GAO Reports
GAO Reports
Here's a look at Government Accountability Office reports
Featured Stories
STEM: Additional Data Needed on Graduate Researcher and Postdoctoral Scholar Compensation
WASHINGTON, April 8 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
STEM: Additional Data Needed on Graduate Researcher and Postdoctoral Scholar Compensation
*
Fast Facts
The federal government spends billions each year on science and technology research. That includes training graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, who are critical to the future workforce.
We looked at pay and benefits for these researchers. We found they were paid less than others with the same level of education-about $36,000 per year for grad students and $60,000 for postdocs. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, April 8 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * STEM: Additional Data Needed on Graduate Researcher and Postdoctoral Scholar Compensation * Fast Facts The federal government spends billions each year on science and technology research. That includes training graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, who are critical to the future workforce. We looked at pay and benefits for these researchers. We found they were paid less than others with the same level of education-about $36,000 per year for grad students and $60,000 for postdocs.Researchers told us low pay and uncertainty may prompt some to quit their training.
We found that the National Science Foundation doesn't collect enough data to fully analyze compensation for these researchers. We recommended that it address this issue.
Researchers standing in a lab, surrounded by electrical and other equipment, looking at a laptop.
Highlights
What GAO Found
GAO found that about 62,500 graduate researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and 22,000 STEM postdoctoral scholars (postdocs) received federal funding in academic year 2023, according to analysis of federal data.
Number of STEM Graduate Researchers by Funding Source and Research Field, Academic Year 2023
Number of STEM Postdoctoral Scholars (Postdocs) by Funding Source and Research Field, Academic Year 2023
Federal agencies fund graduate researchers and postdocs either directly-such as through a research fellowship-or indirectly-such as through a grant to a university. For direct funding, agencies are responsible for setting compensation levels. Directly funded STEM postdocs earned a median annual income of $60,000 in academic year 2023-the most recent year for which data were available. Such data are not available for graduate researchers. Universities and other institutions are responsible for setting indirect funding compensation levels. These institutions set compensation based on applicable laws, established policies and practices, geographic market prices, and other considerations. Comprehensive data are not available on indirectly funded compensation, but GAO's analysis of university information found median indirect compensation levels to be about $62,200 for postdocs and $36,000 for graduate researchers in academic year 2025. The most recent U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that a full-time worker with a doctoral degree-a similarly educated group compared to postdocs-earned about $118,000.
Agencies collect varied compensation data for graduate researchers and postdocs, depending on whether they are directly or indirectly funded. For example, the Department of Defense collects stipend information for directly funded graduate researchers and postdocs but not for those that are indirectly funded. This variation creates data gaps. The National Science Foundation (NSF)-the principal federal statistical agency for the STEM workforce-also collects some data on graduate researcher and postdoc compensation but does not collect these data in a manner that allows for a detailed assessment of the adequacy of compensation. NSF would be in a better position to provide policymakers with a more complete picture of the financial health and stability of the U.S. STEM research workforce if it were to comprehensively identify gaps in data needed to fully assess the adequacy of compensation and to assess the feasibility of collecting such data.
In 2022, Congress directed NSF to sponsor a study on graduate student funding, including the effects of different funding mechanisms on graduate student experiences and outcomes. As of March 2026, NSF had not engaged an entity to complete the required study, nor has it established a timeline to do so. Establishing a timeline would help ensure that the study is completed. In turn, completing this study would provide Congress and other policymakers with information to understand existing funding mechanisms' effectiveness and help them determine actions needed to improve graduate researcher experiences and outcomes.
Factors that influence graduate researcher and postdoc recruitment and retention include future career goals, development opportunities, and funding stability, according to 72 postdocs and graduate researchers who responded to GAO's questionnaire. Respondents also identified challenges, including low pay and the cost-of-living in higher cost areas. Stakeholders GAO interviewed said the lack of benefits, such as family and caregiver-oriented support, is a recruitment challenge and may prompt postdocs and graduate researchers to evaluate whether to pursue a program.
Why GAO Did This Study
A robust STEM workforce drives innovation and economic growth and supports U.S. national security. Federal agencies have invested billions of dollars annually in STEM research, which includes investments in graduate researcher and postdoc training. These researchers may receive monetary compensation such as stipends, salaries, and wages, and fringe benefits such as vacation, sick leave, and health insurance. But compensation may be low relative to other professionals with the same level of education and experience. GAO was asked to examine federal compensation for STEM graduate researchers and postdocs. This report examines how many graduate researchers and postdocs receive compensation, the federal role in establishing such compensation, and how compensation-related factors influence recruitment and retention, among other things. GAO selected eight agencies for review-six that provided over 80 percent of federal funding to science and engineering graduate researchers in academic year 2021, and two additional agencies that either collect relevant statistical data or coordinate federal STEM initiatives. GAO also reviewed agency data, interviewed agency officials and stakeholders, and administered an online questionnaire to 72 STEM graduate researchers and postdocs, among other methods.
Recommendations
GAO recommends that NSF (1) conduct an analysis to determine the gaps in data needed to fully assess the adequacy of compensation for graduate researchers and postdoctoral scholars and to assess the feasibility of collecting these data and (2) establish a timeline to conduct a study of the U.S. graduate education system that Congress required by August 2023 and publish the results of this evaluation. NSF agreed with these recommendations.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
National Science Foundation The Director of the National Science Foundation should conduct an analysis to determine the gaps in data needed to fully assess the adequacy of monetary compensation and fringe benefits for graduate researchers and postdoctoral scholars and assess the feasibility of collecting these data. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
National Science Foundation The Director of the National Science Foundation should establish a timeline to undertake an evaluation of NSF's role in supporting graduate researcher education and training through fellowships, traineeships, and other funding models, and of the impact of different funding mechanisms on graduate student experiences and outcomes, and publish the results of this evaluation, as required by the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. (Recommendation 2)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107757
On the Horizon: Three Science and Technology Trends That Could Affect Society
WASHINGTON, April 2 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
On the Horizon: Three Science and Technology Trends That Could Affect Society
*
Fast Facts
In our second periodic report on science and tech trends, we looked at 3 emerging technologies with transformative potential:
Neural implants for human augmentation could enable direct brain-to-brain communication, accelerated learning, or hands-free control of computers, but could also compromise user privacy and security
General purpose robots could alter daily life, with potentially significant ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, April 2 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * On the Horizon: Three Science and Technology Trends That Could Affect Society * Fast Facts In our second periodic report on science and tech trends, we looked at 3 emerging technologies with transformative potential: Neural implants for human augmentation could enable direct brain-to-brain communication, accelerated learning, or hands-free control of computers, but could also compromise user privacy and security General purpose robots could alter daily life, with potentially significantsocial and environmental effects
Technologies to remove "space junk" could reduce the danger that more than 1 million pieces of debris pose to vital infrastructure in orbit, but legal ambiguities could stand in the way
The words emerging trends 2026 are capitalized, along with six icons, 1. a robot walking, 2. a robot arm with hand attachment, 3. a person with a device in their brain, 4. a brain, 5. a device grabbing onto a satellite, and 6. the earth covered with satellites
Highlights
What GAO Found
GAO identified three potentially transformative technologies that are trending toward maturity and may need congressional attention over the next 10 years. These technologies are:
* Neural implants for human augmentation. Currently, neural implants are only available to people with certain medical needs. Future implants might enable direct brain-to-brain communication, hands-free control of computers, or the rapid acquisition of new skills and abilities. General availability of neural implants could compromise users' privacy and security, depending on who can access data from such implants. In addition, differentiating between medical and augmentative uses would involve subjective value judgments and ethical questions. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including determining whether to propose standards for the ethical development and use of neural implants or explore ways to ensure that privacy and security concerns are addressed.
* General purpose robots. General purpose robotics represents a fundamental shift from task-specific automation to flexible, adaptable machines capable of performing a wide range of tasks and potentially learning new tasks. Such robots could assist with a variety of tasks, including helping maintain infrastructure and assisting with disaster response. But their use could also lead to significant social impacts, such as risks associated with giving robots a level of autonomy in hazardous environments. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including determining whether to explore a broad range of oversight, risk assessment, or control mechanisms (such as software controls requiring human confirmation) to help mitigate these concerns.
* Orbital debris removal technologies. There are more than 15,000 pieces of orbital debris currently tracked, with more than a million pieces that are too small to track but can still damage satellites and other spacecraft that provide important services. Technology is in development to actively remove, relocate, or repurpose large, non-tumbling debris. This could reduce the risk of a catastrophic cascade of collisions, but would not eliminate it because small or tumbling debris constitute the vast majority of dangerous debris. Additionally, further development and use of novel technologies may be hampered by possible legal difficulties posed by the Outer Space Treaty. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including supporting targeted research to fill technological gaps or initiating legal analyses to develop solutions to legal difficulties. GAO is not making recommendations but has identified several policy considerations for the Congress and others to weigh as these technologies continue developing.
Why GAO Did This Study
Science and technology are constantly evolving, and there is a need for analysis of emerging trends of the future to help prepare for disruptions that may have major impacts in the lives of Americans. To address this need, GAO developed this report focused on technologies approximately 10 years on the horizon. The goal is to provide foresight into developing technologies that could have significant impacts on Americans.
GAO described developments in these technologies and how they may be affected by various elements which may be useful for policymakers, such as legislative bodies, government agencies, or other groups, to consider. These elements include the five domains in the STEER framework: social impacts, technology drivers, environmental impacts, economic drivers, and the regulatory landscape.
To conduct this work, GAO relied on a review of scientific literature from academic journals and position papers and held semi-structured interviews with eleven experts across the three technologies. GAO relied on the judgment of its engineers and scientists and consideration of the collected information to describe key aspects of the technological trends, including identifying technological developments, market conditions, or economies of scale that could further accelerate the maturity of these new technologies, and considerations for policymakers.
Recommendations
GAO is not making recommendations but has identified several policy considerations for the Congress and others to weigh as these technologies continue developing.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108079
Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund: Procedures Related to FY 2024 Receipts and Disbursements
WASHINGTON, March 31 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund: Procedures Related to FY 2024 Receipts and Disbursements
*
Fast Facts
The Senate Gift Shop sells gift and memorabilia items to members of the Senate, their staff, and the public. As part of our role in helping Congress oversee its own funds, we performed certain procedures that the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration requested on behalf of the Secretary of the Senate. We reviewed the documents supporting the Gift Shop's fiscal year 2024 receipts ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 31 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund: Procedures Related to FY 2024 Receipts and Disbursements * Fast Facts The Senate Gift Shop sells gift and memorabilia items to members of the Senate, their staff, and the public. As part of our role in helping Congress oversee its own funds, we performed certain procedures that the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration requested on behalf of the Secretary of the Senate. We reviewed the documents supporting the Gift Shop's fiscal year 2024 receiptsand disbursements.
Our report provides the results of performing each of the procedures and includes responses to our findings from officials at the Senate Gift Shop. We make no overall conclusion on the results.
The Capitol building
Highlights
What GAO Found
GAO performed agreed-upon procedures solely to assist the Secretary of the Senate in ascertaining whether information from the Senate Gift Shop and the Senate Disbursing Office supported the Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund's (Fund) fiscal year 2024 receipts and disbursements. The procedures that GAO agreed to perform were related to the Senate Gift Shop's processes over (1) daily receipts, weekly deposits, and monthly reconciliations for the Fund's receipts and (2) purchasing, invoice payment, and monthly reconciliations for the Fund's disbursements.
The Secretary of the Senate is responsible for the sufficiency of these agreed-upon procedures to meet its objectives, and GAO makes no representation in that respect. The report provides details on the agreed-upon procedures and the results of performing each of the procedures.
The Secretary of the Senate in an email response stated that she had no comments on the report.
Why GAO Did This Study
The Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration requested that GAO perform procedures on the Fund's fiscal year 2024 receipts and disbursements. The Senate Gift Shop is under the authority of the Secretary of the Senate and is responsible for offering members, staff, and the general public the opportunity to purchase Senate memorabilia and gifts. Sales receipts are deposited into the Fund at the Senate Disbursing Office and then used to purchase inventory items for resale, supplies, and other services.
For more information, contact: Cheryl E. Clark at clarkce@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108543
Veteran Homelessness Programs: Opportunities to Improve Data Collection and Establish an Evaluation Plan
WASHINGTON, March 30 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Veteran Homelessness Programs: Opportunities to Improve Data Collection and Establish an Evaluation Plan
*
Fast Facts
The Veterans Affairs Department collaborates with the Department of Housing and Urban Development on a program that provides affordable housing and related support to veterans experiencing homelessness.
However, sometimes VA staff don't refer eligible veterans to the program. During 2020-2024, 174,000 eligible veterans were not referred, and VA didn't document the reason ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 30 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Veteran Homelessness Programs: Opportunities to Improve Data Collection and Establish an Evaluation Plan * Fast Facts The Veterans Affairs Department collaborates with the Department of Housing and Urban Development on a program that provides affordable housing and related support to veterans experiencing homelessness. However, sometimes VA staff don't refer eligible veterans to the program. During 2020-2024, 174,000 eligible veterans were not referred, and VA didn't document the reasonwhy for most of them (87%). Having such data can help VA fix problems that keep people out of the program-such as not having enough VA case managers to support program participants.
We made recommendations to help address this and other issues.
A photo of a key and a house keychain on top of an American flag.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Departments of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) jointly operate the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program. Veterans experiencing homelessness receive HUD housing vouchers and VA case management delivered through local VA medical centers.
VA has faced challenges hiring and retaining enough case managers. In fiscal year 2024, more than one-quarter of medical centers with two or more case managers had at least 20 percent of these positions unfilled (see figure). Factors contributing to vacancies included staff burnout and turnover. GAO analysis of VA data shows that annual case manager turnover ranged from 20 percent to 26 percent in fiscal years 2020-2024. Stakeholders at all eight sites GAO visited described periods of high turnover and persistent vacancies. The effects of insufficient staffing include reduced services for veterans and delays in admitting new participants.
HUD-VASH Case Manager Staffing Levels in Fiscal Year 2024, by VA Medical Center
Each dot represents a VA medical center's staffing level for the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program.
VA has taken steps to improve case manager hiring but has not consistently collected data on reasons that prevented veterans from entering HUD-VASH. Of 174,045 instances of veterans not being referred to the program in 2020-2024, VA did not document the reason in 151,296 (87 percent), according to GAO's analysis. With more complete data on the reasons, VA could better assess its unmet need, adjust hiring strategies, and allocate case managers accordingly. VA then would be better positioned to serve more veterans.
HUD launched the Tribal HUD-VASH pilot program in fiscal year 2016 to test a new approach to serving American Indian/Alaska Native veterans and had served over 1,100 veterans as of April 2025, according to HUD. HUD's program design aligns to some extent with leading practices GAO identified in prior work. For example, HUD communicated with stakeholders at all stages of the program. But HUD has not clearly defined the program's objectives or how it will measure progress toward them. HUD also has not implemented an evaluation plan. By fully incorporating leading practices, HUD could help ensure it has the information needed to make informed decisions about the program.
Why GAO Did This Study
HUD estimated that 32,882 veterans experienced homelessness on a single night in January 2024. Some policymakers note that this population faces significant barriers, including high housing costs. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 includes a provision for GAO to review VA case management and the availability of affordable housing for veterans experiencing homelessness. This report examines, among other things, challenges reported by VA staff and stakeholders related to (1) hiring and retaining case managers for HUD-VASH, and (2) implementing Tribal HUD-VASH.
GAO analyzed data on HUD-VASH case managers for fiscal years 2020-2024; reviewed VA and HUD policies and guidance; and reviewed HUD documentation on the Tribal HUD-VASH program. GAO interviewed officials from VA and HUD and housing and service providers at eight sites GAO visited (selected for geographic diversity and prevalence of veteran homelessness).
Recommendations
GAO recommends that VA collect comprehensive data on the reasons veterans are not referred to HUD-VASH and take appropriate corrective actions. GAO also recommends that HUD clearly define measurable objectives and develop and implement a data analysis plan to evaluate Tribal HUD-VASH. VA agreed with the recommendation. HUD did not agree or disagree but indicated it would take actions to implement the recommendation.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Department of Veterans Affairs The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure that the Senior Executive Director of the Homeless Programs Office develops a method for requiring VAMCs to collect data on the reasons eligible veterans were not referred to HUD-VASH, including when veterans are not referred due to insufficient case management capacity, and use these data, as appropriate, to inform staffing assessments. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Department of Housing and Urban Development The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should ensure that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Programs clearly define its objectives for the Tribal HUD-VASH pilot program and how it will measure progress toward them and develop and implement a data collection and analysis plan for evaluating the program. The plan should include how lessons learned will inform decisions on scalability or integrating pilot activities into overall efforts. (Recommendation 2)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107517
Securities And Exchange Commission: Recent Workforce Reductions and Other Personnel Management Changes
WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Securities And Exchange Commission: Recent Workforce Reductions and Other Personnel Management Changes
*
Fast Facts
Since January 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission has made significant personnel management changes in response to executive orders and other directions from the administration. For example, it offered voluntary departure incentives-which over 12% of staff took in FY 2025-and required employees to work in the office full time.
SEC's 2024 employee survey results ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Securities And Exchange Commission: Recent Workforce Reductions and Other Personnel Management Changes * Fast Facts Since January 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission has made significant personnel management changes in response to executive orders and other directions from the administration. For example, it offered voluntary departure incentives-which over 12% of staff took in FY 2025-and required employees to work in the office full time. SEC's 2024 employee survey resultswere positive overall and our May-June 2025 interviews with SEC staff highlighted positive practices. But employees also raised concerns about the effect of workforce reductions and the cancelation of telework.
SEC is working to manage the effects of these workforce changes.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission building facade with the U.S. flag atop a flagpole in the foreground.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Since January 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has implemented significant personnel management changes in response to executive orders and other direction from the administration. Key changes include offering voluntary departure incentives, requiring employees to work in the office full time, and removing references to diversity, equity, and inclusion from SEC policies and procedures. About 18 percent of employees left SEC during the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025. Most employees who departed took a voluntary departure incentive, and according to SEC, it did not conduct any involuntary terminations in response to executive actions in 2025. SEC also paused its leadership development program in 2025, in part due to uncertainty about the availability and timing of future advancement opportunities.
SEC Employee Departures, Fiscal Year 2025
SEC's 2024 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey results were positive overall and showed improvement in prior challenge areas, such as performance management and communication across divisions and offices. GAO interviews with SEC employees in May and June 2025 highlighted positive practices in these areas, such as supervisors' use of formal and informal feedback to recognize performance. However, employees GAO spoke with raised concerns about the effect of workforce reductions (48 of 61 employees) and the cancellation of routine telework (43 of 61 employees). For example, 33 of the 61 said that departing employees had either unique knowledge or specific subject-matter expertise, resulting in a loss of institutional knowledge. A few employees (8 of 61) stated that as of the time of the interviews, they believed SEC had not yet experienced the full effects of these departures.
SEC has made efforts to manage and assess the effects of its 2025 workforce changes. For example, it has taken steps to manage the effects of staff departures, including holding meetings with division and major office heads to identify skill and resource gaps and adjusting the targeted ratio of employees per senior officer. In December 2025, SEC also submitted a staffing plan that identified positions for potential hiring for each division and office. As SEC continues to address the effects of recent workforce changes, GAO will monitor its efforts through its triennial reports.
Why GAO Did This Study
SEC relies on a highly skilled workforce to carry out its mission as the primary regulator of the U.S. securities markets. That mission is to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitate capital formation. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains a provision for GAO to report triennially on the quality of SEC's personnel management. GAO's previous four reports ( GAO-13-621, GAO-17-65, GAO-20-208, and GAO-23-105459 ) identified several challenges and included 11 recommendations, all of which SEC has addressed.
This report addresses (1) key personnel management changes SEC has implemented since GAO's 2022 report, (2) employees' views on SEC's personnel management, and (3) steps SEC has taken to manage and assess the effects of recent personnel management changes on its mission.
GAO reviewed SEC documents and workforce data and interviewed SEC officials. GAO also analyzed SEC employee responses to the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey from 2022 through 2024 (the latest available) and interviewed a nongeneralizable sample of 61 SEC employees in nine mission-critical divisions and offices.
For more information, contact Michael E. Clements at clementsm@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107813
Minority Business Development Agency: Information on Performance Assessment and Compliance Monitoring
WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Minority Business Development Agency: Information on Performance Assessment and Compliance Monitoring
*
Fast Facts
The Minority Business Development Agency has programs to grow and develop businesses owned and operated by socially or economically disadvantaged people. The agency helps these businesses access capital, markets, and contracting opportunities through its network of 39 business centers (as of 2024).
This Q&A report reviews MBDA's performance monitoring and program oversight. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Minority Business Development Agency: Information on Performance Assessment and Compliance Monitoring * Fast Facts The Minority Business Development Agency has programs to grow and develop businesses owned and operated by socially or economically disadvantaged people. The agency helps these businesses access capital, markets, and contracting opportunities through its network of 39 business centers (as of 2024). This Q&A report reviews MBDA's performance monitoring and program oversight.We found that MBDA annually rates how centers meet performance goals. 5 of the 7 we reviewed received the highest rating in 2023-2024.
MBDA also monitors how centers comply with program requirements. 5 centers initiated improvement plans in 2021-2024.
Two people at a desk using a laptop in a bright office setting.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Minority Business Development Agency's (MBDA) mission is to promote the growth and competitiveness of minority business enterprises. These enterprises are statutorily defined as being at least 51 percent owned, operated, and controlled by one or more socially or economically disadvantaged individuals. MBDA supports these enterprises through a network of business centers designed to expand their access to capital, contract opportunities, and markets. In 2024, there were 39 active business centers.
MBDA's responsibilities include assessing business centers' performance against annual program goals and monitoring their compliance with statutory and program requirements. GAO's review of performance information for a sample of seven centers found that most reported exceeding annual goals in 2024. MBDA monitoring includes reviews of centers' performance and financial reports and site visits by MBDA staff. In 2023, MBDA initiated performance improvement plans for five of the 39 centers for issues such as submitting incomplete reports.
MBDA's Key Activities for Monitoring and Enforcing Compliance at Business Centers
Following executive orders issued in February and March 2025, MBDA and business centers lost access to the agency's performance data platform, nearly all MBDA staff were placed on administrative leave, and cooperative agreements with business centers were terminated. In May 2025, staff reductions and some agreement terminations were rescinded by a preliminary injunction order issued by a federal district court. According to MBDA officials, the agency retained its performance data. In November 2025, the same court issued an order vacating agency actions under the March executive order and a permanent injunction prohibiting the federal government from implementing the executive order. However, in January 2026 the defendants, including MBDA, appealed the November 2025 decision. The appeal was pending as of February 27, 2026.
Why GAO Did This Study
The Minority Business Development Act of 2021 includes a provision for GAO to review MBDA's programs, including business center compliance with program requirements. This report describes MBDA programs, its assessment and oversight of business centers, and the effects of executive orders issued in early 2025. GAO analyzed agency documents, notices of funding opportunity, and performance reports; reviewed laws, executive orders, and research literature; and interviewed MBDA officials, business center operators, and advocacy organizations. GAO also reviewed 2024 performance data for a nongeneralizable sample of seven business centers (selected in part for geographic diversity) and analyzed compliance and enforcement activity in 2021-2024.
For more information, contact Courtney LaFountain at LaFountainC@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107718
Cyber Workforce: Evidence-Based Decision Needed for the Future of OPM's Dashboard
WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Cyber Workforce: Evidence-Based Decision Needed for the Future of OPM's Dashboard
*
Fast Facts
A shortage of IT professionals and the need for a talented cyber workforce is one of the federal government's most important challenges. The Office of Personnel Management created the Cyber Workforce Dashboard to help federal agencies make informed workforce planning decisions.
But we found that 5 of the 6 agencies we looked at-and OPM itself-don't use the Dashboard. All 6 agencies reported ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Cyber Workforce: Evidence-Based Decision Needed for the Future of OPM's Dashboard * Fast Facts A shortage of IT professionals and the need for a talented cyber workforce is one of the federal government's most important challenges. The Office of Personnel Management created the Cyber Workforce Dashboard to help federal agencies make informed workforce planning decisions. But we found that 5 of the 6 agencies we looked at-and OPM itself-don't use the Dashboard. All 6 agencies reportedissues with the functionality and usefulness of the data in the Dashboard.
We recommended that OPM either terminate the Dashboard or address feedback from agencies and continue offering it with needed improvements.
Hands typing on a laptop computer with an illustration of technical human resource management charts floating above the keyboard.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) launched its Cyber Workforce Dashboard in 2023 as a government-wide application for managing the cybersecurity workforce. The intended purpose of the Dashboard was to provide a comprehensive government-wide view of federal cyber workforce data and to allow agencies to benchmark their workforce data against other agencies.
However, five of six selected agencies and OPM, the administrator of the Dashboard, reported they were not using the Dashboard. The General Services Administration was the one agency using it, primarily for workforce planning. All six selected agencies reported limitations with the Dashboard, including communications with OPM, access, functionality, and use of data. OPM reported many of the same types of limitations in managing the effort.
Number of Office of Personnel Management's Cyber Workforce Dashboard Limitations Experienced by the Six Selected Agencies
Given the lack of use, the Dashboard is not meeting its intended purpose for the six selected agencies. Further, OPM does not know the extent of non-use by the almost 20 other federal agencies that have access to the Dashboard. Additionally, OPM has not solicited feedback on it. Regarding costs, according to OPM officials, the funds spent on the Dashboard effort since its inception were minimal and therefore not covered by a separate budget line item. Officials added that they did not have an estimate of exact costs or future planned costs.
Without information on the extent of use among the more than 20 federal agencies, OPM is limited in knowing whether it should continue or terminate the effort. Expeditiously collecting and analyzing such information, soliciting feedback from agencies, and determining costs are essential to determining the future of the Dashboard.
Why GAO Did This Study
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Office of the National Cyber Director (ONCD), and prior GAO reports have stated that the federal government faces a persistent shortage of cyber and IT professionals. Building and maintaining a talented cyber workforce is one of the federal government's most important challenges. The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 includes a provision for GAO to periodically evaluate federal agencies' information security policies and practices. This includes evaluating agencies' cybersecurity workforce management policies and applications, such as the Dashboard. This report (1) describes the Dashboard, (2) describes how selected federal agencies are using the Dashboard to support their workforce planning efforts, and (3) determines the extent to which the Dashboard is meeting its intended purpose. GAO randomly selected six agencies, divided into three tiers based on their reported fiscal year 2025 IT spending. GAO interviewed relevant OPM and agency officials and reviewed Dashboard documentation and usage metrics that OPM initially gathered after the Dashboard was launched. GAO also analyzed applicable guidance, best practices, and relevant Dashboard documentation.
Recommendations
GAO is making one recommendation to OPM to collect and analyze information on Dashboard use, solicit agency feedback on Dashboard limitations, determine the costs, and make an evidence-based decision to either terminate the Dashboard or continue offering it to agencies with needed improvements. OPM partially concurred and stated that it will work with ONCD and OMB to determine what actions, if any, should be taken and OMB to determine what actions, if any, should be taken.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Office of Personnel Management The Director of the Office of Personnel Management should collect and analyze information on Dashboard use, solicit agency feedback on Dashboard limitations, determine the costs, and make an evidence-based decision to either terminate the Dashboard or continue offering it to agencies with needed improvements. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108098
CMS Innovation Center: Obligations and Model Testing Progress
WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
CMS Innovation Center: Obligations and Model Testing Progress
*
Fast Facts
Federal spending on health care for Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance is expected to top $1.6 trillion in 2025 and keep increasing.
The CMS Innovation Center was created by law to test new approaches to health care delivery-called "models"-that could curb spending while providing better care. We reviewed the Center's efforts and funds.
Since 2010, the Center has committed to spend $11.4 billion ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 27 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * CMS Innovation Center: Obligations and Model Testing Progress * Fast Facts Federal spending on health care for Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance is expected to top $1.6 trillion in 2025 and keep increasing. The CMS Innovation Center was created by law to test new approaches to health care delivery-called "models"-that could curb spending while providing better care. We reviewed the Center's efforts and funds. Since 2010, the Center has committed to spend $11.4 billionand has tested or is testing 70 models. The Center expanded 4 models nationwide and improved others. It established new short- and long-term goals in 2025 to help shape its portfolio of models and assess future performance.
A stethoscope and calculator laying on top of an itemized medical bill
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Innovation Center) was established within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to test new approaches to health care delivery and payment-known as models-for use in Medicare or Medicaid. From 2011 through 2024, the Innovation Center obligated $11.4 billion for its activities. These included the testing of 70 models-24 of which were actively being tested as of January 2025. Total annual obligations peaked at $1.3 billion in fiscal year 2015 and have since decreased by nearly 40 percent to $789 million in fiscal year 2024. According to officials, these trends reflect the number of models the Innovation Center tests, among other factors.
Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Innovation Center) General Process for Model Development and Testing
Of 70 models tested, the Innovation Center has expanded four models to be implemented nationwide. These four models achieved net savings during the testing period. In addition to expanding certain models, the Innovation Center has also incorporated elements into Medicare and tested successor models that iterate upon previous concepts.
The Innovation Center uses selected performance management practices to regularly assess the performance of its efforts to test new health care delivery and payment approaches. For example, in May 2025, the Innovation Center established new long-term goals to outline the agency's vision for its activities. It also developed corresponding near-term goals, including performance measures with targets and time frames. The Innovation Center uses this information to evaluate its progress toward its long-term goals, according to officials, and plans to regularly assess the outcomes of its activities against these near-term goals.
Why GAO Did This Study
In 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act established the Innovation Center to test new health care delivery and payment approaches to reduce federal health spending. In 2012 and 2018, GAO reported on the Innovation Center's progress in testing models, use of resources, and its assessment of its overall performance.
GAO was asked to update its earlier work. In this report, GAO (1) describes the Innovation Center's obligations from 2011 through 2024 and how it obligated the funds to develop and test models; (2) describes the outcomes of model testing; and (3) examines the extent to which the Innovation Center follows selected practices of performance management to assess its performance.
GAO reviewed obligations data from fiscal years 2011 through 2024, reviewed model documentation and performance information, and compared efforts against selected performance management practices. GAO interviewed officials from the Innovation Center and CMS's Office of the Actuary.
For more information, contact Leslie V. Gordon at GordonLV@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107953
Commercial Shipbuilding: Selected Offshore Wind Projects Used a Mix of U.S. and Foreign Vessels, Spurring Some Shipbuilding Investments
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Commercial Shipbuilding: Selected Offshore Wind Projects Used a Mix of U.S. and Foreign Vessels, Spurring Some Shipbuilding Investments
*
Fast Facts
By law, some of the ships used to build offshore wind farms must be U.S. flag-i.e., built and registered in the U.S. and largely crewed by domestic mariners. Such projects may help increase investment in the U.S. maritime industry, which plays a vital role in national security.
We reviewed the extent to which U.S. ships and crews carried ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Commercial Shipbuilding: Selected Offshore Wind Projects Used a Mix of U.S. and Foreign Vessels, Spurring Some Shipbuilding Investments * Fast Facts By law, some of the ships used to build offshore wind farms must be U.S. flag-i.e., built and registered in the U.S. and largely crewed by domestic mariners. Such projects may help increase investment in the U.S. maritime industry, which plays a vital role in national security. We reviewed the extent to which U.S. ships and crews carriedout offshore wind projects.
For the 3 projects we reviewed, 80% of the ships were U.S. flag. The other 20% were large, specialized foreign vessels. Since the foreign vessels were larger and required more crew, a similar number of foreign and domestic mariners worked on these projects.
An installation vessel installing turbines in the water at a U.S. offshore wind project.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Constructing offshore wind projects requires numerous oceangoing vessels (offshore wind vessels). Under the Jones Act and other coastwise laws, vessels used for some U.S. offshore wind activities must be U.S. flag-built and registered in the U.S. and largely crewed by domestic mariners. GAO identified more than 300 unique vessels involved in the construction of three selected U.S. offshore wind projects in the Atlantic Ocean. About 80 percent were U.S.-flag. These U.S.-flag vessels were generally smaller and conducted support activities like ferrying workers and surveying cable routes. About 20 percent of the vessels were foreign-flag; many were large, specialized vessels for which there were no U.S.-flag counterparts. GAO estimated that a similar number of foreign and domestic mariners worked across the vessels for the three selected projects, since the larger, more complex foreign-flag vessels required more mariners.
A Foreign Vessel Installing Turbines at a U.S. Offshore Wind Project
Note: Wind turbine installation vessels often have "legs" capable of extending to the seafloor, allowing the vessel to become a fixed platform.
Fifty new offshore wind vessels, according to the American Clean Power Association, had been delivered, were under construction, or were on order at U.S. shipyards. Constructing all these vessels could generate revenue at almost 20 shipyards across a dozen states. Most are for support vessels, but U.S. vessel owners also invested in two larger, specialized U.S.-built installation vessels. None of the vessel construction was financed using Maritime Administration assistance programs. According to vessel owners GAO interviewed, that was, in part because the application process took too long. Maritime Administration officials said their review process takes, at best, 6 to 9 months. The vessel owners said it often takes much longer. They also said additional vessel construction was unlikely given a lack of future projects.
Why GAO Did This Study
Concerns over the state of U.S. commercial shipbuilding have grown in recent years. Proponents of offshore wind suggest the demands of the industry may provide opportunities to invest in new vessels at U.S. shipyards. Since 2010, the Department of Interior (Interior) has granted about 40 offshore wind leases to commercial developers. Five projects were under construction, as of December 2025. In 2025, the White House took steps to suspend offshore wind development pending review.
GAO was asked to review the extent to which the U.S. maritime industry is constructing U.S. offshore wind projects. This report discusses (1) the extent to which U.S.-flag vessels and domestic mariners were used at selected offshore wind projects and (2) investments in U.S.-built offshore wind vessels, including any use of Maritime Administration financial assistance programs.
GAO selected three offshore wind projects under construction as of August 2025 and analyzed developer-provided data on the vessels used as of November 2025. GAO estimated the range in number of mariners on these vessels based on vessel specifications and discussions with the U.S. Coast Guard and a mariners' union. GAO reviewed an August 2025 study on investments in offshore wind vessels by the American Clean Power Association; spoke with 11 vessel owners and 11 stakeholders identified based on their expertise; reviewed relevant laws; and interviewed officials from the Maritime Administration, Interior, Department of Energy, and Department of Homeland Security.
For more information, contact Andrew Von Ah at VonAha@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107769
Artificial Intelligence: OMB Action Needed to Address Privacy-Related Gaps in Federal Guidance
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Artificial Intelligence: OMB Action Needed to Address Privacy-Related Gaps in Federal Guidance
*
Fast Facts
Federal agencies are increasingly adopting AI as its capabilities improve. However, AI technology poses privacy-related risks and challenges.
For example, using AI may reveal personal and private information in raw data sets. At the same time, agencies don't always have the tools and resources to ensure privacy protection while using AI.
The Office of Management and Budget's ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Artificial Intelligence: OMB Action Needed to Address Privacy-Related Gaps in Federal Guidance * Fast Facts Federal agencies are increasingly adopting AI as its capabilities improve. However, AI technology poses privacy-related risks and challenges. For example, using AI may reveal personal and private information in raw data sets. At the same time, agencies don't always have the tools and resources to ensure privacy protection while using AI. The Office of Management and Budget'sgovernment-wide AI guidance doesn't fully address all the major privacy-related risks and challenges. We recommended that OMB give agencies more direction in addressing these risks and challenges.
A person typing on a computer keyboard with illustrations of several exclamation points each in a triangle positioned around a shield that has A.I. in the middle, superimposed over the person's hands.
Highlights
What GAO Found
GAO convened a panel of experts who identified privacy risks and challenges associated with the use of artificial intelligence (AI), which align with GAO's prior reporting on AI use. For example, the experts noted that using AI may reveal sensitive information in raw data sets, potentially exposing personal and private information, among other privacy risks. At the same time, the experts identified several challenges that federal agencies face in addressing these risks. These include the lack of technology to implement AI with appropriate privacy protections and the potential performance tradeoff when adjusting or removing certain data for the sake of privacy.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s government-wide AI guidance does not fully address all the identified privacy-related risks and challenges. Specifically, OMB's guidance does not specify the types of known privacy-related risks that agencies should consider when establishing policies to address privacy in AI. OMB's guidance provides direction on addressing two challenges identified by the panelists: the need for enhanced skills among the federal workforce to effectively implement AI and the ability to accelerate and scale the implementation of AI systems with privacy protections. However, the guidance does not fully address the remaining eight challenges.
Extent to Which the Office of Management and Budget's Government-wide Guidance Addressed 10 Selected Expert-identified Privacy-related Challenges When Using Artificial Intelligence (AI), as of January 2026
Given the risks and challenges, additional guidance from OMB could help ensure agencies take appropriate steps to protect the privacy of sensitive data when using AI. OMB could also use existing mechanisms, such as the Chief AI Officer Council or Federal Privacy Council, as forums for interagency information-sharing about strategies or best practices for addressing AI-related privacy challenges. Without this additional direction, risks are increased that agencies' use of AI would disclose sensitive data, or compromise privacy in other ways.
Why GAO Did This Study
AI is rapidly evolving and has significant potential to transform society and people's lives. Further, surges in AI capabilities have led to a wide range of innovations with substantial promise for improving the operations of government agencies. However, AI can also pose significant risks to individuals, groups, and organizations. As a result, when agencies use AI to carry out their missions, they need to consider privacy-related risks and challenges. They also need to ensure that they have implemented appropriate risk management and privacy controls to protect the private information of the American public.
In this report, GAO (1) describes the risks and challenges associated with protecting privacy when using AI and (2) examines the extent to which OMB addressed these risks and challenges in government-wide guidance.
To do so, GAO assembled a panel of experts and compiled a non-exhaustive list of privacy risks and challenges associated with AI. GAO also reviewed OMB's AI-related guidance to determine if it highlighted the specific types of privacy risks identified by the experts. Further, GAO compared OMB's AI-related government-wide guidance to 10 selected challenges to determine if they could be addressed by the contents of the guidance.
Recommendations
GAO is making two recommendations to OMB to fully address the identified risks and challenges via updated guidance or by facilitating additional information sharing. GAO provided OMB with a copy of the draft report for its review and comment. OMB did not provide comments.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should specify examples of known privacy-related risks that agencies should consider when updating their policies as they pertain to AI. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should facilitate additional information sharing or issue government-wide guidance related to:
* how agencies should consider privacy when evaluating and auditing AI models that contain sensitive information;
* storing data in a manner where sensitive data can be separated from the dataset;
* clear rules, norms, and best practices with respect to privacy that agencies should use when developing AI solutions internally;
* performance metrics agencies can use to assess privacy-related impacts when using AI;
* actions agencies can take to ensure that members of the public who interact with their AI technologies understand what they are consenting to;
* technological tools agencies can use to protect sensitive data when using AI;
* incorporating AI-specific considerations into privacy impact assessments, including identifying risks and informing the public about how PII is involved in the use of AI; and
* potential tradeoffs between privacy and performance agencies can consider when using AI. (Recommendation 2)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107681
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: Review of the FY 2025 Financial Statement Audit
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: Review of the FY 2025 Financial Statement Audit
*
Fast Facts
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is a federally funded, nonprofit corporation. It was established to fund and evaluate research aimed at helping patients, doctors, and policymakers make better health care decisions.
The institute is required to have its financial statements audited annually, and we're required to review those audits. The institute's auditor issued ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: Review of the FY 2025 Financial Statement Audit * Fast Facts The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is a federally funded, nonprofit corporation. It was established to fund and evaluate research aimed at helping patients, doctors, and policymakers make better health care decisions. The institute is required to have its financial statements audited annually, and we're required to review those audits. The institute's auditor issuedan unmodified (clean) opinion on its FY 2025 financial statements, concluding that they fairly presented the institute's financial position and activities.
We reviewed certain aspects of this financial audit and found no significant issues requiring attention.
Stethoscope atop a medical bill
Highlights
What GAO Found
Based on the limited procedures GAO performed in reviewing the independent public accounting firm's (IPA) fiscal year 2025 audit of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's (PCORI) financial statements, GAO did not identify any significant issues that it believes require attention. Had GAO performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to its attention that it would have reported.
The IPA provided an unmodified audit opinion on PCORI's fiscal years 2025 and 2024 financial statements. Specifically, the IPA found that PCORI's financial statements were presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Further, for fiscal year 2025, the IPA did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that it considered to be material weaknesses or any reportable noncompliance with the selected provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements it tested. PCORI concurred with the IPA's conclusions.
GAO's review of PCORI's fiscal year 2025 financial statement audit, as differentiated from an audit of the financial statements, was not intended to enable GAO to express-and it does not express-an opinion on PCORI's financial statements or conclude on the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting. Furthermore, GAO does not express an opinion on PCORI's compliance with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. The IPA is responsible for its reports on PCORI dated February 11, 2026, and the conclusions expressed therein.
GAO provided a draft of its report to PCORI and the IPA for review and comment. PCORI's Chief Financial Officer provided technical comments, which GAO incorporated in the final report. An IPA partner responded that the IPA had no comments on the draft report.
Why GAO Did This Study
This report presents the results of GAO's review of PCORI's fiscal year 2025 financial statement audit. PCORI is a federally funded, nonprofit corporation that is neither an agency nor establishment of the U.S. government. PCORI's purpose is to help patients, clinicians, policymakers, and others make informed decisions about health and health care options.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires PCORI to obtain an annual financial statement audit from a private entity with expertise in conducting financial audits. The act includes a provision for the Comptroller General of the United States to review the audit and report the results to the Congress annually. GAO's objective was to review the results of PCORI's fiscal year 2025 financial statement audit. To satisfy this objective, GAO (1) read and considered various documents relating to the IPA's independence, objectivity, and qualifications; (2) analyzed key IPA audit documentation; (3) read PCORI's fiscal years 2025 and 2024 financial statements, the IPA's audit report on the financial statements, and the IPA's report on internal control over financial reporting and compliance; and (4) met with IPA representatives and PCORI management officials.
For more information, contact Cheryl E. Clark at clarkce@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108882
International Collaboration: U.S. Banking Agencies' Participation in Climate Risk Network
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
International Collaboration: U.S. Banking Agencies' Participation in Climate Risk Network
*
Fast Facts
The Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System is a forum for sharing best practices and working on climate-related financial risk. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation became members in 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively.
These agencies joined ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * International Collaboration: U.S. Banking Agencies' Participation in Climate Risk Network * Fast Facts The Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System is a forum for sharing best practices and working on climate-related financial risk. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation became members in 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. These agencies joinedto collaborate with other central banks and supervisors. They participated in working groups and retained related records but did not implement the network's recommendations.
The agencies withdrew from this forum in 2025, generally citing changed agency priorities.
A person writing on a tablet in the background with a digital dashboard projection from the laptop of schematics, data, and numbers related to finances and renewable energy
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) is an international network of central banks and financial supervisors that works to address climate risk management in the financial sector. Its steering committee forms working groups, which in 2024 issued 19 publications, including updates to climate-scenario analyses and guidance on sustainable investment. NGFS is funded by voluntary, in-kind member contributions and external project support.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Federal Reserve), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) joined NGFS in 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively, to better understand climate-related financial risks and collaborate internationally. They withdrew in 2025, generally citing (1) changed agency priorities, (2) a determination that continued participation was inconsistent with their statutory mandates to ensure safety and soundness of financial institutions, and (3) NGFS's increasing focus on broader environmental risks.
The banking agencies participated in NGFS meetings and working groups, responded to surveys, and reviewed draft publications. Costs related to NGFS participation were for staff time and did not include providing funding to NGFS, according to GAO's document review and interviews with officials. Officials reported that the agencies shared limited information with NGFS, did not provide nonpublic supervisory data or adopt NGFS recommendations, and retained records in accordance with agency retention policies. NGFS-related records are confidential and not disclosed, except as compelled by law, according to the NGFS charter.
Federal Reserve, FDIC, and OCC Participation in 2022-2024 NGFS Working Groups
Federal Reserve
OCC
FDIC
Workstreams
Supervision
Scenario design and analysis
Monetary policy
Net zero for central banks
Task forces
Adaptation
Capacity building and training
Biodiversity loss and natureaEUR'related risks
Expert networks
Legal
Research
Data
Source: GAO analysis of Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) information. | GAO-26-108020
Notes: The Workstream on Supervision incorporates climate-related risks within regulatory practices. The Workstream on Net Zero for Central Banks integrates sustainability into corporate operations. The Task Force on Adaptation promotes measures to respond to climate-related variables, which moderate harm or take advantage of opportunities.
Why GAO Did This Study
Established in 2017, NGFS serves as a forum for sharing best practices and conducting analysis on climate risk management in the financial sector. It has advocated for mobilizing capital for low-carbon investments. As of January 2026, it had 149 members from more than 92 countries.
GAO was asked to examine the banking agencies' membership in NGFS. This report describes why the Federal Reserve, OCC, and FDIC joined and later withdrew, and the extent to which the agencies participated in activities and shared information with NGFS while they were members.
GAO reviewed the NGFS charter, annual reports, and publications. GAO also reviewed agency documentation on NGFS membership, activities, and records retention policies. In addition, GAO reviewed written responses from NGFS and interviewed representatives from the three banking agencies, and three industry and climate change organizations.
For more information, contact Michael E. Clements at clementsm@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108020
Financial Audit: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Funds' 2025 and 2024 Financial Statements
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Financial Audit: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Funds' 2025 and 2024 Financial Statements
*
Fast Facts
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insures over $10 trillion in deposits and protects your money if your FDIC-insured bank fails.
We audit and issue opinions annually on financial statements of FDIC's insurance funds and on related internal controls (e.g., processes to reasonably assure that transactions are properly authorized and recorded).
We found the statements ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Financial Audit: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Funds' 2025 and 2024 Financial Statements * Fast Facts The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insures over $10 trillion in deposits and protects your money if your FDIC-insured bank fails. We audit and issue opinions annually on financial statements of FDIC's insurance funds and on related internal controls (e.g., processes to reasonably assure that transactions are properly authorized and recorded). We found the statementswere reliable and controls over financial reporting were effective in 2025.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Sign
Highlights
What GAO Found
GAO found (1) the financial statements of the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) and of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) Resolution Fund (FRF) as of and for the years ended December 31, 2025, and 2024, are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles; (2) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting relevant to the DIF and to the FRF as of December 31, 2025; and (3) with respect to the DIF and to the FRF, no reportable instances of noncompliance for 2025 with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements GAO tested.
In commenting on a draft of this report, FDIC stated that it was pleased to receive unmodified opinions for the 34th consecutive year on the DIF's and the FRF's financial statements. FDIC also noted that GAO reported that FDIC maintained effective internal control over financial reporting and that there was no reportable noncompliance with tested provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. FDIC reiterated its commitment to sound financial management.
Why GAO Did This Study
Section 17 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended, requires GAO to audit the financial statements of the DIF and of the FRF annually. In addition, the Government Corporation Control Act requires that FDIC annually prepare and submit audited financial statements to Congress and authorizes GAO to audit the statements. This report responds to these requirements.
For more information, contact: M. Hannah Padilla at padillah@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107996
Federal Real Property: Options to Address Funding Challenges
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Federal Real Property: Options to Address Funding Challenges
*
Fast Facts
We testified before the House Appropriation's Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government about the impacts of funding uncertainty on federal property.
It is based on many of our federal property management reports, including:
* Federal Real Property: Agencies Need New Benchmarks to Measure and Shed Underutilized Space
* Capital Financing: Alternative Approaches to Budgeting for Federal Real ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Federal Real Property: Options to Address Funding Challenges * Fast Facts We testified before the House Appropriation's Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government about the impacts of funding uncertainty on federal property. It is based on many of our federal property management reports, including: * Federal Real Property: Agencies Need New Benchmarks to Measure and Shed Underutilized Space * Capital Financing: Alternative Approaches to Budgeting for Federal RealProperty
Additionally, it updates information we reported in our prior work.
We've made recommendations to the General Services Administration and other federal agencies related to this issue.
U.S. Capitol building with the words GAO testimony to Congress.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Many agencies rely on the General Services Administration (GSA) to manage facilities for them. The Federal Buildings Fund (Buildings Fund) was established for real property management and associated activities. GSA collects rent from tenant agencies; deposits it into the Buildings Fund; and uses that money for real property acquisition, operation, maintenance, and disposal. Through the appropriations process, Congress sets annual limits on how much of this funding GSA can obligate to various activities.
GAO's work has highlighted the impact of uncertain funding on real property management:
* Capital projects. Obtaining upfront funding for large projects-such as constructing, purchasing, or renovating federal buildings-has been a challenge for federal agencies. Congressional spending limits require GSA to first use available funds to pay for other needs, including leasing, operations and maintenance, and debt costs, making funding for large capital projects less available and potentially costing more in the long run.
* Maintenance and repair. Agencies' backlog of deferred maintenance and repairs has grown by billions of dollars in recent years due, in part, to funding constraints. Deferring maintenance can worsen the condition of agencies' assets and lead to premature replacement, significantly increasing costs.
* Consolidation and disposal. Federal agencies have struggled to determine how much space they need to fulfill their missions and identify the funding to consolidate operations, reconfigure spaces, and prepare unneeded property for disposal. Funding uncertainty can result in missed opportunities to eliminate leases and consolidate agencies into federally owned space, costing the federal government hundreds of millions of dollars.
GAO has identified actions Congress and federal agencies could take to better manage real property and address funding-related challenges. For example:
* Disposal of underused buildings.GAO recommended that the Office of Management and Budget and GSA take steps to address challenges with federally underused space, including assisting agencies in monitoring building utilization and reducing underutilized space.
* Adopting alternative budgetary structures. GAO reported on different budgetary structures as options that could help Congress and agencies make more prudent fiscal decisions. For example, Congress could modify the Buildings Fund to exclude certain major renovations or grant tenant agencies the authority to manage buildings they occupy. GAO has identified issues Congress may wish to consider when granting additional budgetary authorities, including ensuring agencies have the necessary real property expertise.
Why GAO Did This Study
The federal government's real property holdings are vast and diverse, costing billions annually to occupy, operate, and maintain. GAO designated federal real property as high risk in 2003 because of large amounts of underused property and the considerable difficulty agencies have faced in disposing of unneeded holdings. Historically, the Buildings Fund has not generated sufficient revenues to meet all real property needs.
This statement discusses: 1) the status of the Buildings Fund, 2) the impacts of funding uncertainty on federal real property management, and 3) some options to address funding challenges. This statement is primarily based on GAO's prior work on the Buildings Fund and real property management, as well as updated information from GSA revenue and occupancy data, agency budget documents, GSA statements on its budget, and legislative proposals.
Recommendations
We have made a number of recommendations to federal agencies to improve the management of federal real property and use existing funding more effectively, including on property disposal and the management of deferred maintenance and repair. Federal agencies have taken actions to address some of these recommendations, but additional action is needed to fully implement others.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109007
Department of Education: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Accountability in Higher Education
WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Department of Education: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Accountability in Higher Education
*
Fast Facts
We testified on how the Department of Education can strengthen accountability over student loans and colleges before the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
It is based primarily on the following reports:
* Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Address Gaps in Servicer Oversight
* Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Verify Borrowers' Information for Income-Driven ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 26 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Department of Education: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Accountability in Higher Education * Fast Facts We testified on how the Department of Education can strengthen accountability over student loans and colleges before the House Committee on Education and Workforce. It is based primarily on the following reports: * Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Address Gaps in Servicer Oversight * Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Verify Borrowers' Information for Income-DrivenRepayment Plans
* Higher Education: Education Should Address Oversight and Communication Gaps in Its Monitoring of the Financial Condition of Schools
Education has taken some steps to implement previous recommendations but more action is needed.
Picture of capitol hill with the words GAO Testimony to Congress
Highlights
What GAO Found
In March 2026, GAO reported on the impact of recent staffing reductions on the Department of Education's oversight of its student loan servicers. In February 2025, Education stopped assessing student loan servicers on accuracy and call quality due to lack of staff capacity, according to Education officials. Prior to discontinuing these quarterly assessments, Education assessed servicers on these metrics for two quarters. These assessments were intended to measure whether servicers were (1) keeping complete and accurate records for borrowers and (2) providing borrowers good customer service.
The decision to stop these assessments occurred shortly after the administration began issuing presidential directives and guidance on downsizing the federal workforce in January 2025. Education reported that between January and December 2025, the number of staff at its Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) decreased from 1,433 to 777.
Prior to FSA discontinuing this oversight, most servicers did not meet the performance standards for accuracy and faced corresponding financial penalties of about $850,000. FSA continued to assess servicer performance on the other performance metrics, which it characterized as less labor intensive to monitor.
Student Loan Servicer Performance on Accuracy Metric
In March 2026, GAO recommended that Education assess servicer accuracy and call quality. Education disagreed, stating that it uses other methods to assess servicer performance. GAO maintains these other methods are not effective substitutes. Moreover, GAO maintains these two assessments are important to protect borrowers and help the government avoid overpaying servicers for poor performance.
GAO also made other recommendations in prior work to help Education strengthen accountability. For example, implementing GAO's 2019 recommendations to improve verification of borrower income and family size information could help reduce the risk of fraud and error in certain repayment plans and potentially save over $2 billion. Similarly, implementing GAO's 2017 recommendation to update the formula for measuring colleges' financial condition could help protect taxpayers against the financial risk of college closures. Finally, implementing GAO's 2016 recommendation to improve tracking of borrower complaints could help Education better track trends and ensure the program effectively meets borrower needs. Education has taken some steps to address these recommendations; however, the agency needs to do more to implement them and strengthen accountability in higher education.
Why GAO Did This Study
In fiscal year 2025, about 10.5 million students received over $131 billion in federal student aid to help them pursue higher education. Education is responsible for maintaining accountability and protecting the federal investment in higher education. Education's responsibilities include overseeing colleges, federal student aid, and the servicers that help administer the student loan program. Education's responsibilities have grown substantially in recent years based on changes to the size and complexity of the federal student loan program, which now exceeds $1.6 trillion in outstanding loans.
This testimony summarizes the findings and recommendations from key GAO reports issued from 2016 through 2026. It includes recent work examining the impact of staffing reductions on Education's oversight of student loan servicers ( GAO-26-108534 ) and other prior work examining higher education accountability issues ( GAO-19-347, GAO-17-555, and GAO-16-523 ). GAO also updated the status of related recommendations.
Recommendations
GAO made 10 recommendations in the reports included in this statement. Education has not yet fully addressed seven of these recommendations. GAO will continue to monitor Education's progress in implementing them.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109069
Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs
*
Fast Facts
The Army relies on "vertical lift systems," such as helicopters, for reconnaissance and attack missions and to transport troops and equipment on the battlefield. The Army's fleet of helicopters is aging and, starting in 2019, the Army prioritized funding to improve its vertical lift portfolio.
However, the Army reprioritized its efforts in 2024. Specifically, the Army canceled ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Future Vertical Lift: Senior Leaders Restructured the Army Aviation Portfolio to Reduce Costs * Fast Facts The Army relies on "vertical lift systems," such as helicopters, for reconnaissance and attack missions and to transport troops and equipment on the battlefield. The Army's fleet of helicopters is aging and, starting in 2019, the Army prioritized funding to improve its vertical lift portfolio. However, the Army reprioritized its efforts in 2024. Specifically, the Army canceledone design due to cost concerns and moved funding to other opportunities. For example, it increased investments in drones.
This Q&A report reviews the Army's decision to shift priorities and its plans to address future capability needs.
Soldiers Using a Virtual Prototype of the Army's Future Long Range Assault Aircraft
Two individuals in camouflage uniform inside a helicopter flight simulator cockpit.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Army relies on what it calls vertical lift systems, primarily helicopters, to accomplish reconnaissance and attack missions and move troops and equipment to and around the battlefield. In its 2019 modernization strategy, the Army identified developing its Future Vertical Lift portfolio as a priority. This portfolio included two crewed and one uncrewed aircraft.
* Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA)-intended to provide reconnaissance, attack, and aerial security capabilities, and estimated to cost $5.3 billion for development and procurement.
* Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA)-a medium-sized assault and utility aircraft that would deliver speed, range, agility, endurance, and sustainability improvements compared to current Black Hawk helicopters.
* Future Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System (FTUAS)-intended to execute reconnaissance operations as a rapidly deployable uncrewed aircraft with vertical take-off and landing capabilities.
The portfolio also included a variety of aircraft to be deployed from larger aircraft and development of an improved turbine engine.
Aircraft in the Future Vertical Lift Portfolio prior to February 2024
In February 2024, the Army made significant changes to this portfolio. According to Army officials, Army leadership collaborated with officials from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to restructure the portfolio. This restructuring ended the development of FARA, continued investment in FLRAA, and increased investment in FTUAS. In addition, the restructuring increased investment in uncrewed aircraft while delaying production of the improved turbine engine.
Army budget officials stated that these changes were due to concerns about the long-term affordability of developing and acquiring FARA and FLRAA simultaneously. Army officials stated that the restructuring decision shifted about $7.3 billion in planned spending to other priorities. These priorities included other programs with vertical lift capabilities as well as improvements to Army barracks.
Planned Spending from Fiscal Years 2025 through 2029 as a Result of Future Vertical Lift Portfolio Restructuring
Because of its decision to end development of FARA, the Army reduced planned capabilities for crewed reconnaissance and attack missions. The Army plans to rely on future uncrewed systems for some reconnaissance and attack missions and existing helicopters for attack.
The Army is currently considering further changes to its vertical lift capabilities. In April 2025, the Secretary of Defense announced the Army Transformation Initiative. This Initiative directs the Army to consider changes to both its acquisitions and force structure. As a result, the Army has proposed a number of other changes to its aviation portfolio, including:
* accelerating FLRAA development and fielding,
* accelerating fielding of launched uncrewed aircraft,
* distributing existing vertical lift capabilities across the Army, and
* ending development of FTUAS.
In GAO's discussions with Army officials, the officials stated that none of these decisions have been finalized and will depend on the outcome of the fiscal year 2026 budget.
Why GAO Did This Study
In 2019, the Army identified six modernization priority areas - including capabilities for Future Vertical Lift - to improve its ability to operate in the modern battlefield. In 2024, the Army made significant changes to the portfolio of vertical lift systems it had been developing.
A Senate Report contains a provision for GAO to review and assess the capabilities affected by the Army's restructuring decisions and the analyses that informed them. GAO's report describes the revisions resulting from the restructuring, the reasons for the changes, how the changes impacted programs and vertical lift capabilities, and Army plans to address potential capability gaps.
To identify why the restructuring decision was made, who made it, what analyses may have been used, and potential effects on capabilities, GAO assessed and compared requirements documents preceding and subsequent to the Army's 2024 restructuring decision, traced funding by analyzing budget documents, and interviewed numerous Army officials. These officials included the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, officials from the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisitions, Logistics, and Technology; the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Programs, which is the office responsible for aligning funding to the Army's acquisition plans; and the Future Vertical Lift Cross-Functional Team, as well as officials from individual vertical lift-related programs.
For more information, contact Alex Winograd at winograda@gao.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108025
Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability
*
Fast Facts
We testified on flood risk mitigation before the House Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Our testimony is based primarily on the following reports:
Flood Insurance: FEMA's New Rate-Setting Methodology Improves Actuarial Soundness but Highlights Need for Broader Program Reform
Flood Mitigation: Actions Needed to Improve Use of FEMA Property Acquisitions
National ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Flood Risk Mitigation: Reducing Fiscal Exposure and Improving Affordability * Fast Facts We testified on flood risk mitigation before the House Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance. Our testimony is based primarily on the following reports: Flood Insurance: FEMA's New Rate-Setting Methodology Improves Actuarial Soundness but Highlights Need for Broader Program Reform Flood Mitigation: Actions Needed to Improve Use of FEMA Property Acquisitions NationalFlood Insurance Program: Fiscal Exposure Persists Despite Property Acquisitions
Additionally, it updates some data and figures we reported in our prior work.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has addressed some of our recommendations but still needs to address others. We have also made recommendations for congressional consideration and offered policy options related to these issues.
Picture of the U.S. Capitol Building
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers three primary programs that mitigate flood risk for properties insured by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). A small number of these properties-known as repetitive loss properties, which have flooded and received claim payments multiple times-contribute to the program's fiscal challenges. According to FEMA, unmitigated repetitive loss properties make up about 2.5 percent of NFIP policies, but 48 percent of NFIP claims by dollar value have been paid to properties with two or more losses.
From 1989 through 2025, 77 percent of the properties FEMA mitigated were funded by the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. FEMA supports four mitigation strategies-acquisition, elevation, relocation, and floodproofing. FEMA has mitigated flood risk primarily through acquisitions, which accounted for 69,415 (about 72.5 percent) of the properties mitigated from 1989 through 2025.
FEMA Hazard Mitigation, by Grant Program and Method, Fiscal Years 1989-2025
While acquisitions offer benefits, the process faces significant challenges that can discourage communities and homeowners from participating. These challenges include a lengthy and complex process, limited state and community capacity, and financial constraints.
NFIP represents a fiscal exposure to the federal government because FEMA is statutorily required to charge premium rates that do not fully reflect flood risk. Although mitigation reduces flood losses, it also requires substantial investment. Without addressing mitigation challenges, the number of repetitive loss properties will continue to grow, increasing costs to NFIP policyholders and federal taxpayers. One way to address the program's fiscal exposure is to target mitigation efforts to those properties contributing most to the premium shortfall. These may disproportionately include repetitive loss properties, which face greater flood risk and higher full-risk premiums. By reducing risk, mitigation could also address affordability in the long term.
Why GAO Did This Study
Flooding is the most expensive natural disaster in the U.S., and in 2024, it caused over $8 billion in damages, according to FEMA. Congress created NFIP in 1968 to protect homeowners from flood losses, minimize property exposure to flood damage, and limit taxpayers' fiscal exposure to flood losses. However, the program faces multiple serious and longstanding challenges, primarily because it has two competing goals: keeping flood insurance affordable while maintaining the program's fiscal solvency.
This statement discusses (1) the role of mitigation in addressing NFIP's fiscal exposure from repetitive loss properties and (2) how targeting mitigation efforts could reduce NFIP's exposure and address affordability.
This statement is based on GAO work issued in 2017-2023, including GAO-17-425, GAO-20-508, GAO-22-106037, and GAO-23-105977. Detailed information on the objectives, scope, and methodology can be found within each report.
Recommendations
GAO has made nine recommendations to FEMA and eight to Congress related to improving the mitigation process, addressing challenges in property acquisitions, and reducing NFIP's fiscal exposure while addressing affordability for policyholders. As of March 2026, FEMA has implemented four of these recommendations.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109045
Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets
*
Fast Facts
Congress sets a limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. When the debt reaches the limit, and Congress doesn't act quickly to raise or suspend it, there's an impasse. These have become more frequent.
Impasses have disrupted financial markets and increased the nation's borrowing costs-which could be avoided. As debt approaches the limit, investors often demand higher interest ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Debt Limit: Prolonged Negotiations Increase Taxpayer Costs and Disrupt Financial Markets * Fast Facts Congress sets a limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. When the debt reaches the limit, and Congress doesn't act quickly to raise or suspend it, there's an impasse. These have become more frequent. Impasses have disrupted financial markets and increased the nation's borrowing costs-which could be avoided. As debt approaches the limit, investors often demand higher interestrates on new U.S. debt to compensate for the risk of not being repaid on time.
These unnecessary costs reinforce our prior recommendation of replacing the current debt limit process with one that aligns decisions on debt with decisions on spending and revenue.
A smartphone showing a web page on the debt limit from the U.S. Department of the Treasury's website, on top of a few $100 bills.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Debt limit impasses impose avoidable costs. As a projected date nears when the U.S. will be unable to meet all its financial obligations-the X date-investors often demand higher yields on new Treasury securities maturing near that date to compensate for the added risk. This increases the government's borrowing costs. GAO estimates that Treasury securities issued during periods of acute market concern over impasses between 2011 and 2023-the most recent impasses with complete data available at the time of GAO's analysis-incurred a total of roughly $107 million to $161 million in increased immediate borrowing costs (in 2024 dollars), depending on the measure used to estimate market concern. Impasses also impose additional, hard-to-quantify costs, including long-term costs from reduced investor confidence in the Treasury market.
Estimated Immediate Treasury Borrowing Costs Associated with Debt Limit Impasses
Note: For each impasse, GAO used two distinct measures of market concern to estimate increased borrowing costs. For more details, see fig. 2 in GAO-26-107872.
Debt limit impasses have also reduced the market value of outstanding Treasury securities. Market participants avoided securities maturing near a projected X-date, as those maturing after this date would be the first to default if the impasse were not resolved in time. GAO's analysis found that these securities lost value relative to comparable ones maturing just before the X-date.
Impasse disruptions to Treasury markets can spread to short-term funding markets and funds closely tied to Treasury securities. In 2011 and 2013, such disruptions included higher borrowing rates and money market fund outflows. These disruptions prompted market participant actions to limit risk and manage future impasse effects. However, other disruptions can occur after impasses are resolved, as fluctuations in the Department of the Treasury's cash balance create volatility in some markets.
GAO's prior work has identified longstanding concerns about the debt limit ( GAO-25-107089 ). The current debt limit process creates an unnecessary risk of U.S. default, with potentially devastating consequences for individuals, financial institutions, and the broader economy. The costs and market disruptions documented in this report further underscore the need for debt limit reform.
Why GAO Did This Study
Congress imposes a legal limit on federal borrowing, known as the debt limit. Under the current process, Congress can approve spending increases or tax cuts without also ensuring that Treasury has sufficient borrowing authority to finance these decisions. In recent years, when the federal government has approached the debt limit, prolonged congressional negotiations on increasing or suspending the limit have repeatedly brought it close to being unable to continue paying obligations stemming from past spending and revenue decisions. If Treasury exhausts its borrowing authority and runs out of cash, a default will occur.
In this report, GAO examines how debt limit impasses-where outstanding debt reached the limit and Congress did not immediately raise or suspend it-between 2011 and 2023 affected Treasury's borrowing costs and U.S. financial markets more broadly.
GAO analyzed financial market data and developed a suite of econometric models to estimate increased borrowing costs attributable to these impasses. GAO also reviewed relevant research, documentation, and laws. In addition, GAO interviewed agency officials and 17 financial market participants, selected to reflect a range of institution types and sizes.
Recommendations
GAO previously outlined alternatives to the current debt limit process and recommended that Congress replace it with an approach that links debt decisions to spending and revenue decisions at the time they are made ( GAO-15-476 and GAO-25-107089 ). GAO maintains that it is imperative that Congress take this action to prevent the recurring adverse effects of debt limit impasses.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107872
Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams
*
Fast Facts
We testified on federal efforts to counter scams before the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee.
The statement is based primarily on the following report:
CONSUMER PROTECTION: Actions Needed to Improve Complaint Reporting, Consumer Education, and Federal Coordination to Counter Scams
Additionally, the statement discusses responses to recommendations we previously made to the Consumer ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Consumer Protection: Government-wide Strategy Expeditiously Needed to Counter Scams * Fast Facts We testified on federal efforts to counter scams before the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee. The statement is based primarily on the following report: CONSUMER PROTECTION: Actions Needed to Improve Complaint Reporting, Consumer Education, and Federal Coordination to Counter Scams Additionally, the statement discusses responses to recommendations we previously made to the ConsumerFinancial Protection Bureau, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Federal Trade Commission. We are monitoring their implementation.
The U.S. Capitol Building with the text GAO Testimony to Congress.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Scams occur in a variety of forms and are a growing risk to consumers.
Examples of a Scam Execution Process
Note: Other types of contact methods, scams, and payment methods exist.
At least 13 federal agencies engage in a range of activities related to countering scams. The agency activities cover a spectrum of roles intended to prevent, detect, and respond to scams. However, each agency largely carries out these activities independently. None of the 13 federal agencies that GAO spoke with were aware of a government-wide strategy to guide efforts to combat scams, nor did GAO independently identify such a strategy. In its April 2025 report, GAO recommended that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) lead a federal effort, in collaboration with other agencies, to develop and implement a government-wide strategy to counter scams and coordinate related activities. The FBI recently outlined actions to address this recommendation.
The Consumer Protection Financial Bureau (CFPB), FBI, and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) collect and report on consumer complaints both directly and from other agencies. Data limitations prevent agencies from determining a total number of scam complaints and financial losses. Accordingly, there is no single, government-wide estimate of the total number of scams and financial losses. Similarly, federal agencies have not produced a common, government-wide definition of scams. A government-wide estimate would capture the scale of scams, and a common definition is necessary for producing such an estimate and for developing a government-wide strategy.
In its April 2025 report, GAO made separate recommendations to CFPB, FBI, and FTC to (1) develop a common definition of scams, (2) harmonize data collection, (3) report an estimate of the number of scam complaints each receives and (4) produce a single, government-wide estimate of the number of consumers affected by scams. In a recent update, the FBI and FTC outlined various concerns with these recommendations, such as differing authorities and mandates among agencies. However, GAO maintains that these recommendations remain valid. In October 2025, CFPB stated that it will monitor FBI and FTC actions before determining if any actions of its own are warranted.
Why GAO Did This Study
Scams, a method of committing fraud, involve the use of deception or manipulation intended to achieve financial gain. Scams often cause individual victims to lose large sums-in some cases their entire life savings. Federal agencies such as the FBI and FTC have responsibilities that include preventing and responding to scams against Americans.
This statement discusses (1) federal agencies' activities to prevent and respond to scams and the need for a comprehensive, government-wide strategy to guide their efforts and (2) federal agencies' activities to compile scam-related consumer-complaint data and estimate the total number of scams and related financial losses. It also provides updates on the status of 3 agencies' actions to address applicable recommendations.
This statement is based on GAO's April 2025 report on federal efforts to combat scams ( GAO-25-107088 ). For that report, GAO analyzed publicly available information (including prior GAO reports) and relevant agency documents. GAO also interviewed officials from 13 different federal agencies involved in countering scams.
Recommendations
In April 2025 GAO made 16 total recommendations to CFPB, FBI, and FTC. The FBI disagreed with three recommendations, including those related to the development of a government-wide estimate and a definition of scams. FTC neither agreed nor disagreed with the five recommendations made to it. CFPB did not respond with comments. The agencies' responses to certain recommendations are discussed in this statement.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109023
Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges
*
Fast Facts
We issued a statement for the Congressional Record on the Department of Veterans Affairs' software licensing practices to the House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
It is based primarily on the following reports:
Federal Software Licenses: Agencies Need to Take Action to Achieve Additional Savings
Cloud Computing: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Veterans Affairs: Further Actions Needed to Address Software License Management Challenges * Fast Facts We issued a statement for the Congressional Record on the Department of Veterans Affairs' software licensing practices to the House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. It is based primarily on the following reports: Federal Software Licenses: Agencies Need to Take Action to Achieve Additional Savings Cloud Computing:Selected Agencies Need to Implement Updated Guidance for Managing Restrictive Licenses
VA is working to address our previous recommendations. We are monitoring its progress.
The U.S. Capitol dome and the words GAO Statement for the Congressional Record
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) spends billions of dollars annually for IT and cyber-related investments, including commercial software licenses. In a January 2024 government-wide report, GAO noted that while VA identified its five most widely used software vendors with the highest quantity of licenses installed, it faced challenges in determining whether it was purchasing too many or too few of these software licenses. Specifically, VA was not tracking the appropriate number of licenses for each item of software currently in use. Additionally, the department did not compare inventories of software licenses that were currently in use to purchase records on a regular basis (see table).
GAO January 2024 Report Assessing the Department of Veterans Affairs' Management of Widely Used Software Licenses
Key activity
Assessment
Track software licenses that are currently in use
Not met
Regularly compare the inventories of software licenses that are currently in use to purchase records
Not met
Source: GAO analysis of agency data. I GAO-26-109060
Until VA adequately assesses the appropriate number of licenses, it cannot determine whether it is purchasing too many licenses or too few. In January 2024, GAO recommended that the department track licenses in use within its inventories and compare them with purchase records. VA concurred with the recommendations and is taking preliminary actions to track software license usage. In early March 2026, VA officials reported that the department plans to implement initial functionality for a centralized software license inventory in late March 2026. If successful, this could be a critical first step in improving the department's ability to track and analyze licenses across the department. Implementation of these recommendations would allow VA to identify opportunities to reduce costs on duplicate or unnecessary licenses.
In a November 2024 report, GAO found that restrictive software licensing practices (e.g., certain vendors' processes) adversely impacted federal agencies' cloud computing efforts, including those of VA. These practices either increased costs of cloud software or services or limited the department's options when selecting cloud service providers. VA had not established guidance for effectively managing impacts from restrictive practices for cloud computing or determined who is responsible for managing these impacts.
Until VA establishes guidance and assigns responsibility for mitigating the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices, it will likely miss opportunities to avoid or minimize these impacts. GAO made two recommendations to VA to mitigate the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices. The department concurred with the recommendations. In May 2025, VA officials reported that the department planned to stand up a working group composed of IT and acquisition subject matter experts to identify, analyze, and mitigate the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices on cloud computing efforts by September 2026. However, it has not provided an update on the status of the working group. GAO will continue to monitor VA's actions to fully implement these recommendations.
Why GAO Did This Study
VA depends on critical underlying IT systems to manage benefits and provide care to millions of veterans and their families. For fiscal year 2025, the department planned to spend about $985 million on software, including commercial software licenses.
In 2015, GAO identified the management of software licenses as a focus area in its High-Risk report. GAO has also previously reported on the need for federal agencies-including VA-to ensure better management of software licenses.
This statement summarizes two 2024 GAO reports on VA software license management, including VA's efforts to track software license usage and manage restrictive licensing practices. The statement also addresses the status of VA's actions in response to recommendations from those reports. GAO reviewed its prior work, VA documentation related to the status of efforts to implement the recommendations, and information provided by VA in March 2026 as part of GAO's ongoing work.
Recommendations
GAO made four recommendations in its two recent 2024 reports for VA to improve its management of software licenses and mitigate the effects of restrictive software licensing practices. The department concurred with the recommendations; however, it has not yet implemented them. It is essential that VA implements the recommendations to minimize costs and mitigate restrictive licensing impacts.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109060
Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars
WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars
*
Fast Facts
The Department of Energy is responsible for cleaning up millions of gallons of radioactive waste from nuclear weapons production. To do this, DOE must rely on a statutory definition of "high-level radioactive waste" that is unclear and hinders its mission. For example, the definition doesn't define the phrase "highly radioactive."
There have been ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 25 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Clarifying Definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Could Help DOE Save Tens of Billions of Dollars * Fast Facts The Department of Energy is responsible for cleaning up millions of gallons of radioactive waste from nuclear weapons production. To do this, DOE must rely on a statutory definition of "high-level radioactive waste" that is unclear and hinders its mission. For example, the definition doesn't define the phrase "highly radioactive." There have beenconcerns about this definition for decades. And, DOE hasn't fully evaluated or pursued opportunities to save tens of billions of dollars in how it treats and disposes of this waste. Our recommendations address these issues.
Underground Storage Tank with Radioactive Waste
Inside an underground radioactive waste storage tank.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for cleaning up waste resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, a process used to produce plutonium. Generally, EM manages this waste associated with reprocessing as if it is high-level radioactive waste (HLW) unless the waste can be classified as low-level radioactive waste (LLW) or transuranic (TRU) waste. LLW and TRU waste are expected to be less expensive to treat and dispose of compared with HLW. To classify its waste, EM relies in part on the statutory definition of HLW in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended. However, GAO, DOE, and others have raised concerns that ambiguities in this definition have impeded EM's cleanup progress.
Examples of Waste Associated with Reprocessing
EM has three processes-known as waste classification tools-it can use to determine that certain waste associated with reprocessing can be treated and disposed of as LLW or TRU waste, rather than HLW. While these tools help EM address ambiguities in the HLW definition, they have shortcomings that hinder EM's progress. For example, one tool cannot be used at the Hanford Site, EM's most complex and expensive site. EM also faces the risk of litigation due to the lack of clarity in the HLW definition, which could affect EM's ability to successfully use the tools. Until the HLW definition is clarified, EM will continue to face significant barriers to completing its cleanup mission. Given the complexity of this issue, any efforts to revise the HLW definition would benefit from input and ideas from experts across government, industry, and academia.
While EM has applied the three tools to treat and dispose of some waste associated with reprocessing as non-HLW, EM has not pursued additional opportunities that GAO and others have identified. Many studies over the last 2 decades-including analyses conducted by EM-have shown that opportunities exist for EM to expedite its cleanup efforts and realize significant cost savings while ensuring safe disposal. For example, in a 2020 report, EM estimated that classifying a portion of tank waste as LLW at its Hanford Site could potentially generate a cost savings of $73 to $210 billion. By systematically evaluating these opportunities and pursuing them to the maximum extent possible, EM could accelerate its cleanup mission and save at least tens of billions of dollars.
Why GAO Did This Study
Since 1989, EM has been responsible for cleaning up waste resulting from plutonium production for the nation's nuclear arsenal. EM has faced many challenges in determining how best to treat and dispose of this waste, and the estimated future cost for addressing this and other waste is more than half a trillion dollars.
Senate Report 118-188 includes a provision for GAO to review DOE's implementation of certain tools to treat and dispose of waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW. GAO's report examines (1) EM's efforts to treat and dispose of such waste and the barriers it faces in doing so and (2) potential opportunities to realize cost savings by treating certain waste as something other than HLW.
GAO analyzed laws, EM policies and documentation, and prior GAO and independent entities' studies. GAO interviewed EM officials regarding EM's plans to treat and dispose of waste associated with reprocessing. GAO also visited two EM sites and evaluated documentation to identify opportunities for EM to treat and dispose of certain waste as LLW or TRU waste.
Recommendations
GAO recommends that Congress consider convening a panel of experts to recommend specific revisions to the statutory definition of HLW to address ambiguities in the definition.
GAO also recommends that EM systematically evaluate opportunities to treat and dispose of certain waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW and communicate to Congress regarding its efforts to implement these opportunities as well as actions Congress can take to minimize or eliminate any barriers impeding EM's ability to pursue them. DOE agreed with the recommendation.
Matter for Congressional Consideration
Matter Status Comments
Congress should consider convening a multidisciplinary panel, such as a Blue Ribbon Commission, comprising a group of relevant experts-for example, from key agencies, industry, and academia-to develop and recommend specific revisions to address ambiguities in the definition of HLW in the AEA and NWPA and to report these recommendations to Congress within 12 months. (Matter for Consideration 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Office of Environmental Management The Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management should systematically evaluate the full range of opportunities to treat and dispose of legacy waste associated with reprocessing as something other than HLW and communicate to Congress on (1) EM's plans to implement identified opportunities-or its rationale for not doing so-and (2) actions Congress can take to minimize or eliminate barriers that impede EM's ability to proceed with these plans. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108018
Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management
WASHINGTON, March 24 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report:* * *
Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management
*
Fast Facts
The IRS has been using AI to help with its operations, including audit selection and answering taxpayer questions. It plans to use AI more in the future, but it may not be ready to do so.
We found that staffing reductions resulted in IRS not having enough skilled employees to support or develop new AI tools. IRS doesn't have a workforce plan to identify and ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 24 (TNSLrpt) -- The Government Accountability Office issued the following report: * * * Artificial Intelligence: IRS Actions Needed to Address Skills Gaps, Information Quality, and Strategic Management * Fast Facts The IRS has been using AI to help with its operations, including audit selection and answering taxpayer questions. It plans to use AI more in the future, but it may not be ready to do so. We found that staffing reductions resulted in IRS not having enough skilled employees to support or develop new AI tools. IRS doesn't have a workforce plan to identify andaddress the skills its AI workforce needs.
Also, IRS's inventory of AI applications was incomplete. For example, it didn't include all the ways AI was being used or identify how the tools would benefit the agency.
Our recommendations address these issues and more.
The letters A and I spelled out on a circuit board in blue lights
Highlights
What GAO Found
IRS had 126 active artificial intelligence (AI) use cases-applications of AI for a particular business need-in its inventory as of June 2025. These 126 use cases included 65 that were either too sensitive for public reporting or were research and development efforts exempt from public reporting. Although IRS has been using AI for several years, its inventory has grown rapidly since reporting 10 use cases in August 2022. IRS categorized most use cases in the June 2025 inventory as either improving (1) operational efficiency or (2) tax compliance and fraud detection. IRS listed 61 percent (77 of 126) of use cases as in development in June 2025 (see figure).
Major staffing reductions at IRS in 2025 could greatly affect its ability to use AI. For example, officials in the Research, Applied Analytics and Statistics group said they lost 63 employees who had been working full- or part-time on AI. Other IRS units also reported reductions in staff that support AI efforts, in addition to organizational and contractual changes. Still, IRS officials stated that the agency plans to use more AI in the future. However, IRS officials said they had not identified skills needed to support AI or developed a plan to address the skills gaps. The recent staff reductions, the intent to pursue additional AI initiatives, and the absence of a plan to address AI skills gaps increase the risk that IRS AI efforts will not succeed.
In addition, IRS's inventory did not always include quality information. For example, GAO determined that over 25 percent of use cases did not include information on how the use case was to benefit the agency. GAO also identified use case inventory omissions. For example, GAO identified several AI-enabled tools IRS officials said were contracted to help build criminal cases. These tools were not included in the inventory. Improved IRS processes and internal communications can address these shortcomings.
IRS's AI governance process had several entities with oversight of individual AI use cases. However, none were responsible for managing AI investments across the agency. Further, IRS does not have a process to ensure its AI investments are contributing to agency-wide goals. Given the risks facing IRS, a more strategic approach is warranted that enables IRS to identify high-value AI initiatives that contribute to agency-wide goals.
Why GAO Did This Study
IRS has used AI for many years. It has numerous AI initiatives under development and in operation, including in areas such as taxpayer service and audit selection. However, future IRS funding, strategy, and staffing levels are uncertain. This dynamic environment highlights the importance of understanding how AI can deliver results for IRS.
GAO was asked to review IRS's use of AI. This report assesses (1) how IRS uses AI and how resource changes at IRS could affect AI efforts; (2) the quality of information in IRS's AI inventory; and (3) how IRS strategically manages its AI investments.
GAO reviewed IRS's internal and public AI inventories, and relevant Department of the Treasury and IRS documents. GAO compared information in and processes for managing IRS's AI inventory to IRS policy and guidance, law, government-wide guidance, and leading practices. In addition, GAO compared IRS's efforts to manage its AI investments against federal guidance and leading practices. GAO also interviewed Treasury and IRS officials.
Recommendations
GAO is making eight recommendations to IRS, including to (1) identify skills gaps and develop an AI workforce plan; (2) implement a comprehensive quality assurance process for AI inventory entries; (3) clarify internal communications to ensure all AI use cases are included in the inventory; and (4) require reporting on use case alignment to strategic goals.
IRS agreed with all eight of GAO's recommendations and described steps it plans to take, or has started taking, in response to each recommendation. IRS also provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should identify the skills the agency needs to support its use of AI and develop a plan to address any related skills gaps. (Recommendation 1)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure IRS has a comprehensive quality assurance process for AI inventory entries, including mechanisms for documenting complete and quality information. (Recommendation 2)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure IRS's internal guidance related to the AI inventory is comprehensive, including the job aids for AI use case owners and checklist the AI governance office uses to verify inventory entries. (Recommendation 3)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should ensure internal communications about AI governance clarify that all AI unclassified use cases, including contracted and sensitive law enforcement AI, are subject to AI inventory requirements, with limited exceptions. (Recommendation 4)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should take steps to identify all existing contracts involving AI and notify those responsible for the contracts of IRS's AI governance requirements. (Recommendation 5)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop and implement policies to increase coordination and collaboration among business units using AI, including assessing opportunities to leverage existing resources, and avoid potential unnecessary overlap or duplication when new use cases are initiated. (Recommendation 6)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should require AI use case owners to report how each use case aligns with IRS strategic goals. (Recommendation 7)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Internal Revenue Service The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should establish performance metrics and require AI use case owners to report on outcomes for IRS to use to inform its strategic decision-making on the use of AI. (Recommendation 8)
Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned.
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
See All 8 Recommendations
Additional Data
Supplemental Material
***
Original text here: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107522