consultation with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and could include, for example, identifying metrics that could be used to evaluate the rule, and implementing a plan to gather and analyze the necessary data.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) agreed with this recommendation and reported that it is working to develop data collection plans and explore a potential evaluation that is focused on the Home Care Rule. As part of this effort, WHD noted that it will continue to work with HHS and other federal partners. In FY16, WHD reported that such an evaluation of how stakeholders and affected industries have responded to the rule would be beneficial. However, litigation has delayed implementation and enforcement of the rule significantly, and WHD believes an evaluation at this stage would be premature and would be unlikely to fully and accurately capture stakeholders' responses to the rule and the resulting impacts. Delaying the evaluation would allow WHD to monitor the results of its own investigations and the effects of ongoing compliance assistance, both of which would be extremely difficult to measure at this early stage. In 2017, WHD reported that it will continue to monitor early implementation to determine the appropriate start for any evaluation and lay the groundwork for future assessment, including a plan for how to identify data that would inform such as an assessment. In 2018, WHD reported that it is too early in the implementation phase of the rule to conduct an evaluation of the rule's impact. The Department and WHD continue to engage with HHS to understand stakeholders' responses to the rule. WHD also continues to lay the groundwork for any future assessment by working to identify data sources that would inform such as an assessment.