Reports & Testimonies
Recommendations Database
GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed. GAO’s priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. Below you can search only priority recommendations, or search all recommendations.
Our recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Moreover, when implemented, some of our priority recommendations can save large amounts of money, help Congress make decisions on major issues, and substantially improve or transform major government programs or agencies, among other benefits.
As of October 25, 2020, there are 4812 open recommendations, of which 473 are priority recommendations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented.
Browse or Search Open Recommendations
Have a Question about a Recommendation?
- For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
- For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
Results:
Subject Term: Standards
GAO-17-748, Sep 22, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7114
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. In October 2019, VHA issued an interim policy on program office memos (also known as "operational memos") that described how these guidance documents should be vetted and recertified. For example, operational memos issued after VHA's new interim policy will expire 2 years after publication if no further action is taken. In November 2019, VHA further clarified in another interim policy the purpose of all national policy and guidance documents, including the purpose and audience for each document type. Because VHA interim policy, by definition, is automatically rescinded after 1 year unless incorporated into a national policy directive, VHA needs to provide us with the finalized version of its recertified national policy directive in order to fully implement this recommendation. The recertified national policy directive should include the framework outlined in its interim policy documents.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. VHA reported that it added a program office memo (also known as "operational memo") section to its internal publications website in November 2017. Uploading operational memos to this website allowed VHA to identify 327 outdated documents that it has since rescinded, as well as numerous other documents that may require rescission. In October 2019, VHA issued an interim policy requiring all operational memos to be maintained on its publications website. Because interim policy is automatically rescinded after 1 year, VHA needs to provide us with the finalized version of its recertified national policy directive that includes the process it established to maintain these documents. In addition, VHA has not provided documentation of how it will disseminate operational memos so that VHA program offices, VISNs, and VAMCs are aware of new or rescinded guidance.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. In June 2018, VHA reported that it had formed a Field Advisory Workgroup to provide continuing advice on national policy. VHA reported its findings and recommendations from the first workgroup meeting in December 2017 to senior leadership, and held another series of interviews in Summer 2018 to gain additional feedback about how national policy changes affect local facilities. In November 2019, VHA noted that it is developing a standardized process for collecting feedback from the field on published policies. To fully implement this recommendation, VHA should provide documentation of the mechanism by which program offices systematically obtain feedback from VISNs and VAMCs on national policy after implementation and how it will take the appropriate actions.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. In October 2018, VHA reported that it had collected information on the waiver procedures and areas of improvement that exist at both the national and local levels. Based on this information, VHA's Waiver Workgroup was finalizing its recommendations for implementing a formal waiver process. As of November 2019, VHA had not yet reached a decision on how to proceed. To fully implement this recommendation, VHA should provide us with documentation of a process that standardizes policy exemptions waivers, including tracking and monitoring those that are approved.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
Status: Open
Comments: VA agreed with our recommendation. In June 2018, VHA reported that it had identified approximately 55,000 local policies and included them in a SharePoint database, which will serve as a baseline for removing redundant or conflicting local policy. In November 2019, VHA issued an interim policy that established business rules for oversight and monitoring local policy development at the VISN and VAMC levels. Specifically, VHA will assess the number of local policies every 6 months as well as identify patterns of non-compliance. In addition, the interim policy includes standardized templates, a recertification requirement of 5 years to mirror the national policy requirement, and restricts VHA program offices from creating requirements for local policy development. VHA also established resources for the new interim policy, such as a list of local policies as required by national policy. Because VHA interim policy, by definition, is automatically rescinded after 1 year unless incorporated into a national policy directive, VHA needs to provide us with the finalized version of its recertified national policy directive in order to fully implement this recommendation.
GAO-17-706, Jul 31, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: We reported that the Department of State and DHS's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have not jointly assessed applicant fraud risks across the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), consistent with federal internal control standards and leading practices for fraud risk management. Specifically, we reported that although State and USCIS perform a number of fraud risk management activities and have responded to individual instances of applicant fraud in the program, these efforts do not position State and USCIS to assess fraud risks program-wide for USRAP or know if their controls are appropriately targeted to the areas of highest risk in the program. Therefore, we recommended that the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. USCIS concurred with our recommendation. In response, State reported that it will work together with USCIS to conduct joint risk assessments by jointly developing a risk assessment framework. According to DHS and State documentation, the departments finalized a joint framework in January 2018. In February 2019, DHS and State provided us with the interim progress report on their efforts to conduct an assessment of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. In June 2019, USCIS reported that DHS and State have completed the planned analysis and the draft report is being prepared for leadership review and clearance. DHS estimated that the report will be completed by September 30, 2020. To fully address the recommendation, State and USCIS should jointly conduct regular fraud risk assessments across USRAP.
Agency: Department of State
Status: Open
Comments: We reported that the Department of State and DHS's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have not jointly assessed applicant fraud risks across the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), consistent with federal internal control standards and leading practices for fraud risk management. Specifically, we reported that although State and USCIS perform a number of fraud risk management activities and have responded to individual instances of applicant fraud in the program, these efforts do not position State and USCIS to assess fraud risks program-wide for USRAP or know if their controls are appropriately targeted to the areas of highest risk in the program. Therefore, we recommended that the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State conduct regular joint assessments of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. USCIS concurred with our recommendation. In response, State reported that it will work together with USCIS to conduct joint risk assessments by jointly developing a risk assessment framework. According to DHS and State documentation, the departments finalized a joint framework in January 2018. In February 2019, DHS and State provided us with the interim progress report on their efforts to conduct an assessment of applicant fraud risk across USRAP. In June 2019, USCIS reported that DHS and State have completed the planned analysis and the draft report is being prepared for leadership review and clearance. DHS estimated that the report will be completed by September 30, 2020. To fully address the recommendation, State and USCIS should jointly conduct regular fraud risk assessments across USRAP.
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The VA Enterprise Mail Management Program Office revised Directive and Handbook 6340 "Mail Management" to include agency-wide goals and performance measures for mail operations and provided GAO draft versions of both documents in March 2020 that are currently under administration review. According to VA officials, final publication of the revised Directive and Handbook 6340 is estimated to be completed between September and December 2020. GAO will continue to monitor VA's progress in implementing this recommendation.
GAO-17-597, Jul 25, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, SSA said its Space Acquisition Review Board (SARB) continues to meet periodically and focuses on efficiently using the agency's resources to reduce its real estate footprint and proactively addressing organizational and operational changes. In addition, SSA said its goals, results, and future plans of its real estate strategy are documented in its annual Real Property Efficiency Plan. GAO reviewed SSA's Real Property Efficiency Plan for 2019-2023 (dated September 2018). This plan states that SSA is using two model field offices to test how emerging technologies and service delivery methods could result in reductions to field office space agency-wide. However, it does not include specific plans for adjusting its overall physical footprint in light of expanding remote service delivery. To close this recommendation as implemented, SSA will need to demonstrate that it has developed a long-term facility plan--possibly building on its model field office pilot--that links to its strategic goals for service delivery and includes a plan for adjusting its field offices in light of increasing use of and geographic variation in remote service delivery.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it published its consolidated and revised Space Allocation Standards and Space Computation Worksheets in June 2019. It said the revised standards include standardized offices, work stations, and employee personal storage space. To close this recommendation as implemented, GAO will need to see evidence that the revised space allocation standards allow more flexibility for growth in demand and new service delivery methods, or at least that SSA considered incorporating such flexibility.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it has identified the most common reasons for technician follow-up on the iClaims system, and based on these reasons has developed a list of potential future enhancements to iClaim. SSA said it prioritized the enhancements based on which would provide the most relief, but is still determining if enhancements can be made. To close this recommendation as implemented, GAO will need to see evidence that SSA has in fact implemented changes to the iClaim system based on the data it collected on reasons for technician follow-up.
Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: In February 2020, SSA said it has developed performance goals for its SSA Express Icons: 15,000 new visitors annually and 50 new partner sites annually. It also said it continues to work on a dashboard for behavioral based management information data collection for the Icon project. This effort will allow the agency to collect better data regarding customer usage. For GAO to close this recommendation as implemented, SSA will need to demonstrate that it has implemented performance measures for its full range of alternative service delivery methods and is collecting related performance information.
GAO-17-569, Jun 20, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Department of Commerce: National Telecommunications and Information Administration: First Responder Network Authority
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, FirstNet had taken some action in response to this recommendation but had not fully implemented it. Once we confirm that FirstNet has taken additional action, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-510, Jun 15, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: In September 2018, NOAA reported that it had awarded a contract to assess hydrographic surveying needs and had drafted a Memorandum of Agreement to improve coordination with the U.S. Geological Survey on data acquisition and management. NOAA also reported that it planned to identify surveying tasks that could be accomplished using the private sector, and would take steps to improve the funding transfer process so that it could take advantage of Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Transportation Safety Board funds available for certain types of private sector survey activities. NOAA officials stated these tasks would be completed and a final strategy on working with the private sector issued by December 30, 2020.
GAO-17-421, May 24, 2017
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open
Comments: Interior agreed with this recommendation. In early August 2017, Indian Affairs reported that BIA regional leadership, in collaboration with Indian Affairs' safety office, will develop and publish a safety training plan for all Indian Affairs employees with responsibilities for safety inspections. Additionally, Indian Affairs reported that BIA and BIE will develop and implement a policy to ensure that first-line supervisors monitor and report on whether employees have completed the training requirements. Indian Affairs reported a target date of January 31, 2020 for implementing this recommendation. In May 2018, Indian Affairs reported that it had completed a draft training plan and noted that it had been submitted to management for review. We requested copies of the training plan but as of August 2018, we had not been provided any. In April 2019, Indian Affairs provided documentation that it had developed and implemented a plan to assess all employees' safety training needs. In addition, agency officials reported that Interior's new training management system allows supervisors to track employees' completion of required safety training courses. However, the agency did not provide documentation that senior managers are overseeing employees' compliance with Indian Affairs' safety training requirements. In May 2020, Indian Affairs officials told us that they had developed a process to generate reports on personnel safety training compliance and would provide documentation demonstrating that such reports are shared with management to address training noncompliance. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions in this area.
GAO-17-474, May 1, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that it plans to assess and document requirements related to ultralight aircraft threats and how technological solutions will address these requirements as part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Air and Marine Operations (AMO) air domain awareness efforts. In March 2018, CBP completed an Air Domain Awareness Capability Analysis Report that identifies current capability gaps, including those related to ultralight aircraft. CBP stated that it plans to build upon the Capability Analysis Report to identify mission needs, a concept of operations, and operational requirements to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. In February 2020, AMO reported that, in 2019, it conducted a technical assessment of one technology and plans to assess other systems in 2020 and 2021 to help determine if they fit into AMO's larger strategic vision for persistent wide area surveillance to address ultralight aircraft and other threats in the air domain. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should assess and document how alternative solutions will meet operational requirements related to ultralight aircraft.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and stated that U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will review available information and develop performance measures and targets as deemed appropriate. As of March 2020, CBP and ICE have not reported taking any actions to develop performance measures and targets. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish and monitor performance measures and targets related to cross-border tunnels.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred and stated that within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Air and Marine Operations and the U.S. Border Patrol are developing a joint performance measure and targets for interdicting ultralight aircraft. However, in December 2019, CBP reported that it will no longer pursue establishing a performance measure because it found that the ultralight aircraft interdiction rate fluctuated year to year, and that the number of ultralight aircraft incidents had been trending downward. Subsequently, in September 2020, CBP officials stated that they had reinitiated efforts to develop a performance measure and target in response to our continued belief that they can be set and would help CBP monitor performance to ensure that technology investments and operational responses to address ultralight aircraft are effective. To fully address our recommendation, CBP should establish a measure and monitor performance related to ultralight aircraft.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. However, CBP and ICE agreed that strengthening operational procedures may be beneficial and stated that they will jointly review procedures and discuss revising and/or consolidating the procedures. In May 2018, CBP stated that it is looking for opportunities to standardize procedures for the detection, interdiction, mapping, and remediation of cross-border tunnels. To this end, CBP has plans to develop a standardized training on tunnel identification and tactics, techniques, and procedures for different types of tunnels. In addition, CBP is working to develop a consistent process that will facilitate coordination and collaboration with ICE. In March 2019, CBP reported that CBP and ICE have begun to routinely meet to collectively develop processes for using tunnel robotics, including processes to enhance communication between CBP and ICE. In September 2020, CBP and ICE reported that they do not plan to take any additional steps to address this recommendation. To fully address our recommendation, CBP and ICE should establish standardized procedures for addressing tunnels, including procedures for sharing information with one another.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS did not concur with this recommendation. DHS stated that that it believes that by establishing common terminology to address our first recommendation, the RECOMs will have more reliable, usable analyses to inform their maritime interdiction efforts. However, DHS did not believe that performance measures and targets related to smuggling by panga boats would provide the most useful strategic assessment of operations to prevent all illicit trafficking, regardless of area of operations or mode of transportation. DHS also cited the recent creation of the DHS Office of Policy, Strategy, and Plans that is to work with U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and other components and offices to better evaluate the effectiveness of all operations that work to prevent the illegal entry of goods and people into the country, as appropriate. In February 2020, DHS reported that the department had not taken any further actions to implement this recommendation. We continue to believe that the recommendation is valid and will monitor any actions DHS takes that are responsive to it. For example, in response to a requirement in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, DHS issued reports in May 2018, February 2019, and August 2020 that contain metrics and planned metrics to measure the effectiveness of border security in the maritime environment and other domains. Planned metrics that DHS does not yet have a methodology to measure across all components include situational awareness in the maritime environment, illicit drugs removal rate, and DHS maritime threat response rate. To fully address our recommendation, DHS should measure its performance related to smuggling across U.S. maritime borders.
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: We reported in May 2019 that DOE and NNSA continued to make progress in responding to this recommendation. The draft 2018 annual report contained, as recommended, more complete and uniform information on assessments, though in some cases different terminology was used by programs and sites. As of June 2020, we have requested final 2018, 2019, and 2020 annual reports from NNSA to ensure progress has continued. Once we have received and reviewed the reports, we will update the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, DOE has not implemented this recommendation. While DOE program offices (Environmental Management, Science, and Nuclear Energy) are individually considering long-term needs, the program offices are not required by Congress to submit the kind of physical security plan that Congress requires of NNSA. In the absence of Congressional direction, we believe it is unlikely that DOE will fully implement this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 2020, we are continuing to monitor actions related to this recommendation. DOE has acknowledged in a classified memorandum the security risks associated with the slow pace of the material control and accountability order. DOE has also developed a plan to implement measures to address these risks in a phased approach with final implementation sometime in the 2020s. Some of the early phases will be complete between 2019 and 2022, but others will extend beyond 2022. As such, it will be important for DOE to continue to report to Congress on residual risk until planned actions are fully completed and their implementation has been verified by the relevant DOE program offices and DOE's Office of Enterprise Assessments. We will update the status of this recommendation once we have we have received and reviewed DOE's classified 2018-2020 annual reports to ensure this action is taken.
GAO-17-80, Mar 23, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-4523
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: The Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) agreed with GAO's March 2017 recommendation that it conduct comprehensive cost-benefit analyses to guide decisions on implementing the most cost-effective option as stocking and custodial services contracts are renewed, and on choosing product distribution options. For example, according to Department of Defense (DOD) officials, DeCA conducted a cost-benefit analysis as part of renewing an agreement with one of the Navy Exchanges in May 2018 and will provide service on a reimbursable basis instead of using the commercial vendor. DeCA officials stated that they will also review product distribution options during commercial negotiations, including taking into account product sales and shipment requirements, among other things. As of January 2020, DOD has not provided documentation to confirm completed actions to implement our recommendations. When we confirm what actions DOD has taken, we will provide updated information.
GAO-17-114, Jan 30, 2017
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD non-concurred with this recommendation. However, the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act mandated that DOD implement this recommendation. As of August 2019, DOD had modified the Health Related Behaviors Survey (HRBS) to include questions on gambling and DOD and the Services are in the process of updating the electronic Periodic Health Assessment (PHA) assessment forms to capture the gambling screening data required by the legislation. Once the PHA is updated to include the gambling screening data, we will be able to close this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, DOD stated that this guidance is still in internal DOD coordination. Moreover, guidance related to gambling disorder screening, referral, and treatment needs to be coordinated with the Addictive Substance Misuse Advisory Committee (ASMAC) before issuance, which is anticipated to be July 2020.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, the Army did not have any updates to provide on the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, Navy officials stated that the draft Navy instruction was returned back to the Navy's Drug Detection and Deterrence Program Office to add language regarding the Secretary of the Navy's ban on hemp/CBD products that was announced this month. The Navy has added the language and pushed the instruction out to the main stakeholders for coordination. It is due back to the Director, Navy Staff no later than 30 August 2019 where it will go back into the queue for signature. Navy officials anticipate signature sometime later this fall.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: The U.S. Coast Guard/DHS concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2019, the Coast Guard stated that updates to this manual are ongoing. According to Coast Guard officials, including gambling disorder in this manual is one of many significant updates the program is adjudicating for this manual and it's a lengthy clearance process. No timeline was provided for expected issuance.
GAO-17-3, Nov 30, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Commerce
Status: Open
Comments: As of August 5, 2020, NIST has not convened a governmentwide effort to provide the best available forward-looking climate information to standards developing-organizations.
GAO-16-787, Sep 13, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions being taken to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was chosen as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. In September 2020, IRS officials provided us draft program and case selection objectives and said they expected to complete actions to implement the recommendation in Fall 2020.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they were beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan and that Field Collection was selected as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. Since program and case selection objectives are necessary before appropriate risk management systems can be established, in September 2020, IRS officials said they expected to complete actions to implement program and case selection objectives in Fall 2020 but provided no anticipated completion date for actions to identify and analyze potential risks to those objectives and related risk management actions.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and described actions it will take to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative which would include actions to address this recommendation. In September 2020, IRS officials said they had revised the Internal Revenue Manual to guide group managers on elements to consider in selecting cases. We will update the status of IRS's actions to implement the recommendation after review of any documentation IRS provides.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS agreed with the recommendation and outlined planned actions to address it. In June 2019, IRS officials told us they are beginning an initiative designed to help identify a program's objectives in relationship to the IRS Strategic Plan. IRS selected Field Collection as one of the pilot programs for this initiative. According to IRS officials, this pilot effort is ongoing and includes consideration of how the agency will address this recommendation. In September 2020, we met with IRS officials to discuss the status of actions to implement this recommendation but no anticipated completion date was provided.
GAO-16-656, Jul 28, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6304
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.
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.
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.
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.
GAO-16-476, May 26, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6806
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to FEMA, to achieve greater integration of FEMA's field leadership components, FEMA's Field Operations Directorate (FOD) convened a Field Leadership Working Group of senior subject matter experts to conduct a mission analysis of FEMA's Field Leadership function (which includes Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinators as well as Federal Coordinating Officers and Incident Management Assistance Teams team leads). According to FEMA, the Working Group was preparing a Field Leader Manual (FLM) for review by FOD leadership. FEMA officials told us that the 2018 Hurricane season led to the deployment of many of FEMA's FOD leaders. These deployments allowed FOD leaders to experience first-hand the connection between regional implementation plans and FDRC performance plans and FEMA said that this knowledge is being integrated into edits of the FLM. In February 2020, FEMA told us that the FOD leadership responsible for the oversight of FDRCs is still determining the timeline to update the FLM based on a realignment of the Field Leadership Cadre. This update will integrate the Federal Coordinating Officers (FCOs) and FDRCs into a single FCO title with professional development specializations in response or recovery. This integration will support all FCOs in having a common baseline of training and experience in both response and recovery. In an August 2020 update, FEMA stated that while they continue to work toward implementing this recommendation, the FOD is currently focused on COVID-19 response efforts and planning for a more severe than average hurricane season. We will continue to monitor FEMA's efforts to see what additional actions the agency takes in response to this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation and said it would take steps to implement it. According to FEMA, the Field Leadership Working Group will implement the elements of this recommendation alongside efforts to clarify the role of the regional National Disaster Recovery Framework implementation plans. FEMA told us that the 2018 Hurricane season led to the deployment of many of FEMA's field leaders and these deployments allowed leaders to experience first-hand the connection between FDRC performance expectations and FEMA's organizational goals. According to FEMA, this knowledge is being integrated into edits of the Field Leader Manual (FLM). In February 2020, FEMA told us the FOD leadership responsible for the oversight of FDRCs is working with their partners in FEMA's Recovery and Resilience sections, as well as with the Regions to define performance expectations for steady-state recovery planning and preparedness under the NDRF. This will include identifying who is functionally accountable for these activities, any gaps, and best practices across Regions. In an August 2020 update, FEMA stated that while they continue to work toward implementing this recommendation, the FOD is currently focused on COVID-19 response efforts and planning for a more severe than average hurricane season. We will continue to monitor FEMA's efforts to see what additional actions the agency takes in response to this recommendation.
GAO-16-514, May 26, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-8777
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2016, we reported on the Department of Homeland Security's management and oversight of short-term holding facilities. We found, for example, that only 4 of 17 Border Patrol holding facilities posted information on how individuals can contact the DHS OIG to file general complaints, and the remaining facilities did not have information posted on any complaint mechanisms, such as the Joint Intake Center or CBP INFO Center. In December 2016, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) sent a broadcast to ICE field offices stating that posters should be visible at all of ICE ERO temporary holding facilities. This broadcast directed ICE ERO Field Office staff to immediately post copies of the Detention Reporting and Information Line poster, both in English and in Spanish, in temporary confinement areas or other areas so that it is visible to individuals in custody at ICE ERO temporary holding facilities. With regard to CBP, in October 2019, officials informed us there is no current CBP guidance requiring signage in CBP holding facilities to communicate complaint mechanisms other than the Prison Rape Elimination Act poster, which relates to reporting mechanisms for any potential incidents of sexual abuse and assault. In September 2020, CBP told us it planned to implement the necessary corrective actions to close this recommendation by March 31, 2021. In order to be able to close the recommendation as implemented, we will need to see updated guidance to the field about the posters that should be displayed in CBP facilities.
GAO-16-457R, May 18, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9377
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During fiscal year 2019, we identified instances where staff did not comply with IRS's policies and procedures related to monitoring and reviewing the monitoring of manual refunds. IRS officials stated that the Wage and Investment (W&I) organization determined that a fully automated process to perform monitoring of manual refunds is the optimal solution to address, at an enterprise level, deficiencies associated with reliance on employees to monitor refunds in process and take appropriate action when potential duplicate or erroneous refund conditions are encountered. In addition, IRS officials indicated that the W&I organization will develop business requirements and request programming through the Unified Work Request process; however, limited resources and competing priorities prevent the identification of an implementation date. As a result, IRS will place this recommendation on hold until an implementation date is known.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: During fiscal year 2019, the Wage and Investment (W&I) organization determined that periodic backlogs of Input Correction Operation (ICO) inventory were caused by a combination of factors, such as systemic issues, fluctuations in projected filings, and hiring challenges. IRS officials stated that the W&I organization has also identified and implemented several strategies to address ICO backlogs and mitigate the impact on the quality review program, including hiring more staff in ICO functions, using seasonal employees, cross-training, overtime, transferring of work, and updating the Internal Revenue Manual. Since IRS provided us with this information near the end of our fiscal year 2019 audit in September 2019, we will evaluate IRS's actions to address this recommendation during our fiscal year 2020 audit.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS established the Asset Management Program Monitoring and Review procedure, effective October 1, 2016, for performing quarterly sample reviews of Information Technology (IT) assets in the Knowledge, Incident/Problem, Service Asset Management (KISAM) system. In September 2017, IRS also revised the Internal Revenue Manual to require Facilities Management and Security Services territory managers or section chiefs to review KISAM key data elements for non-IT assets to verify that they are correct and updated. However, during our fiscal year 2018 floor-to-book inventory testing, we identified exceptions where (1) a key detailed information element (e.g., building code) for property and equipment (P&E) assets was not properly recorded in KISAM and (2) P&E assets found on the floor did not have asset records in KISAM. We will conduct inventory testing and follow-up to determine the status of this issue during our audit of IRS's fiscal year 2020 financial statements.
GAO-16-501, May 18, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-6244
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Office of Personnel Management
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OPM partially agreed with this recommendation. In December 2018, OPM stated that it is working with its learning management system vendor to develop requirements, but had not yet targeted an expected completion date. To fully implement the recommendation, OPM needs to complete its efforts to ensure that it provides and tracks training for individuals with significant security responsibilities. As of March 2020, OPM has not provided evidence that it has completed these actions.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: VA concurred with our recommendation. The agency has conducted security control assessments for the two systems, but these assessments did not show that technical controls were comprehensively tested. According to VA, the agency will complete the next security control assessment in October 2019 and complete the system assessment report in December 2019. As of March 2020, the agency has not provided evidence that it has implemented this recommendation. Subsequent to VA informing us that it has completed implementation, we plan to verify the agency's actions.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Comments: OMB concurred with our recommendation. On December 9, 2016, OMB issued memorandum M-17-09, Management of Federal High Value Assets, which lists some existing policies and guidance and other actions that agencies need to take to protect IT assets. Further information is needed to validate implementation of the recommendation. As of March 2020, the agency has not provided evidence that it has implemented this recommendation. Subsequent to OMB informing us that it has completed implementation, we plan to verify the agency's actions.
GAO-16-325, Apr 7, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-9286
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the department was in the process of addressing it. Specifically, a HHS official reported in August 2020 that the department had created a team to address cloud computing best practices and intended to finalize guidance on SLA key practices by June 2021. We will continue to evaluate the department's progress in implementing this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2020, an official from the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) reported that the department was in the process of addressing the recommendation. Specifically, a Treasury official reported that the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer was working with the Treasury Senior Procurement Executive to incorporate the key practices identified in our report into Treasury acquisition policy, which was expected to be completed by January 2021. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concurred with our recommendation and reported that the department was in the process of addressing it. In August 2020, a VA official reported that the department's Office of Information Technology was working to re-write existing SLA documentation following a review from the Office of Inspector General but did not provide a date when the guidance would be finalized. We will continue to monitor the status of this recommendation.
GAO-16-11, Mar 17, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-7215
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: According to OSHA officials, the agency had a study underway to review OSHA's workplace violence enforcement cases in health care to better understand the obstacles OSHA compliance officers encountered during these investigations and identify factors which led to citations. The study was intended to help compliance officers develop citations in workplace violence cases. In addition, in December 2016, OSHA published a Request for Information on Preventing Workplace Violence in Healthcare and Social Assistance (RFI) to help identify workplace violence prevention requirements that could be effective and economical if a regulation were to be developed. OSHA reported in June 2018 that it is evaluating the information it received in response to the RFI and is gathering information on best practices in certain industries. As of April 2020, OSHA completed its review of the submissions in response to the RFI, is developing regulatory options, and will obtain additional input from potentially affected small businesses. The agency anticipates completing this process by the end of 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, the agency should complete its process of obtaining input on the regulatory options the agency is developing, and finalize its determination on whether regulatory action is needed.
GAO-16-226, Feb 9, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3604
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. In February 2018 DOD issued a policy on harassment prevention and response in the armed services that defined hazing as one form of harassment, and required each military department secretary to provide a plan to implement the policy. As of October 2020, DOD stated that it had assessed that the military services had fully implemented DOD's hazing policy by September 2020. This determination was based on an assessment of military service implementation plans for DOD's harassment prevention and response policy, which includes prevention of hazing. Through ongoing work on hazing in the military, we continue to monitor the extent to which DOD has regularly monitored the extent to which the military services have implemented its hazing policy.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. As of September 2017, DOD had added questions to its survey of servicemembers that would facilitate an evaluation of hazing prevalence but had not yet conducted the evaluation. In October 2020, DOD stated that it need to conduct additional analysis on its survey data and on a hazing/bullying metric developed for DOD by the RAND Corporation, and estimated it would implement this recommendation by October 2023.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open
Comments: DHS concurred with this recommendation in its written comments on our report. In 2017 the Coast Guard surveyed servicemembers on hazing and stated that it planned to, but had not yet conducted an evaluation of prevalence. However, in July 2018, the Coast Guard stated that no further analysis was planned for the 2017 survey data. The Coast Guard stated that a second survey was planned for 2019, but did not identify any plans to evaluate the prevalence of hazing in the Coast Guard. As of October 2020, the Coast Guard has not provided a requested update on the status of the implementation of this recommendation or indicated any ongoing plans to implement it.
GAO-16-87, Feb 5, 2016
Phone: (404) 679-1875
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2019, FEMA provided an update on the status of actions taken in response to our report. As of April 2019, FEMA stated that they are continuing to work on two actions. One, the development of a new organizational structure. FEMA is still refining and assessing the impact of the new IMAT structure. Two, in April 2019, FEMA delivered a new IMAT Program Orientation to nineteen new IMAT members. FEMA plans to analyze the impact of these changes along with attrition information. It plans to develop a high-level blueprint of the actions taken by FEMA to better manage the IMAT program and retain staff. Until completion of the action items, this recommendation will remain open. FEMA officials plan to provide a status update and finalize their efforts by September 2019. As of July 2020, FEMA officials have not completed steps to implement a revised IMAT structure. FEMA anticipates completing several actions by September 2020 and finalizing their plan by December 2020. However, due to COVID-19, the agency may face additional delays in doing so.
GAO-16-261, Jan 29, 2016
Phone: (202) 512-3236
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB has taken some actions to address this recommendation related to procurement awards, such as adopting a shorter character limit for the "Award Description" element and providing additional guidance for the "Primary Place of Performance" element. However, it needs to provide additional guidance for these data elements related to grant awards to ensure collection of consistent and comparable information.
GAO-16-151, Dec 16, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: In May 2017, Treasury officials told us that they planned to include correspondence data as part of Treasury's fiscal year 2018 annual performance plan and fiscal year 2016 annual performance report. While the fiscal year 2016 performance report included data on correspondence overage rates, as of August 2019, Treasury has not included correspondence overage as part of its performance goals. We continue to believe this recommendation is valid.
GAO-16-196T, Nov 18, 2015
Phone: (617) 788-0534
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Education agreed with this recommendation and reviewed its process for providing guidance to servicers. It has issued a few clarifications to servicers to help with consistency and reported that it intends to incorporate this recommendation into its acquisition plan for a new loan servicing system. To fully implement this recommendation, the agency needs to demonstrate that the new Direct Loan servicing system will provide clear and consistent instructions and guidance to servicers to ensure program integrity and improve service to borrowers. As of February 2020, Education officials said implementation of this recommendation was still in progress, pending completion in October 2021. At that time, the agency expects the re-design of its student loan financial services environment, which will include additional guidance to servicers, to be fully operational.
GAO-16-39, Oct 20, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Comments: As of November 2019, GSA has informed us that it submitted a legislative proposal as part of the FY 2018 and FY 2019 budget cycle that was subsequently not included in the President's budget. We have asked GSA to provide us a copy of this proposal. We will evaluate whether this proposal is sufficient to close this recommendation.
GAO-15-671, Sep 28, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2019, FDA released for public comment its new Draft Guidance for Industry #256 - Compounding Animal Drugs from Bulk Drug Substances. The draft guidance describes FDA's policy regarding the compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances including the conditions under which FDA does not intend to take enforcement action for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act's requirements for approval, adequate directions for use, and current Good Manufacturing Practices. We will review the updated guidance when it is finalized and determine if it addresses this recommendation. In August 2020, FDA indicated that, in response to numerous requests from external stakeholders, the comment period on the draft guidance has been extended to October 2020. Once the comments have been reviewed, FDA anticipates finalizing the guidance by the end of calendar year 2021.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In July 2019, FDA reported to GAO that when the Draft Guidance for Industry #256 was issued that calendar year, FDA intended to develop a risk-based compliance program to address compounding of animal drugs from bulk drug substances. As part of that compliance program, FDA reported that it intended to consistently document the basis for its decisions about what actions are taken, for example, warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints. In August 2020, FDA reported that a working group has been formed to develop a risk-based compliance strategy, which will include a process for documenting the basis for FDA's decisions about how or whether it followed up on warning letters, adverse event reports, and complaints about drug compounding for animals. FDA anticipates implementing this strategy simultaneously with the finalization of Guidance for Industry #256, which is anticipated to occur at the end of calendar year 2021. We will follow-up with FDA regarding these actions and determine if the actions address our recommendation.
GAO-15-744, Sep 10, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-9110
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In January 2017, IRS supplied documentation on how it had established a fairness policy statement, which is incorporated into the Internal Revenue Manual, communicated to staff in email, and provided via a powerpoint presentation to staff. IRS also established and documented collection program objectives as part of its FY2017 Collection Program Letter. In October 2017, IRS shared additional draft documentation with GAO that would align SB/SE objectives with objectives from its FY2017 Collection Program Letter as well as other information such as performance measures. Following our assessment and request for more information, in November 2017, IRS provided a document intended to define certain collection program objectives, but it did not clearly define fairness or collection program and ACS objectives. We provided IRS feedback on the document in November 2017, January 2018, and July 2018. In June 2019, IRS officials provided information on an ongoing IRS initiative to identify objectives for various programs, but the collection program with its automated case processes was not among the pilot programs. As a result, any actions to implement the recommendation will be stalled until the initiative's pilot programs are complete. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided a planned date when it expects to complete them. We will update the status of IRS's plans and actions to implement the recommendation after we complete review of any documents IRS provides, as we requested in December 2019.
GAO-15-641, Jul 29, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-2834
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2020, Congress has taken no action to direct DOT to study this matter.
GAO-15-752T, Jul 29, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-6806
including 2 priority recommendations
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB issued guidance in June 2019 that provides an overview and timeline for merging DATA Act reporting with implementation of a federal program inventory. To fully address this recommendation, OMB needs to provide additional details on the implementation of these requirements.
Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: OMB issued several guidance documents in 2019 that set out key aspects of a process for agencies to establish standards for, and practices for governing, managing, and protecting, all federal data. These and related efforts represent significant progress, but OMB needs to ensure this broad guidance is followed by clear and specific requirements for agency data governance to ensure the quality of their DATA Act reporting.
GAO-15-598, Jul 23, 2015
Phone: (617) 788-0534
Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Comments: In 2016, Education published an issue brief about identifying low-performing schools, which referenced GAO's report and the potential risks of limited state action to identify and address low performance. In December 2019, Education provided GAO with a revised data collection instrument for collecting information about states' criteria for identifying low-performing teacher preparation programs. Officials stated that the instrument has been approved by OMB and Education plans to start using it in October 2020. Officials said that the instrument is designed to provide more structured information about state criteria and allow Education to better monitor states' responses from year to year. We are encouraged by these efforts and will revisit the status of this recommendation when the new template is implemented in 2020.
GAO-15-487, May 22, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation. In August 2016, DOD officials told us that a new DOEHRS version was released that contained several system enhancements and defect corrections to improve overall data quality in the system. However, as of July 2020, DOD had not provided specific information on these system enhancements, which would allow us to determine whether our recommendation has been fully addressed.
GAO-15-434, May 21, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS better document the process, including the methods used to review recommendations from the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) and the rationale for final relative value decisions. CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that CMS establishes relative values for new, revised, and potentially misvalued physicians' services based on its review of a variety of sources of information, including the RUC. At that time, CMS officials told us the agency was working to improve the transparency of its process by proposing and finalizing changes to the process in the annual rule for the Physician Fee Schedule. Officials estimated that this process would take several years to complete. In order to close this recommendation as implemented, CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation of its process for establishing relative values. As of June 2020, GAO was still waiting on confirmation from CMS that it had completed its enhancement process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services in a way that would allow for greater transparency and documentation. CMS will need to demonstrate that it has improved its internal and external documentation for establishing relative values in order for GAO to close the recommendation. CMS officials agreed the recommendation should remain open as progress continues.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS develop a process for informing the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC), as CMS already does for potentially misvalued services identified by CMS or other stakeholders. CMS did not concur with this recommendation, asserting that the RUC is completely independent of CMS, and as such CMS has no authority to set the RUC's agenda for which services are reviewed. As of June 2020, CMS had not changed its position on the recommendation. We continue to believe that CMS needs to inform the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC, as it does for potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders. We acknowledge that in 2017 CMS changed its process for establishing relative values by including proposed values for almost all services in the annual proposed rulemaking for the Physician Fee Schedule, which means that the changes in values for potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC are open for public comment before they become effective. However, we continue to believe CMS should inform stakeholders of these potentially misvalued services before CMS receives RUC recommendations for them and subsequently publishes the values in the proposed rule. Doing so would give stakeholders the same amount of time they have to provide input on potentially misvalued services identified by other stakeholders.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: To help improve the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) process for establishing relative values for Medicare physicians' services, in May 2015 we recommended that the Administrator of CMS incorporate data and expertise from physicians and other relevant stakeholders into the process, as well as develop a timeline and plan for using the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA). CMS concurred with this recommendation, stating that stakeholders have the opportunity each year to nominate potentially misvalued services for review through a public nomination process. In August 2017, CMS officials reported that the final rulemaking for the 2017 Physician Fee Schedule included a data collection effort using PAMA funds and other authorities that will help furnish data to help in valuations for more than half of physician services. However, this effort pertains to global services, which are a specific type of service under the Physician Fee Schedule that include global, professional, and technical components, and does not apply to non-global services, which encompass almost half of physician services. Officials also reported that they had awarded a contract to explore data collection on practice expense and methodologies for using such data when valuing services in the Physician Fee Schedule. However, CMS did not indicate a specific timeline and plan for using the PAMA funds, just that the agency would continue to use these funds to explore more ways to gain improved data. In March 2018, CMS reported that it now incorporates data and expertise from relevant stakeholders-apart from the RUC-into its process for establishing relative values by including any new, revised, or potentially misvalued values in the annual proposed rulemaking, instead of establishing them on an interim final basis in the final rule. This means that the changes in values for services will be open for public comment prior to the implementation of changes to payment. We acknowledge that CMS has made progress towards meeting our recommendation by changing its process to allow for public comments on proposed changes to relative values before they go into effect. CMS has also made progress by beginning to use PAMA funds to assist with valuing global services and exploring avenues for collecting practice expense data. To close this recommendation, we need documentation that CMS has started to incorporate data more broadly into its process for establishing relative values and that it has a documented timeline and plan for how it will use the funds appropriated by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014. As of June 2020, we had not received this documentation.
GAO-15-331, Mar 23, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: NNSA believes it has met the requirements of the recommendation and considers it closed. In our March 2015 report--which examined NNSA's report on the contract to manage and operate the Pantex Plant and the Y-12 National Security Complex under a single management and operating (M&O) contract with Consolidated Nuclear Services (CNS)--we recommended that NNSA enhance the clarity and completeness of its future reports on the costs and benefits of M&O contract competitions. While NNSA demonstrated progress in implementing this recommendation in its September 2017, August 2018, and April 2019 reports to Congress on the costs and benefits of the contract competitions for the Sandia, Nevada, and Los Alamos sites respectively, NNSA did not provide clear and complete information on all required elements of these reports. Specifically, for the Sandia National Laboratories M&O contract, in our August 2018 report we found that NNSA addressed most but not all reporting requirements. For example, NNSA's report addressed all requirements pertaining to cost savings, other benefits, and disruptions or delays, but only partially addressed the reporting requirements on the limitations or uncertainties about cost savings and on the immediate costs of competition and over the life of the contract. NNSA issued a report in August 2018 on the costs and benefits of its competition of the M&O contract for the Nevada National Security Site. In our April 2019 report on NNSA's cost-benefit analysis of that contract competition, we found that, of the five required reporting elements, NNSA's report addressed one with detail but addressed the other four without detail. In April 2019 NNSA issued its cost-benefit analysis of the competition for the Los Alamos National Laboratory contract. In our January 2020 report on NNSA's cost-benefit report for that contract competition, we found that it addressed five reporting elements on costs and disruption during contract transition with detail, partially addressed two reporting elements on uncertainties and benefits, and did not address one reporting element on activities to be covered by the M&O contractor. Since our 2015 recommendation, NNSA's cost-benefit reports on M&O contract competitions have generally provided clearer and more complete information on most of the required reporting elements, but they have not provided clear and complete information on all required reporting elements. In June 2020, NNSA announced that it would end the current CNS contract for Pantex and Y-12 management and operations instead of awarding the contractor its final option term. This will result in a new contract competition and award by the end of the current contract's term on September 30, 2021. The NNSA report on the costs and benefits of that competition may give us another opportunity to assess the quality of NNSA's reports for clarity and completeness on the required reporting elements.
GAO-15-226, Feb 26, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-5431
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. In September 2016, the Marine Corps established a Customer Wait Time (CWT) standard and developed CWT metrics that are in alignment with DOD policy. These changes were to be incorporated into Marine Corps policy through their normal Service procedures. As of August 2020, the Marine Corps has the CWT standard included in its new policy document, but the policy is going through internal coordination and is still in draft at this time. Current timeframe for publication is January 2021. Once we confirm the CWT standard is in the issued policy, we will close the recommendation.
GAO-15-74, Jan 27, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-7215
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor (DOL) agreed that this type of information may be helpful in determining the extent to which lump sum window offers are made, as well as the types of disclosures the participants receive. However, as of July 2017, DOL reported that it has not identified authority under ERISA for it to impose such a requirement on plan sponsors either before or shortly after the plan offers the lump sum window. The agency states that ERISA expressly provides specific reporting and disclosure requirements. These include various filings, such as annual financial reports, reports upon plan termination, and reports upon making certain transfers of pension plan assets to health benefit accounts. The agency believes ERISA does not require plans to notify them regarding the benefit distribution options they offer or changes in those options, and does not read the broad rulemaking authority in ERISA in Section 505 (general regulations) and Section 110 (pension reporting and disclosure) as authorizing EBSA to establish the notice filing requirement GAO recommended. The agency also commented that ERISA expressly requires that most pension plans file a Form 5500 annual report with the statute specifying the required contents of this annual report in some detail and requiring "such other financial and actuarial information as the Secretary may find necessary or appropriate." Although the agency noted it could, by regulation, require reporting on lump sum window offers on the Form 5500, there would be a substantial time lag because ERISA by statute establishes the reporting cycle for the Form 5500 -- the report is not due until 210 days (7 months) after the plan year closes (e.g., for calendar year plans, July 31st of the following year). The agency recognizes that this might not be responsive to the recommendation, which appears to envision a notification system that is relatively contemporaneous with the lump sum window being offered to participants and beneficiaries. In 2018, DOL noted that it allocated its regulatory resources to other priority projects and, as of June 2020, reported that this status remains unchanged.
Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Labor agreed with this recommendation, noting it is important to coordinate with the Treasury Department/IRS and PBGC to clarify the guidance regarding the information sponsors and other plan fiduciaries should provide to participants and beneficiaries when extending lump sum window offers. In 2016, the agency noted that the manner of publishing that guidance would be part of that coordination process. They may consider some formal public request for input (such as publishing a Request for Information in the Federal Register) and focus group or other field testing work. In addition, the agency noted that the 2015 ERISA Advisory Council announced that one of its projects this year concerns how to give participants effective notices and disclosures concerning lump sum window offers, including possible development of model participant notices. The 2015 Council developed recommendations and model notices on lump sum window offers in "pension risk transfer transactions," and suggested that DOL make the Model Notices available on its web site to plan sponsors and participant advocates and that plan sponsors use the Model Notices when engaging in risk transfer transactions. Similar to other model communications developed by the 2015 Council, the agency believes the model notice could be further enhanced if subjected to broader public input from, for example, plan sponsors, participant advocates, communications experts, and academics. Subject to the limits on its authority in this area and resource constraints. They are considering efforts to obtain public input on the Council's recommendations and model notice. They also intend to contact the Treasury Department/IRS and PBGC to discuss the Council's recommendations. In 2017, EBSA reported that it does not have a specific timeline for any next action but would alert GAO if a decision is made to add such a project to EBSA's agenda. In 2018, DOL noted that it allocated its regulatory resources to other priority projects and, as of June 2020, reported no additional changes.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.
Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open
Comments: Treasury generally agreed with this recommendation but did not provide specific comments on plans to address it. As of August 2019, Treasury has not addressed this recommendation.
GAO-15-112, Jan 23, 2015
Phone: (202) 512-8777
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: In response to our report, in December 2016, Congress passed and the President signed the FBI Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-302, which, among other things, provides a means for FBI employees to obtain corrective action for retaliation for disclosures of wrongdoing made to supervisors and others in the employees' chain of command. Following this, the FBI worked closely with the Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG) to develop a training that clearly identifies to whom FBI employees may make protected disclosures. In addition, the FBI issued an aligned policy directive and two fact sheets detailing whistleblower rights. In October 2018, a DOJ official reported to us that the department was in the process of updating its regulations and, in February 2020, DOJ officials confirmed that the updated regulation was in the departmental clearance process but they could not provide an estimate for when it would be finalized. As a result, as of February 2020, DOJ's regulations have not been updated and are inconsistent with the current statute and FBI's guidance and training; as such, the problem of unclear or conflicting guidance to FBI employees still needs to be addressed. To address this recommendation, DOJ would need to update its regulations and ensure that all relevant guidance is clear and consistent across the department.
GAO-14-648, Sep 19, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-9627
including 4 priority recommendations
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest information on DHS headquarters consolidation efforts when it is provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading capital planning practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150), enacted on April 29, 2016, mirrors GAO recommendations in this area. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS's headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region, and an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. We will review the latest information on DHS's headquarters consolidation efforts when it is provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of these recommendations at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading practices for capital planning and cost and schedule estimation is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes updated cost and schedule estimates for the consolidation project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest DHS headquarters consolidation cost and schedule estimates when they are provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading cost and schedule estimation practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: General Services Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of April 2020, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes updated cost and schedule estimates for the consolidation project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. GAO will review the latest DHS headquarters consolidation cost and schedule estimates when they are provided to Congress, and will assess the materials in the context of this recommendation at that time. Continued DHS and GSA attention to following leading cost and schedule estimation practices is critical given the project's multi-billion dollar cost and impact on future departmental operations.
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: The Department of Homeland Security Headquarters Consolidation Accountability Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-150) was enacted on April 29, 2016. Among other things, the act requires DHS, in coordination with GSA, to submit information to Congress about DHS headquarters consolidation efforts not later than 120 days of enactment. As of March 2019, DHS and GSA had not submitted the information to Congress required by Pub. L. No. 114-150. Required information includes: a comprehensive assessment of property and facilities utilized by DHS in the National Capital Region; an analysis that identifies the costs and benefits of leasing and construction alternatives for the remainder of the consolidation project; and updated cost and schedule estimates for the project that are consistent with GAO's recommendations in GAO-14-648. Furthermore, the act requires the Comptroller General to evaluate the cost and schedule estimates not later than 90 days after their submittal to Congress. DHS reported that DHS and GSA prepared a comprehensive response to P.L. No. 114-150, but that the consolidation plan and response needed to be revised based on changing budget circumstances, among other things. In April 2020, DHS estimated that the final consolidation plan will be completed and approved in 2020. A comprehensive report to Congress on DHS headquarters consolidation, along with reliable project cost and schedule estimates, could inform Congress's funding decisions.
GAO-14-699, Aug 21, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. The Corps developed a list of projects for deauthorization in accordance with the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, Section 1001, and provided the list to OMB for clearance on January 26, 2018. Additionally, on December 9, 2019, the Corps reported that it provided a list of projects eligible for deauthorization in FY 2020 to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works for review. Upon approval, the list will be sent to OMB for clearance. After receiving OMB clearance, according to the Corps, the list will be provided to Congress and the public in accordance with WRDA. As of July 2020, we are continuing to monitor the Corps' progress in implementing the recommendation.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and as of December 2016, a task order has been awarded for a contractor to prepare a comprehensive inventory of studies authorized by statute. The Corps reported that once the comprehensive inventory of studies is complete, the Corps will develop policies and procedures for the study deauthorization process and those policies and procedures will be used to carry out the process of deauthorizing studies. In March 2020, the Corps reported that it was working to develop a scheduled for providing us with a list of studies eligible for deathorization. As of July 2020, we are continuing to monitor the Corps' progress in implementing the recommendation.
GAO-14-410, Jul 2, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-8678
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: According to HUD officials, Ginnie Mae and FHA met to discuss their manufactured housing programs and produced a white paper. Once we receive a copy of the white paper, we will determine if it addresses our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: As of March 2018, HUD stated that the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs continues to work toward fully implementing both the installation and dispute resolution programs in the default states using two new contractors for these purposes. As the implementation of these programs continues to mature, HUD stated that its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs will be monitoring program requirements and service delivery and gathering data that it can use in assessing the feasibility of putting in place user fees for these programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.
Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
Status: Open
Comments: In response to this recommendation, as of March 2018, HUD plans to consider user fee reserve best practices in evaluating any carryover balances and developing future operating budgets for its manufactured housing programs. The Office of Manufactured Housing Programs plans on reviewing best practices and determining next steps ideally by the end of Fiscal Year 2019. We continue to believe that setting clear goals for the reserve and clarifying how those reserves will be used helps ensure accountability and transparency both to Congress and users of fee-based programs. We will continue to monitor HUD's progress in implementing our recommendation.
GAO-14-412, Jun 11, 2014
Phone: (404) 679-1816
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that the Navy should have followed the policy that requires the decision memorandum, but did not do so because of "compressed timelines." DOD added that it would ensure the completion of decision memorandums for any future early decommissioning recommendations. We have been unable to determine whether DOD has implemented this recommendation since our report was issued. Most recently, DOD has not responded to our October 2019 request for an update. Given the significance of this recommendation, we will continue to leave it open until we are satisfied that DOD has or has not implemented it.
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that although it recognizes the importance of engaging with congressional stakeholders, it did not do so regarding its decommissioning decisions because those decisions were made in the context of budget development. DOD's comments added that until the Secretary of Defense and the President have approved the budget request, all such actions are predecisional and internal, and therefore are not discussed with Congress. DOD also disagreed with the part of our recommendation to require that its early decommissioning decision memorandums specifically address capacity as well as capability gaps, stating that by definition a decommissioning creates a capacity gap. Since our report was issued, we have been unable to determine the extent to which DOD has taken steps to implement this recommendation. Most recently, DOD has not responded to our October 2019 request for an update. Given the significance of this recommendation, we will continue to leave it open until we can determine whether DOD has or has not taken steps to implement it.
GAO-14-114, Feb 3, 2014
Phone: (202) 512-2834
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: FMCSA did not agree with our recommendation, disputing the methodology and conclusions in our report. However, we continue to believe that addressing Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology limitations has merit and could help the agency better target FMCSA's resources to the carriers that pose the highest risk of crashing. For example, we found FMCSA requires a minimum level of information for a carrier to receive an SMS score; however, this requirement is not strong enough to produce sufficiently reliable scores. As a result, FMCSA identified many carriers as high risk that were not later involved in a crash, potentially causing FMCSA to miss opportunities to intervene with higher risk carriers. To fully implement this recommendation, FMCSA should revise SMS methodology to account for data limitations that limit comparisons so that the FMCSA is better positioned to identify and mitigate carriers that pose the greatest safety risks. FMCSA has recently developed and tested a new methodological approach that could potentially account for the limitations we identified. While FMCSA has not yet committed to deploying the new methodology, they hope to do so some time in 2020.
Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open
Comments: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) agreed with the basic principles that GAO addressed in this area, but disagreed with GAO's characterization of FMCSA's proposed Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) rule. In January 2016, FMCSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed a revised methodology for issuance of a safety fitness determination for motor carriers. Specifically, the new methodology would have determined when a motor carrier is not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles in or affecting interstate commerce based on the carrier's on-road safety data; an investigation; or a combination of both. However, in July 2018, in part due to a review of SMS by the National Academies of Science congressionally mandated evaluation of SMS, FMCSA announced that the enhancements previously proposed will not be completed.
GAO-13-621, Jul 18, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-8678
including 1 priority recommendation
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation
Comments: SEC management and the union agreed in November 2018 to implement a new performance management system and a new incentive bonus program in 2020. According to SEC officials, SEC plans to work with OPM to validate the new performance management system by conducting focus groups with staff at the midpoint of the 2020 appraisal period and surveying staff on the new system at the conclusion of the 2020 appraisal period. These plans are consistent with our 2013 recommendation that SEC should conduct periodic validations of its performance management system. In August 2020, SEC reported that it began implementation of the new 2-tier performance management program and will complete the annual rating cycle in December 2020, with feedback and appraisal closeout activities occurring in early calendar year 2021. According to SEC, OPM will assess the new program after calendar year 2020 performance cycle activities are completed. We will continue to monitor SEC's progress in validating the new performance management system.
GAO-13-534, Jun 28, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-3841
Agency: Department of Energy
Status: Open
Comments: In April 2017, the Director of NNSA Office of Policy issued guidance to NNSA Laboratory Field Office Managers to update contracts to include a new clause requiring laboratory contractors to submit a strategic plan every year in accordance with guidance. Part of the annual plan requires contractors to discuss the costs of doing business and cost-increase factors at the sites, including overhead dollars. The annual strategic plan is due to the NNSA Office of Policy by August 15 each year. The annual strategic plans included information on indirect costs and cost drivers, but did not include benchmarking. We again requested information on the benchmarking requirements, if any, in July 2020.
GAO-13-246, May 31, 2013
Phone: (202) 512-7114
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, HHS officials informed us that they plan to implement this recommendation in March 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, HHS officials informed us that they plan to implement this recommendation in March 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In June 2019, HHS officials informed us that they plan to implement this recommendation in March 2020. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-12-16, Dec 8, 2011
Phone: (202) 512-7022
Agency: Congress
Status: Open
Comments: As of September 2020, Congress had not taken actions to clarify the provisions we had noted within the Liability Risk Retention Act as causing some uncertainty among risk retention groups and state insurance regulators.
GAO-11-494R, Jun 21, 2011
Phone: (202)512-9521
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: IRS's actions to address this recommendation are ongoing. IRS officials stated that during fiscal year 2020, Facilities Management and Security Services (FMSS) will update the Internal Revenue Manual to reflect the necessary guidance for service center guards and FMSS physical security specialists to know (1) whom the guards are to contact to report lighting outages and (2) how lighting outages are to be documented and tracked until resolved.
GAO-11-280, Apr 7, 2011
Phone: (202)512-7043
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. In November 2014, CMS officials reported that the agency's Survey and Certification Group was in the early stages of a planned multi-year review of all of its business processes, including those related to nursing home complaint investigations. Officials stated that, as part of that review, agency staff would seek to provide clarification on all aspects of the complaint process, including what it means to substantiate a complaint. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: In November 2014, CMS officials reported that the fiscal year 2014 protocol for assessment of state agency performance includes a new measure that tracks how soon after the completion of a complaint investigation a state agency uploads data from that investigation to CMS's complaint tracking system. However, the protocol does not call for assessment of the number of days by which state survey agencies miss the deadlines for some complaint investigations--a measure that we suggested could provide a more comprehensive picture of state agency performance. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed that CMS needed to take steps to strengthen and increase accountability of state survey agencies' management of nursing home complaints. In November 2014, CMS officials reported that while they believed the CMS State Operations Manual, which specifies procedures for addressing complaints, provides significant guidance regarding the information that state agencies should convey to complainants at the close of an investigation, they would review the guidance to identify any needed changes. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed that CMS needed to take steps to strengthen and increase accountability of state survey agencies' management of the nursing home complaints process and stated that CMS would provide clarification and guidance to states to ensure complaints were prioritized at the appropriate level. However, in CMS's fiscal year 2014 protocol for assessment of state agency performance, the prioritization standard still required only that complaints be assigned a priority level at or above the level assigned by CMS reviewers. We remain concerned that defining the standard this way may create an incentive for survey agencies to prioritize some complaints at a higher level than is warranted--which could increase workload and potentially jeopardize the timeliness of investigations that warrant the higher priority level. In July 2019 CMS officials said some actions have been taken and that they would forward us information. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.
GAO-10-56, Nov 19, 2009
Phone: (206)287-4860
Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.
GAO-09-976, Sep 30, 2009
Phone: (202)512-3000
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically share with appropriate staff business rules information, along with related results of periodic evaluations of the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of time frames for regularly sharing business rules information. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open
Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically evaluate the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices and share evaluation results with appropriate staff. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of any evaluation results or a date when IRS expects to complete the first such evaluation. Nor had IRS provided time frames for regularly conducting and sharing business rules evaluation results. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.
GAO-09-483, May 12, 2009
Phone: (202)512-5837
Agency: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Status: Open
Comments: As of June 4, 2019, the revised Prime Broker letter has not been finalized. Staff from the Reg SHO team in SEC's Trading and Markets division stated that they have regularly and continuously asked the industry for comments on the Prime Broker Letter without receiving any real progress. Their most recent request for comments was emailed to industry counsel on May 22, 2019. Industry counsel acknowledged the request but have yet to provide comments.