Targeted News Service

More Recent Headlines

GAO Reports

News stories and news briefs of Government Accountability Office audits, news, reports and testimony.

Featured Stories

GAO Issues Report on Airline Consumer Protections

WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on airlines' training programs on racial, ethnic and religious non-discrimination for their employees and contractors. The report (GAO-19-654R) is titled "Airline Consumer Protections: Information on Selected Airlines' Non-Discrimination Training Programs".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on airlines' training programs on racial, ethnic and religious non-discrimination for their employees and contractors. The report (GAO-19-654R) is titled "Airline Consumer Protections: Information on Selected Airlines' Non-Discrimination Training Programs". The report was sent to Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking memberof the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on Aug. 22. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Representatives from all six U.S. airlines GAO selected stated that they provide non-discrimination training to employees; representatives from four said they provide the same training to contractor staff who work directly for the airline. Specifically, all selected airline representatives told GAO they provide initial non-discrimination training to newly hired employees who interact with passengers--including, for example, pilots, flight attendants, and customer service representatives. Airline representatives provided high-level examples describing the content of their trainings, but with one exception, they declined to provide more specific information, citing the sensitive or business proprietary nature of such materials. Airlines have no legal requirement to provide GAO with their non-discrimination training materials.

Representatives generally stated that trainings emphasize treating all individuals fairly and without bias, regardless of race, ancestry, or religion, among other things. Representatives from four selected airlines also said that their non-discrimination trainings cover implicit bias--a term that refers to attitudes or stereotypes about groups of people that unconsciously affect a person's understanding, actions, and decisions. Non-discrimination trainings are typically embedded in larger training programs and delivered using a combination of in-person and web-based modules, according to airline representatives. Five selected airline representatives also told GAO they use available data (e.g., passenger complaints) to evaluate the effectiveness of their non-discrimination trainings and make updates as needed.

The Department of Transportation (DOT) does not require airlines to provide non-discrimination training to employees and contractors; however, officials told GAO that most larger airlines generally provide such training. DOT officials also stated that they receive few discrimination complaints relative to the millions of passenger boardings each year. Further, DOT officials said that if they were to identify an issue when reviewing passenger complaints, among various other monitoring activities, they could initiate an investigation of an airline's non-discrimination training and take enforcement action if warranted. However, representatives from non-discrimination advocacy organizations GAO interviewed identified additional actions that DOT and airlines could take to help ensure the non-discriminatory treatment of passengers, actions such as sharing non-discrimination trainings with such organizations for their input and feedback."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal law prohibits airlines from discriminating against passengers on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, or ancestry. Nevertheless, recent high-profile events reported in the media have led some non-discrimination advocacy organizations to question whether airlines treat all passengers equally and without bias. For example, in 2017 the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People issued a travel advisory (lifted in 2018) against one airline, citing "disrespectful, discriminatory or unsafe conditions" for African-American passengers.

DOT is responsible for ensuring that airlines adhere to federal non-discrimination laws. DOT encourages airlines to implement comprehensive non-discrimination training to help prevent and reduce incidents of unlawful discrimination. DOT has also developed and issued guidance to help airline employees and contractors understand their legal obligations not to discriminate against passengers.

The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included provisions for GAO to examine airlines' training programs on racial, ethnic, and religious non-discrimination for their employees and contractors, including how frequently airlines train new employees and contractors. This report describes selected airlines' programs for training employees and contractors on racial, ethnic, and religious non-discrimination. To understand airlines' non-discrimination training programs, GAO requested interviews and documentation from six airlines generally selected to include those with the highest number of passenger boardings and complaints of discrimination submitted directly to DOT. Representatives from five of the six selected airlines agreed to be interviewed, and one airline provided a written statement describing its non-discrimination training. Additionally, representatives from five airlines declined to provide GAO with their non-discrimination training materials, stating that their materials are business proprietary. While representatives from the remaining airline allowed GAO to attend its training, they asked GAO not to include a summary of the training in the report because it is business proprietary.

To understand DOT's oversight responsibilities, GAO conducted interviews with DOT officials and reviewed relevant documents and passenger complaint data. GAO also met with representatives from four non-discrimination advocacy organizations to gain their perspectives on airlines' non-discrimination training programs."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-654R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DOD Installations

WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's installation access control efforts. The report (GAO-19-649) is titled "DOD Installations: Monitoring Use of Physical Access Control Systems Could Reduce Risks to Personnel and Assets".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's installation access control efforts. The report (GAO-19-649) is titled "DOD Installations: Monitoring Use of Physical Access Control Systems Could Reduce Risks to Personnel and Assets". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction,Veterans' Affairs, and Related Agencies, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, chairwoman, and Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, on Aug. 22. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found" The Department of Defense (DOD) has issued guidance on accessing its domestic installations and strengthening physical access control systems (PACS)--used to scan credentials to authenticate the identity and authorize individuals to access DOD installations. Specifically, DOD has recently issued guidance directing the fielding of PACS and has fielded or plans to field such systems at domestic installations. The Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) developed the PACS used by the Air Force, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Defense Logistics Agency. The Army developed its own PACS. Both types of PACS electronically connect to DOD's Identity Matching Engine for Security and Analysis (IMESA). IMESA accesses authoritative government databases to determine an individual's fitness for access (i.e., whether an individual is likely a risk to an installation or its occupants), and continually vets this fitness for subsequent visits (see fig.).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-649?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The Air Force and DLA have monitored their installations' use of PACS, but the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps have not. Army, Navy, and Marine Corps installation officials stated that they do not monitor PACS use at their installations because there is no requirement to do so. Because the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps do not monitor PACS use and DOD does not require that they do so, those military services do not have the data they need to evaluate the effectiveness of PACS and make informed risk-based decisions to safeguard personnel and mission-critical, high-value installation assets. DOD, Army, Navy, and Marine Corps officials agreed that monitoring installations' use of PACS would be beneficial and could be readily accomplished without significant cost using existing technology.

The Army and DMDC have used a tiered approach and established helpdesks to address PACS technical issues. The Army has established performance measures and goals to assess its approach, which has improved the ability to resolve technical issues. DMDC, however, does not have performance measures and goals, and thus lacks the information needed to evaluate its PACS' performance and address issues negatively affecting operational availability."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In November 2009, an Army officer killed or wounded 45 people at Fort Hood, Texas; 4 years later in September 2013, a Navy contractor killed or wounded 16 people at the Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C. Independent reviews conducted in the aftermath of these shootings identified physical access control weaknesses at DOD installations.

The conference report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 contained a provision for GAO to assess DOD's installation access control efforts. GAO (1) described actions DOD has taken to develop guidance on physical access to domestic installations and to field PACS at these installations, (2) evaluated the extent to which DOD has monitored the use of fielded PACS at these installations, and (3) evaluated the extent to which DOD has implemented an approach for addressing PACS technical issues and assessing associated performance. GAO analyzed DOD guidance on physical access control requirements, and visited installations to discuss with installation command and security force officials their experiences using PACS. This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in May 2019. Information that DOD deemed sensitive has been omitted."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO made five recommendations, including that DOD monitor installations' use of PACS and develop appropriate performance measures and goals for resolving technical issues to improve PACS performance. DOD concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-649?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Management

WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of Defense has made progress in implementing the requirements of section 911, including establishing a new cross-functional team on electromagnetic spectrum operations. The report (GAO-19-598) is titled "Defense Management: DOD Should Set Deadlines on Stalled Collaboration Efforts and Clarify Cross-Functional Team Funding Responsibilities".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of Defense has made progress in implementing the requirements of section 911, including establishing a new cross-functional team on electromagnetic spectrum operations. The report (GAO-19-598) is titled "Defense Management: DOD Should Set Deadlines on Stalled Collaboration Efforts and Clarify Cross-Functional Team Funding Responsibilities". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on Aug. 20. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense (DOD) is up to 21 months late in fully addressing five of seven requirements of section 911 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017. These remaining five requirements are designed to strengthen collaboration within the department to foster effective and efficient achievement of objectives and outputs (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-598?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD has not addressed most of these remaining requirements of section 911 largely because the Chief Management Officer (CMO) has not approved the documents drafted to meet the requirements or coordinated department-wide review of the documents and provided them for Secretary of Defense issuance. According to Office of the CMO (OCMO) officials, some of the draft documents were provided to the CMO for review and approval as early as August 2018. After providing a draft of this report to the department for comment, GAO learned that the organizational strategy was circulated for department coordination in July 2019, with components expected to provide input by August 2019. However, while the OCMO has set an internal time frame for the organizational strategy, it has not set similar time frames for completing the other four remaining requirements, such as delivering guidance and training on cross-functional teams. GAO previously reported that establishing internal deadlines with key milestones and deliverables is important for tracking progress and implementing actions effectively.

DOD established a cross-functional team pursuant to section 911 on electromagnetic-spectrum operations (EMSO), but according to a team official, funding for the team was delayed. EMSO refers to those activities consisting of electronic warfare and joint electromagnetic-spectrum management operations used to exploit, attack, protect, and manage the electromagnetic operational environment to achieve the commander's objectives. According to the memorandum establishing the team, the CMO is required to provide administrative support to and coordinate with the team to ensure adequate resources are immediately available. However, team officials stated that this funding was delayed in part because of disagreements over responsibility for funding the team under the terms of this memorandum. Moreover, according to a team official, plans for funding in future fiscal years have not been developed. If DOD does not clarify roles and responsibilities for funding the team, the CMO and the EMSO team may face additional delays securing funding, which could negatively affect the team's ability to conduct its work and meet its objectives."

Why GAO Did This Study: "DOD continues to confront organizational challenges that hinder collaboration. To address these challenges, section 911 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 directed the Secretary of Defense to, among other things, issue an organizational strategy that identifies critical objectives that span multiple functional boundaries; establish cross-functional teams to support this strategy; and provide related guidance and training.

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 also included a provision for GAO to assess DOD's actions in response to section 911. This report assesses the extent to which DOD has made progress in implementing the requirements of section 911, including establishing a new cross-functional team on electromagnetic spectrum operations.

GAO reviewed documentation, interviewed cross-functional team members and other DOD officials, and compared DOD's actions to section 911 requirements and leading practices for cross-functional teams."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making six recommendations, including that DOD set and ensure that it meets specific internal deadlines for review and approval of outstanding requirements of section 911, and that DOD clarify roles and responsibilities for providing funding for the EMSO cross-functional team. DOD concurred with GAO's recommendations and set deadlines for addressing the remaining requirements."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-598?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Acquisition Workforce

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's implementation of human capital flexibilities for its acquisition workforce. The report (GAO-19-509) is titled "Defense Acquisition Workforce: DOD Increased Use of Human Capital Flexibilities but Could Improve Monitoring".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's implementation of human capital flexibilities for its acquisition workforce. The report (GAO-19-509) is titled "Defense Acquisition Workforce: DOD Increased Use of Human Capital Flexibilities but Could Improve Monitoring". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriationssubcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on Aug. 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

The text of What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense (DOD) has used human capital flexibilities extensively to hire, recruit, and retain its civilian acquisition workforce. Since 2014, usage rates for hiring flexibilities--alternatives to the traditional, competitive hiring process--have generally increased. DOD leadership has encouraged its hiring personnel to use these flexibilities, such as direct hire authorities, to reduce the length of the hiring process. From fiscal year 2014 to 2018, DOD used hiring flexibilities for 90 percent of its approximately 44,000 civilian acquisition workforce hiring actions (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-509?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD also increased its use of recruitment and retention flexibilities for its civilian acquisition workforce, increasing the dollar amount authorized from $13.9 million in fiscal year 2014 to $33.7 million in fiscal year 2018. This increase came as DOD leadership emphasized the benefits of these flexibilities, and oversaw concerted efforts to increase their usage through the dissemination of information to human resource specialists.

While usage of human capital flexibilities has increased, DOD's Office of Human Capital Initiatives (HCI), which is responsible for DOD-wide acquisition workforce strategic planning, does not regularly monitor or assess how the department uses these flexibilities. HCI regularly monitors the overall health of the acquisition workforce, including by reviewing workforce metrics on a quarterly basis, but does not regularly monitor the military departments' use of human capital flexibilities. For example, GAO found the Air Force and Navy used direct hire authorities twice as often as the Army in fiscal year 2018. Without efforts to gain such insights through monitoring, HCI may be missing opportunities to identify challenges, inconsistencies, or needed improvements in using these tools. With regard to assessing the use of human capital flexibilities, HCI intends to study how long it takes to hire personnel when using the flexibilities. According to DOD officials, this analysis can begin following development of a plan to ensure that defense components consistently collect data on hiring timeframes. DOD officials said they expect to issue this plan in 2019."

Why GAO Did This Study: "DOD spends over $300 billion annually on contracts for products and services such as major weapons systems and military support services. By awarding and overseeing these contracts, DOD's acquisition workforce plays a critical role in maximizing DOD's buying power. DOD has increased the size of its acquisition workforce in recent years, but has also faced a number of challenges hiring and retaining personnel. DOD has a number of human capital flexibilities that help DOD in hiring, recruiting, and retaining its civilian acquisition workforce. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 included a provision for GAO to review DOD's implementation of human capital flexibilities for its acquisition workforce. This report: (1) provides information on DOD's use of human capital flexibilities and (2) determines the extent to which DOD has monitored and assessed its use of these flexibilities. GAO reviewed relevant statutes, and DOD policies, guidance, and acquisition workforce plans; analyzed DOD's fiscal year 2014-2018 civilian acquisition workforce personnel data; and interviewed DOD officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that HCI regularly monitors DOD's use of human capital flexibilities for its civilian acquisition workforce to help identify challenges, inconsistencies, or needed improvements in using these tools. DOD concurred with the recommendation."

the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-509?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Travel

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on problems related to improper payments in the Department of Defense's travel pay program. The report (GAO-19-530) is titled "Defense Travel: DOD Should Strengthen Its Ongoing Actions to Reduce Improper Travel Payments".

The report was sent to Rep. Gary J. Palmer, R-Alabama, on Aug. 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense's (DOD) Defense Travel System (DTS)--the primary system DOD uses to process travel payments--accounts for most of DOD's travel payments. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on problems related to improper payments in the Department of Defense's travel pay program. The report (GAO-19-530) is titled "Defense Travel: DOD Should Strengthen Its Ongoing Actions to Reduce Improper Travel Payments". The report was sent to Rep. Gary J. Palmer, R-Alabama, on Aug. 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense's (DOD) Defense Travel System (DTS)--the primary system DOD uses to process travel payments--accounts for most of DOD's travel payments.DOD spent $18.3 billion on DTS travel payments from fiscal years 2016 through 2018, while incurring a reported $965.5 million in improper travel payments. In that period, DOD averaged $6.1 billion in DTS travel payments and $322 million in improper travel payments annually. Not all improper travel payments--such as legitimate payments that initially lacked supporting documentation?represented a monetary loss to the government. Officials said DOD first estimated a monetary loss from improper travel payments in fiscal year 2017. For fiscal years 2017 and 2018 it estimated a total monetary loss of $205 million out of $549 million in improper DTS payments (see fig.).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-530?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Defense Travel System Total and Improper Travel Payments (Fiscal Years 2017 and 2018)

In October 2016, DOD established a Remediation Plan to reduce improper travel payments and a committee to monitor implementation of the plan at 10 DOD components. DOD selected these 10 components because they accounted for a significant percentage of total travel payments. However, DOD did not take into account the components' own estimates of their improper payment rates. As of March 2019, only 4 of the 9 components that responded to GAO's survey had completed all of the plan's requirements, in part because of a lack of milestones in the plan and ineffective monitoring for required actions. As a result, DOD does not have reasonable assurance that its actions have been sufficient.

DOD has mechanisms to identify errors leading to improper travel payments, and some components have developed specific corrective plans to address the errors. However, GAO found that these efforts did not clearly identify the root causes of the errors, in part because there is no common understanding of what constitutes the root cause of improper travel payments. DOD components also have not incorporated considerations of cost-effectiveness into decisions about whether to take actions that could reduce improper payments. Without addressing these issues, DOD will likely miss opportunities to implement the changes necessary to address the root causes of improper travel payments."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Improper payments--including payments that should not have been made or were made in an incorrect amount--are a long-standing, significant challenge in the federal government. Both GAO and the DOD Inspector General have reported on problems related to improper payments in DOD's travel pay program.

This report examines (1) the amount DOD spent on DTS travel payments for fiscal years 2016 through 2018 and how much of those payments DOD estimated to be improper and the extent to which DOD has (2) implemented its Remediation Plan and (3) identified travel payment errors, the root causes of those errors, and the cost-effectiveness of addressing root causes. GAO analyzed fiscal years 2016 through 2018 data on DTS payments, reviewed DOD's Plan and documentation, interviewed officials about implementation efforts, and surveyed 52 DOD components about steps taken to address improper travel payments."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO made 5 recommendations, including that DOD consider data on improper payment rates in its remediation approach; define the term "root cause", and consider cost effectiveness in deciding how to address improper payments. DOD generally concurred with 4 recommendations, but did not concur with revising its approach for selecting components to implement its Remediation Plan, stating that it has already taken actions that address this issue. GAO believes the recommendation remains valid."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-530?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Electronic Cigarettes

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on e-cigarettes imported into the U.S. from 2016 through 2018. The report (GAO-19-619R) is titled "Electronic Cigarettes: U.S. Imports, 2016-2018".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on July 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The customs value of e-cigarette devices, parts, and liquid imported into the United States in 2016 through 2018 was $2.4 billion, resulting in $120 million in tariff revenue. E-cigarette ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on e-cigarettes imported into the U.S. from 2016 through 2018. The report (GAO-19-619R) is titled "Electronic Cigarettes: U.S. Imports, 2016-2018". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on July 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The customs value of e-cigarette devices, parts, and liquid imported into the United States in 2016 through 2018 was $2.4 billion, resulting in $120 million in tariff revenue. E-cigarettedevices and parts each accounted for about $1.2 billion (48 percent for each, or 96 percent for both), and e-cigarette liquid accounted for $101.5 million (4 percent) of the total customs value over that period. From 2016 to 2018, the customs value of all U.S. e-cigarette imports increased by 300 percent, with the highest increases associated with imported e-cigarette parts (594 percent) and one type of nicotine-containing e-cigarette liquid (582 percent). Although e-cigarettes were imported from 65 countries during this period, imports from China accounted for 97 percent of the customs value of all e-cigarette imports. U.S. e-cigarette imports cleared customs at 36 ports of entry; the top five ports of entry--Los Angeles, Cleveland, Chicago, Savannah, and Norfolk--accounted for 81 percent of the total customs value of U.S. e-cigarette imports from 2016 through 2018."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Over the last 15 years, use of electronic cigarettes, known as e-cigarettes, in the United States has grown rapidly as use of traditional cigarettes declined among both adolescents and adults. As GAO reported in 2017, most e-cigarettes sold in the United States are thought to be imported. The U.S. government began collecting data specific to e-cigarette imports in January 2016, after the Committee for Statistical Annotation of Tariff Schedules established six new statistical reporting numbers for e-cigarette devices, parts, and liquid in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS). The six HTS statistical reporting numbers for U.S. e-cigarette imports cover devices with and without nicotine; parts with and without nicotine; and two types of nicotine-containing e-cigarette liquid. U.S. Customs and Border Protection collects U.S. import data from records submitted by importers, and the U.S. Census Bureau (Census) incorporates these data into its official trade statistics.

GAO was asked to report on e-cigarettes imported into the United States from 2016 through 2018. This report examines the customs value, tariff revenue, countries of origin, and ports of entry for e-cigarette devices, parts, and liquid imported during those years. GAO analyzed import data for the six statistical reporting numbers for e-cigarettes for calendar years 2016 through 2018. GAO used data that were available in April 2019 from the Interactive Tariff and Trade DataWeb database maintained by U.S. International Trade Commission, which incorporates U.S. trade statistics published by Census."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-619R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Future Warfare

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the the Army's implementation of a new warfighting concept to guide how its forces will engage jointly with other services in multiple domains, especially in cyber and space. The report (GAO-19-570) is titled "Future Warfare: Army Is Preparing for Cyber and Electronic Warfare Threats, but Needs to Fully Assess the Staffing, Equipping, and Training of New Organizations".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the the Army's implementation of a new warfighting concept to guide how its forces will engage jointly with other services in multiple domains, especially in cyber and space. The report (GAO-19-570) is titled "Future Warfare: Army Is Preparing for Cyber and Electronic Warfare Threats, but Needs to Fully Assess the Staffing, Equipping, and Training of New Organizations". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee,Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on Aug. 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Army is changing aspects of its doctrine, organizations, and training to develop a force that can effectively engage great-power competitors--Russia and China--through multi-domain operations by 2028. Multi-domain operations present adversaries with multiple challenges across multiple domains (land, air, sea, cyber, and space) in contested environments. To this end, the Army is revising its doctrine to guide how the force and specific units will function. The Army is also reorganizing its force by creating new units to conduct missions in multiple domains and by updating the responsibilities of key Army formations, such as Army divisions. Also, the Army is training its combat forces for multi-domain operations in part by increasing the focus on cyber operations.

The Army is establishing new cyber and electronic warfare units for multi-domain operations, but did not fully assess the risk of activating some units at an accelerated pace and is experiencing staffing, equipping, and training challenges. For example, the Army activated a cyber battalion in December 2018, and as of March 2019, this unit was understaffed by more than 80 percent. Army guidance directs the Army staff to conduct assessments on new units to determine whether the Army can staff, equip, and train these organizations. However, Army leadership believed the threats justify developing these units at an accelerated pace. Consequently, the Army did not assess the staffing, equipping, and training risk before activating one unit, and only conducted an initial risk assessment before activating a second unit. As a result, senior Army leaders may not know what other challenges could arise, such as sustainment, as the units grow in capabililty. Army officials told GAO that as these units evolve, it is uncertain when more comprehensive risk assessments would take place. The Army has previously accelerated the activations of other units when it saw fit to do so, and is considering creating other new units for multi-domain operations. If the Army does not assess risks for units activated at an accelerated pace, those units may be unable to effectively conduct multi-domain operations."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The rise of great-power competitors, such as China and Russia, prompted the Army to transform the way it plans to fight. The Army is developing a new warfighting concept to guide how its forces will engage jointly with other services in multiple domains, especially in cyber and space.

The House Armed Services Committee included a provision in House Report 115-200 accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 for GAO to review the Army's implementation of the concept. Among its objectives, this report addresses (1) how the Army is changing its doctrine, organizations, and training in order to execute multi-domain operations; and (2) the extent to which the Army has established new cyber and electronic warfare units, including any challenges faced by these units, and whether the Army assessed risks associated with its plan to establish these units.

GAO reviewed Army concepts, doctrine, force design, and training documents concerning multi-domain operations. GAO also interviewed Army and Department of Defense officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations, including that the Army comprehensively assess the risk of staffing, equipping, and training the cyber and electronic warfare units that it has activated at an accelerated pace, and to do so for new organizations it plans to activate in an accelerated manner for multi-domain operations. The Army concurred with one recommendation and partially concurred with two recommendations. GAO clarified the recommendations, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-570?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicare Part D

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the role of pharmacy benefit managers in the Part D program. The report (GAO-19-498) is titled "Medicare Part D: Use of Pharmacy Benefit Managers and Efforts to Manage Drug Expenditures and Utilization".

The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, and Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Medicare Part D plan sponsors used ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the role of pharmacy benefit managers in the Part D program. The report (GAO-19-498) is titled "Medicare Part D: Use of Pharmacy Benefit Managers and Efforts to Manage Drug Expenditures and Utilization". The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, and Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Medicare Part D plan sponsors usedpharmacy benefit managers (PBM) to provide 74 percent of drug benefit management services and performed the remaining 26 percent of services themselves in 2016--the most recent year of data at the time of our analysis. Plan sponsors are private entities that operate drug plans; PBMs are organizations that help manage drug benefits.

Rebates and other price concessions--discounts generally paid by manufacturers to Part D plan sponsors and PBMs after the sale of a drug at the pharmacy--grew faster than Part D expenditures from 2014 through 2016. Specifically, gross expenditures (the amount paid to pharmacies by plan sponsors, or by the PBM on the sponsor's behalf, and by the beneficiary) increased 20 percent, to $145.1 billion. During this period, rebates and other price concessions increased 66 percent, to $29 billion--20 percent of 2016 gross expenditures. Consequently, net expenditures (gross expenditures less rebates and other price concessions) increased only 13 percent, to $116.1 billion.

PBMs primarily earned Part D revenue through a volume-based fee paid by plan sponsors based on PBM-processed claims; a per-member, per-month fee paid by plan sponsors; or a combination of the two. PBMs also earned revenue from the rebates they negotiated with manufacturers for Part D drugs, which accounted for $18 billion of the $26.7 billion in rebates in 2016. PBMs retained less than 1 percent of these rebates, passing the rest to plan sponsors. Plan sponsors in turn may use rebates to help offset the growth in drug costs, helping control premiums for beneficiaries.

The Department of Health and Human Services provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Total expenditures for the Medicare Part D drug program exceeded $100 billion in 2016. Part D plan sponsors may use a PBM to provide drug benefit management services for Part D coverage, such as negotiating drug rebates and other price concessions and paying pharmacy claims. Policymakers have sought a better understanding of PBMs' roles in the drug supply chain and plans' and PBMs' efforts to manage Part D drug spending and use.

GAO was asked to examine the role of PBMs in the Part D program. This report examines, among other objectives, (1) the extent to which Part D plan sponsors use PBMs, (2) trends in rebates and other price concessions obtained by both PBMs and plan sponsors for Part D drugs, and (3) how PBMs earn revenue for services provided to Part D plans.

GAO analyzed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data on Part D plan sponsors' use of PBMs in 2016 as well as CMS drug expenditure, pricing, and rebate and other price concession data for all Part D drugs from 2014 through 2016 (the most recent available data at the time of our analysis). GAO reviewed service agreements between Part D plan sponsors and PBMs that were approved by CMS from January 2016 through May 2018 and had the highest enrollment as of June 2018. GAO spoke with CMS officials and 38 stakeholder groups including PBMs, Part D plan sponsors, pharmacy representatives and drug manufacturers."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-498?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Social Security, Medicare

WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Social Security and Medicare trust funds. The report (GAO-19-596) is titled "Social Security and Medicare: Improved Schedule Management Needed for More Timely Trust Fund Reports".

The report was sent to Rep. Tom Reed, R-New York, ranking member of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security, on July 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Annual reports on the status of Social Security and Medicare trust funds are developed through a collaboration between agency ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Social Security and Medicare trust funds. The report (GAO-19-596) is titled "Social Security and Medicare: Improved Schedule Management Needed for More Timely Trust Fund Reports". The report was sent to Rep. Tom Reed, R-New York, ranking member of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security, on July 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Annual reports on the status of Social Security and Medicare trust funds are developed through a collaboration between agencyofficials and trustees, which include relevant Cabinet members and public members nominated by the President (if confirmed). Offices of the Chief Actuaries from the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) submit data and draft reports to a working group of agency officials representing trustees and any public trustees. The working group reviews the information and, after gaining consensus, submits it to the boards of trustees for final approval. The boards of trustees send the final reports to Congress.

The trustees missed the April 1 statutory deadline for submitting the reports to Congress in 17 of the 25 years from 1995 to 2019, and have issued them more than 2 months late in 6 of the last 10 years (see figure). According to agency officials and former public trustees GAO interviewed, factors that may account for delays include late-breaking changes to assumptions or data, and difficulty scheduling the boards' meetings. Additionally, contrary to GAO's guide on best practices for project schedules, officials have not taken steps to update the report-development schedules to reflect actual progress, maintained a formally documented baseline schedule to incorporate lessons learned from prior years, or notified Congress of their progress. Without taking steps to improve report-development schedule management, these trust fund reports will likely continue to be untimely, missing the April 1 statutory deadline. Also, without improved efforts to keep congressional committees informed, Congress will be unaware of when the reports will be issued, potentially hindering oversight of the trust funds."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Social Security Act requires boards of trustees to issue reports to Congress by April 1 each year on the financial status of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Policymakers and others can use these reports to understand the programs' finances, conduct oversight, and consider legislative proposals for the programs. GAO was asked to review the timeliness of these reports.

This report (1) describes how the boards of trustees develop the annual Trustees reports, and (2) examines the extent to which the boards of trustees have provided the reports to Congress by the April 1 deadline since 1995, and what factors account for any delays.

GAO reviewed boards of trustees meeting minutes from 1995-2018, working group agendas from 2011-2018, and report development schedules and the annual Trustees reports from 1995-2019; as well as relevant federal law. GAO also interviewed agency working group officials from SSA and CMS; the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury; and eight former public trustees who served since 1995."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that Treasury take steps to work with the other trustees to improve schedule management for developing the annual Trustees reports, and to establish a policy to inform congressional committees of jurisdiction about expected delays in issuing the reports. Treasury agreed with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-596?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Ex-Im Bank

WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of the Export-Import Bank's monitoring of dual-use exports that it continued to finance in fiscal 2017, as of August 2019. The report (GAO-19-656R) is titled "Export-Import Bank: Status of End-Use Monitoring of Dual-Use Exports as of August 2019".

The report was sent to Sen. Michael Crapo. R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of the Export-Import Bank's monitoring of dual-use exports that it continued to finance in fiscal 2017, as of August 2019. The report (GAO-19-656R) is titled "Export-Import Bank: Status of End-Use Monitoring of Dual-Use Exports as of August 2019". The report was sent to Sen. Michael Crapo. R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, rankingmember of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, D-New York, chairwoman, Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, on Aug. 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "As of August 2019, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) monitored the end use of its dual-use export transactions that it continued to finance in fiscal year 2017, as summarized below.

* Two satellites for the government of Mexico. A fixed service satellite was launched in December 2012 and became operational in February 2013, and a mobile service satellite was launched in October 2015 and became operational in December 2015. For 2019, EXIM received all documents from the government of Mexico on time and subsequently determined that Mexico was in compliance with the bank's dual-use policy.

* Construction equipment for the government of Cameroon. The government of Cameroon made its final payment under the credit agreement on July 28, 2018, ending the bank's end-use monitoring responsibilities for this transaction, according to EXIM. An EXIM official confirmed that no additional reports or certifications were required in 2019.

* Satellite for French company Eutelsat. Eutelsat made its final payment on June 29, 2017, ending the bank's end-use monitoring responsibilities for this transaction.

EXIM did not finance any new exports under its dual-use authority in fiscal year 2018, according to EXIM authorizations data and EXIM officials."

Why GAO Did This Study: "EXIM's mission is to support the export of U.S. goods and services overseas through loans, loan guarantees, and insurance, thereby supporting U.S. jobs. Since 1994, EXIM has had authority to facilitate the financing of U.S. exports of defense articles and services, provided that it determines these items are nonlethal and primarily meant for civilian end use. Included in the same act was a provision for GAO to report annually on the end uses of dual-use exports financed by EXIM during the second preceding fiscal year.

This report (1) examines the status of EXIM's monitoring of dual-use exports that it continued to finance in fiscal year 2017, as of August 2019; and (2) identifies any new dual-use exports that EXIM financed in fiscal year 2018."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is not making any recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-656R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Security Assistance

WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on human rights training for foreign security forces. The report (GAO-19-554) is titled "Security Assistance: U.S. Agencies Should Improve Oversight of Human Rights Training for Foreign Security Forces".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Louisiana, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on human rights training for foreign security forces. The report (GAO-19-554) is titled "Security Assistance: U.S. Agencies Should Improve Oversight of Human Rights Training for Foreign Security Forces". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Louisiana,chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, D-New York, chairwoman, and Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, on Aug. 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Several entities within the Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) are involved in human rights training. DOD's Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) conducts program management for DOD's efforts to build the capacity of foreign security forces. The human rights training required by 10 U.S.C Sec. 333 is provided exclusively by the Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (DIILS), a DOD entity. DOD operates a number of other educational entities that provide training to foreign security forces, and many include human rights-related material in their curriculum or through operational exercises. (See figure.)

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-554?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD does not systematically track human rights training and, as a result, only limited information is available on the provision of and funding for these activities. Without a process to ensure systematic and accurate tracking of human rights training data, DSCA is limited in its ability to monitor its compliance with the training-related provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017. State relies on DOD to track human rights training for military forces and tracks some training and funding data for police.

DOD and State have not assessed the effectiveness of human rights training for foreign security forces, according to agency officials. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 required DOD to conduct monitoring and evaluation of its security assistance programs. DOD has taken initial steps to develop monitoring and evaluation policies but officials stated that they have not yet determined when DOD will evaluate human rights training. State officials said they do not know when the agency will begin monitoring and evaluating human rights training provided under the International Military Education and Training program, a large source of funding for such training. Monitoring and evaluation would enable DOD and State to determine the effectiveness of U.S.-provided human rights training for foreign security forces."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The U.S. government seeks to advance human rights when it provides security assistance to foreign countries. Such assistance includes DOD- and State-supported human rights and international humanitarian law training for foreign security forces. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 consolidated multiple capacity building authorities, now codified at 10 U.S.C. Sec. 333. DOD implements most U.S. human rights training for foreign security forces.

Congress included a provision in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2018 for GAO to review human rights training for foreign security forces. This report, among other objectives, (1) describes the entities through which DOD and State provide such training, (2) assesses the extent to which DOD and State track the provision of and funding for such training, and (3) examines the extent to which DOD and State have evaluated the effectiveness of the training. GAO reviewed laws, regulations, guidance, agency training and funding data, and course catalogs, and interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations, including that the Secretary of Defense establish a process to systematically track mandated human rights training and develop a timeline for implementing monitoring and evaluation. DOD agreed. GAO also recommends that the Secretary of State develop a plan with a timeline to monitor and evaluate such training. State disagreed. GAO continues to believe the recommendation is valid as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-554?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Guided Missile Frigate

WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the FFG(X) Guided Missile Frigate program. The report (GAO-19-512) is titled "Guided Missile Frigate: Navy Has Taken Steps to Reduce Acquisition Risk, but Opportunities Exist to Improve Knowledge for Decision Makers".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Louisiana, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the FFG(X) Guided Missile Frigate program. The report (GAO-19-512) is titled "Guided Missile Frigate: Navy Has Taken Steps to Reduce Acquisition Risk, but Opportunities Exist to Improve Knowledge for Decision Makers". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Louisiana, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense,Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on Aug. 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Navy undertook a conceptual design phase for the FFG(X) Guided Missile Frigate program that enabled industry to inform FFG(X) requirements, identify opportunities for cost savings, and mature different ship designs. The Navy also streamlined the FFG(X) acquisition approach in an effort to accelerate the timeline for delivering the ships to the fleet. As shown in the figure, however, the Navy has requested funding for the FFG(X) lead ship even though it has yet to complete key cost estimation activites, such as an independent cost estimate, to validate the credibility of cost expectations. Department of Defense (DOD) cost estimators told GAO the timeline for completing the independent cost estimate is uncertain. Specifically, they stated that this estimate will not be finalized until the Navy communicates to them which FFG(X) design is expected to receive the contract award. GAO-identified best practices call for requisite cost knowledge to be available to inform resource decisions and contract awards.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-512?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The Navy plans to use a fixed-price incentive contract for FFG(X) detail design and construction. This is a notable departure from prior Navy surface combatant programs that used higher-risk cost-reimbursement contracts for lead ship construction. The Navy also plans to require that each ship has a minimum guaranty of $5 million to correct shipbuilder-responsible defects identified in the 18 months following ship delivery. However, Navy officials discounted the potential use of a warranty--another mechanism to address the correction of shipbuilder defects--stating that their use could negatively affect shipbuilding cost and reduce competition for the contract award. The Navy provided no analysis to support these claims and has not demonstrated why the use of warranties is not a viable option. The Navy's planned use of guarantees helps ensure the FFG(X) shipbuilder is responsible for correcting defects up to a point, but guarantees generally do not provide the same level of coverage as warranties. GAO found in March 2016 that the use of a guaranty did not help improve cost or quality outcomes for the ships reviewed. GAO also found the use of a warranty in commercial shipbuilding and certain Coast Guard ships improves cost and quality outcomes by requiring the shipbuilders to pay to repair defects. The FFG(X) request for proposal offers the Navy an opportunity to solicit pricing for a warranty to assess the cost-effectiveness of the different mechanisms to address ship defects."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In response to the shortcomings of the Navy's Littoral Combat Ship program and evolving threats, the Navy began the FFG(X) program. With FFG(X), the Navy intends to deliver a multi-mission ship that will provide anti-surface, anti-submarine, and air warfare capabilities. DOD approved FFG(X) requirements in February 2019.The Navy plans for a competitive contract award to support final FFG(X) design and construction. The program is expected to cost over $20 billion for 20 ships.

The House report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 included a provision for GAO to review the FFG(X) program. This report addresses, among other things, the FFG(X) acquisition approach and contracting plans.

GAO reviewed requirements, acquisition, design, and cost-related documentation. GAO interviewed Navy and other defense officials, and conducted industry site visits to each shipyard participating in FFG(X) conceptual design activities. GAO also leveraged prior GAO reports and best practices guides."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Navy provide Congress with the independent cost estimate for FFG(X) prior to the detail design and construction contract award and seek ship warranty cost information from industry as part of the request for proposal process. While DOD generally concurred with GAO's recommendations, it did not agree to update its request for proposal to solicit ship warranty pricing. GAO continues to believe this is an essential element of the recommendation, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-512?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicaid Payment

WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of selected states' implementation of Medicaid third-party liability changes. The report (GAO-19-601) is titled "Medicaid Payment: CMS Has Not Overseen States' Implementation of Changes to Third-Party Liability".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on Aug. 9. Here ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of selected states' implementation of Medicaid third-party liability changes. The report (GAO-19-601) is titled "Medicaid Payment: CMS Has Not Overseen States' Implementation of Changes to Third-Party Liability". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on Aug. 9. Hereare excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Medicaid officials in the nine selected states GAO reviewed described being in various stages of implementing third-party liability changes as required by law. These changes affect whether health care providers must seek payment from a liable third party, such as private insurance, before the state Medicaid agency pays for services. The changes apply to prenatal care services, pediatric preventive services, and services for children subject to child support enforcement (CSE beneficiaries). At the time of GAO's review,

* Officials from four of the nine selected states reported having fully implemented the changes for prenatal care services, which were required to be implemented starting in February 2018. Officials from the remaining five states were discussing the changes internally, researching how to implement the changes in their Medicaid payment systems, or waiting for additional guidance from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal agency responsible for overseeing states' Medicaid programs.

* None of the nine states had implemented the changes to pediatric preventive services and services for CSE beneficiaries, which must be implemented starting in October 2019. Officials from six states told GAO that they were in the early stages of exploring how they would make the changes, while the remaining three states had not developed such plans.

GAO found that guidance issued by CMS in June 2018 to assist states in implementing the third-party liability changes contains information inconsistent with the law. For example, CMS's guidance incorrectly informs states that providers do not need to seek third-party payments before the state pays for some prenatal services. In addition, CMS has not determined the extent to which states are meeting third-party liability requirements. CMS officials stated that they expect states to comply with current law for Medicaid third-party liability and that they do not verify whether states have implemented the required third-party liability changes unless the agency is made aware of non-compliance. However, this approach is inconsistent with CMS's Medicaid oversight responsibilities, including its responsibility to ensure federal funds are appropriately spent.

Medicaid experts and other stakeholders told GAO that the third-party liability changes could affect some health care providers in ways that could result in decreased beneficiary access to care, because some providers might be less willing to see Medicaid patients. According to stakeholders, this could occur for two primary reasons.

1. The changes may increase administrative requirements for providers by requiring them to identify sources of coverage, obtain insurance information, and submit claims to third-party insurers before submitting them to Medicaid.

2. The changes may result in providers waiting longer to receive Medicaid payment for certain services to the extent that states require providers to seek third-party payments before paying the providers' claims."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Medicaid program is typically the payer of last resort. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 changed the Medicaid third-party liability payment requirements for prenatal care services, pediatric preventive services, and services provided to CSE beneficiaries. Before the act, in the case of these three services, states were generally required to pay providers for services delivered to Medicaid beneficiaries and then obtain any payments from liable third parties.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 also included a provision for GAO to study the potential effects of these changes. In this report, GAO (1) describes the status of selected states' implementation of Medicaid third-party liability changes; (2) evaluates CMS's implementation and oversight of the Medicaid third-party liability changes; and (3) describes stakeholders' views of the possible effects of these changes on providers and beneficiaries. GAO conducted interviews with state Medicaid agencies and provider associations in nine selected states, which were selected by taking into consideration Medicaid spending and stakeholder recommendations, among other factors. GAO also conducted interviews with national experts in Medicaid, national organizations representing beneficiaries and providers, and officials from CMS."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that CMS (1) ensure that its guidance to states on third-party liability requirements reflects current law, and (2) determine the extent to which state Medicaid programs are meeting federal third-party liability requirements. The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with these recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-601?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Obesity Drugs

WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the prevalence of obesity and the use and insurance coverage of obesity drugs. The report (GAO-19-577) is titled "Obesity Drugs: Few Adults Used Prescription Drugs for Weight Loss and Insurance Coverage Varied".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Rep. Frank ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the prevalence of obesity and the use and insurance coverage of obesity drugs. The report (GAO-19-577) is titled "Obesity Drugs: Few Adults Used Prescription Drugs for Weight Loss and Insurance Coverage Varied". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Rep. FrankPallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, republican leader of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on Aug. 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The prevalence of obesity--that is, body weight higher than what is considered a healthy weight for a given height--was about 38 percent among all U.S. adults, according to the latest available national estimates at the time of GAO's analysis. This prevalence was similar for adults with different types of health insurance.

Treatment for adults with obesity may include one or more of nine prescription drugs that the Food and Drug Administration has approved for weight management (i.e., obesity drugs), though relatively few adults have used these drugs. Of an estimated 71.6 million U.S. adults with obesity, an estimated 660,000 per year, on average, used an obesity drug from 2012 through 2016, according to national estimates. Among adults who reported trying to lose weight, about 3 percent reported that they took prescription medication for weight loss from 2013 through 2016, according to national estimates.

Coverage of obesity drugs varied across different types of health insurance, including Medicare and Medicaid. Plans cited factors such as low consumer demand and strong evidence supporting other treatments in their coverage decisions. GAO's analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' data indicates that some Medicare prescription drug plans and state Medicaid programs reimbursed for some obesity drugs in 2016 and 2017. Coverage for private health insurance plans also varied, and plans may require the patient to obtain prior authorization for the drugs to be covered, according to officials from insurers and pharmacy benefit managers GAO interviewed. For example, officials from one insurer said that some of their plans only cover obesity drugs after a patient has tried other treatment options such as behavioral counseling."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Obesity has been associated with an increased risk of developing conditions such as heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and certain types of cancer. Treatment options for individuals with obesity include lifestyle therapy, such as diet, exercise, and behavioral counseling; obesity drugs; surgery; or a combination of these efforts. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-123) included a provision for GAO to review the prevalence of obesity and the use and insurance coverage of obesity drugs.

This report examines the prevalence of obesity in the United States, and what is known about the use and health insurance coverage of obesity drugs, among other objectives.

GAO examined data from agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on the prevalence of obesity (using estimates for 2013 through 2016) and the use, spending, and coverage of obesity drugs; conducted a literature review of relevant studies published from January 2012 through January 2019 in peer-reviewed and other publications; reviewed drug formularies for selected health plans; and reviewed documents and interviewed officials from federal agencies and stakeholder organizations (including medical associations, advocacy groups, pharmacy benefit managers, and insurers).

HHS provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which were incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-577?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Global Tobacco Control

WASHINGTON, Aug. 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. global tobacco control efforts. The report (GAO-19-533R) is titled "Global Tobacco Control: U.S. Efforts Have Primarily Focused on Research and Surveillance".

The report was sent to Rep. Karen Bass, D-California, chair of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, and Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, on Aug. 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In fiscal years 2015 through 2018, U.S. agencies' funding ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. global tobacco control efforts. The report (GAO-19-533R) is titled "Global Tobacco Control: U.S. Efforts Have Primarily Focused on Research and Surveillance". The report was sent to Rep. Karen Bass, D-California, chair of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, and Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, on Aug. 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "In fiscal years 2015 through 2018, U.S. agencies' fundingfor global tobacco control primarily supported tobacco research grants and surveillance activities. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) obligated about $41.6 million for 47 awards to address global tobacco control. HHS provided the majority of this funding--about $39.5 million (95 percent of all U.S. funding)--for 41 awards primarily focused on research and surveillance. Additionally, HHS component agencies--the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Food and Drug Administration--participated in knowledge sharing and technical assistance. USAID funded six research awards, totaling about $2.1 million. The Department of State (State) did not fund any global tobacco control awards directly but is the largest contributor to the World Health Organization (WHO) and Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), which pool U.S. contributions with funding from other members to implement global tobacco control efforts."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The United Nations' WHO has reported that tobacco use is one of the world's leading cause of preventable deaths, killing over 8 million people each year--almost three times the number that die from tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and malaria combined. The majority of those deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries.

To address this problem, WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was adopted by the World Health Assembly in 2003 and came into force in 2005. The FCTC's stated objective is to protect people from the consequences of tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke by providing a framework for implementing tobacco control measures at the national, regional, and international levels. While the U.S. government is not bound by FCTC provisions, HHS, USAID, and State engage in global tobacco control efforts.

GAO was asked to review U.S. global tobacco control efforts. In this report, GAO describes U.S. agencies' funding and activities for global tobacco control in fiscal years 2015 through 2018. GAO reviewed data and documentation from HHS, USAID, and State and met with officials from each agency. GAO reviewed obligations data covering all grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements from HHS and USAID and examined award documentation for both agencies' global tobacco control awards. In addition, GAO reviewed documentation and interviewed officials from WHO and PAHO.

GAO is not making any recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-533R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nuclear Supply Chain

WASHINGTON, Aug. 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Energy's use of the enhanced procurement authority and on the status of any previous recommendations. The report (GAO-19-606R) is titled "Nuclear Supply Chain: NNSA Should Notify Congress of Its Recommendations to Improve the Enhanced Procurement Authority".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking member ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Energy's use of the enhanced procurement authority and on the status of any previous recommendations. The report (GAO-19-606R) is titled "Nuclear Supply Chain: NNSA Should Notify Congress of Its Recommendations to Improve the Enhanced Procurement Authority". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking memberof the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen.Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, chairman, and Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies, on Aug. 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Officials from the Department of Energy's (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said that DOE has not used its enhanced procurement authority since it was authorized in December 2013. This authority allows the Secretary of Energy, in the interest of national security, to exclude suppliers from certain procurements made directly by DOE and NNSA or indirectly by a contractor, if various conditions are met. The authority applies to procurements of "covered systems"--primarily nuclear weapons components and items associated with the design, production, and maintenance of such weapons; items associated with the design and development of nonproliferation and counterproliferation systems; and certain information technology systems. NNSA officials stated that since August 2018, they identified additional circumstances that could warrant using the enhanced procurement authority. However, the officials said that NNSA is unlikely to use the authority because of concerns that it could (1) take significant time to get approval from the Secretary of Energy to use and (2) only be applied on a case-by-case basis and not across multiple contract actions involving a supplier for which a specific supply chain risk has been identified.

According to NNSA officials, NNSA is continuing to work on a draft report in response to an August 2016 GAO recommendation to assess the circumstances that might warrant using the enhanced procurement authority and take additional actions based on the results. Per the officials, the draft report--which officials now expect to complete by the end of 2019--includes suggestions to change the authority to address NNSA's concerns by (1) delegating approval authority to a lower level to reduce the amount of time it may take to get approval to use the enhanced procurement authority and (2) allowing the enhanced procurement authority to apply across multiple contract actions that include the same supplier of concern. DOE officials stated that they agreed with NNSA's suggestion to delegate the enhanced procurement authority to a lower level and also suggested that among other things the authority be broadened to include more than covered systems. The DOE and NNSA officials further stated that if it is amended to address these concerns, the enhanced procurement authority could provide DOE and NNSA with a powerful tool to manage supply chain risks.

However, NNSA has not yet formally communicated its concerns about, and suggested changes for, amending the authority to relevant congressional committees because NNSA has not finalized its report, plans for which have been delayed by over a year. By formally communicating the agency's concerns about, and suggested changes to, the enhanced procurement authority in a timely manner, NNSA would provide Congress with the relevant information for considering how to make the authority more useful to DOE and NNSA for managing supply chain risks."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The continued globalization of the nation's supply chains--including the trend toward using a non-domestic supply chain for some nonnuclear components of nuclear weapons and related systems--has led to heightened risks of potential supply chain exploitation. According to NNSA, malevolent exploitation of NNSA supply chain vulnerabilities could affect weapon functionality. For example, according to DOE and NNSA documents, a counterfeit or sabotaged component could cause a nuclear weapon to malfunction. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 provides the Secretary of Energy with an enhanced procurement authority. The Secretary may use the authority to exclude suppliers from the procurement of a covered system without providing the supplier with a reason, and the Secretary's decision is not subject to review in federal court.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 includes a provision for GAO to report on DOE's use of the enhanced procurement authority and on the status of any previous recommendations GAO has made in this area. This report updates GAO's previous work by examining the extent to which DOE used its enhanced procurement authority to manage supply chain risks and assessed the circumstances and factors that officials reported as affecting its use since GAO last reported on it in August 2018.

GAO reviewed the conditions for using the enhanced procurement authority as described in the act and DOE and NNSA documents. GAO interviewed NNSA officials involved with decisions to use the authority to determine the extent to which DOE has used the authority, including whether any additional circumstances in which to use the authority may have been identified since GAO's August 2018 report; the status of the agency's actions taken in response to GAO's August 2016 recommendation; and the status of NNSA's assessment of the circumstances and factors that could affect DOE's and NNSA's use of the authority."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that DOE, in coordination with NNSA, formally communicate to the relevant congressional committees concerns about, and suggested changes to, the enhanced procurement authority in a timely manner. NNSA agreed with GAO's recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-606R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Generic Drug Applications

WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues regarding the approval of generic drug applications in the first review cycle. The report (GAO-19-565) is titled "Generic Drug Applications: FDA Should Take Additional Steps to Address Factors That May Affect Approval Rates in the First Review Cycle".

The report was sent to Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, republican ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues regarding the approval of generic drug applications in the first review cycle. The report (GAO-19-565) is titled "Generic Drug Applications: FDA Should Take Additional Steps to Address Factors That May Affect Approval Rates in the First Review Cycle". The report was sent to Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, republicanleader of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on Aug. 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "GAO found that 12 percent of the 2,030 generic drug applications reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from fiscal years 2015 through 2017 were approved in the first review cycle. The first review cycle begins when FDA accepts a generic drug application for review and ends when FDA makes its first decision about whether the drug should be approved for marketing and sale. For applications that were not approved in that first cycle, the application must undergo one or more subsequent review cycles to obtain approval, delaying the generic drug's arrival to market.

GAO identified several factors that may have contributed to whether a generic drug was approved during the first review cycle. For example, certain types of complex drugs were less likely to receive approval in the first review cycle, such as eye drops or other drugs administered through the eye.

FDA has taken steps to increase the rate of generic drug approvals in the first review cycle. For example, FDA has increased communication with applicants and introduced templates for reviewers to improve the consistency and clarity of their comments. However, GAO's review of a judgmental selection of 35 applications found examples of variation in the clarity and content of FDA's comments to applicants. Such variation may have contributed to whether applicants could adequately address deficiencies within the first cycle, and therefore whether the applications were approved. In addition, stakeholders GAO interviewed expressed concern that changes to the brand-name drug's labeling mid-cycle could delay or prevent generic drugs' approval in the first review cycle, and some stakeholders said they believe that the labeling changes may be strategically timed to delay approvals. Although FDA officials noted that it would be difficult for brand-name companies to time labeling changes in this way, they said that the agency has not conducted analysis that would enable it to assess the validity of these concerns. Therefore, FDA lacks the information needed to respond to these concerns or address problems should they exist."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Generic drugs--copies of brand-name drugs--lead to significant cost savings. Before a generic drug can be marketed, FDA must approve the generic drug application. According to FDA, applications go through an average of three cycles of review before being approved, which may take years.

The FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 included a provision for GAO to study issues regarding the approval of generic drug applications in the first review cycle. This report examines 1) the first review cycle approval rate of generic drug applications in recent years and factors that may have contributed to whether applications were approved; and 2) changes FDA has made to increase the first review cycle approval rate. GAO reviewed FDA data on all generic drug applications reviewed from fiscal years 2015 through 2017 and documentation from the first review cycle for a judgmental selection of 35 applications from fiscal years 2017 and 2018. GAO also interviewed a non-generalizable selection of stakeholders. Applications and stakeholders were chosen to ensure variation in experience with the approval process."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that FDA 1) take additional steps to address inconsistency in its written comments to generic drug application sponsors and 2) assess the extent to which the timing of brand-name drug companies' drug labeling changes affects the approval of generic drugs and take steps, as appropriate, to limit the effect. HHS concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-565?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on VA Health Care

WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's efforts to assess the impact of the same-day services initiative on veterans' access to care. The report (GAO-19-546) is titled "VA Health Care: Goals and Related Measures Needed to Better Assess the Impact of Same-Day Services".

The report was sent to Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Michigan, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, on Aug. 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's efforts to assess the impact of the same-day services initiative on veterans' access to care. The report (GAO-19-546) is titled "VA Health Care: Goals and Related Measures Needed to Better Assess the Impact of Same-Day Services". The report was sent to Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Michigan, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, on Aug. 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department ofVeterans Affairs' (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) introduced its same-day services initiative in primary and mental health care in April 2016, and used a five-pronged approach for its design: it defined same-day services, developed guidance, updated its mental health policies, offered training, and assessed VA medical center readiness to implement the initiative. Officials from all six VA medical centers GAO visited said they already were providing same-day services prior to the initiative and generally relied on previous approaches to implement VHA's same-day-services initiative. However, these officials told GAO that some of VHA's guidance and updated policies were difficult to implement due to long-standing challenges of staffing and space constraints, among others. For example, one medical center official stated that the medical center did not have the appropriate providers readily available to complete the initial mental health assessments of new patients in a timely manner--a new requirement under VHA's updated policies.

VHA officials stated that the objectives of the same-day services initiative are to improve veterans' access to care and customer service. However, VHA has not documented these objectives in a directive or developed and documented performance goals that, with associated performance measures, would monitor progress. Although VHA does monitor patient experience scores and the number of same-day appointments, these measures are not tied to specific performance goals. For example, VHA has not specified targets for the number of same-day appointments medical centers should provide. Furthermore, monitoring the number of same-day appointments does not capture all of the ways VA medical centers provide same-day services, such as renewing prescriptions. VHA officials acknowledged the intitiative was quickly developed in response to the 2014 access crisis, and developing new policies or processes, which could include documenting objectives and developing performance goals, was not the priority. Without performance goals and related measures, VHA will continue to be limited in its ability to determine, how, if at all, the same-day services initiative has improved veterans' access to care."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2014, a series of congressional testimonies highlighted problems with veterans' access to care after significant appointment wait times at VA medical centers reportedly resulted in harm to veterans. In response, VHA implemented several initiatives, including same-day services at its medical centers and outpatient clinics.

GAO was asked to review the same-day services initiative and VHA's related oversight activities. This report (1) describes how VHA designed and how selected medical centers implemented the same-day services initiative; and (2) examines VHA's efforts to assess the impact of the same-day services initiative on veterans' access to care.

GAO reviewed VHA documents, including policies, guidance, and requirements related to same-day services and interviewed VHA officials regarding implementation and oversight. GAO visited six VA medical centers selected for the complexity of services offered, range of wait times, and geographic variation, among other factors. GAO interviewed officials from (1) the six VA medical centers and affiliated outpatient clinics, (2) VHA's networks with oversight responsibility, and (3) two veterans service organizations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that VA document objectives and develop performance goals and related performance measures to facilitate the periodic assessment of the impact of same-day services on veterans' access to care. VA agreed with GAO's recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-546?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Land Ports of Entry

WASHINGTON, Aug. 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Customs and Border Protection's process for inspecting passenger vehicles, pedestrians and commercial vehicles at land ports of entry's to secure the border. The report (GAO-19-658) is titled "Land Ports of Entry: CBP Should Update Policies and Enhance Analysis of Inspections".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, and Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, on Aug. 6. Here are excerpts of summaries associated ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Customs and Border Protection's process for inspecting passenger vehicles, pedestrians and commercial vehicles at land ports of entry's to secure the border. The report (GAO-19-658) is titled "Land Ports of Entry: CBP Should Update Policies and Enhance Analysis of Inspections". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, and Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, on Aug. 6. Here are excerpts of summaries associatedwith the report.

What GAO Found: "U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has processes for inspecting passenger vehicles, pedestrians, and commercial vehicles at U.S. land ports of entry (POE). These processes include reviewing travel documents, screening against law enforcement databases, and using canines and X-ray equipment (see figure below). However, because CBP has not updated many of its policies--in a few cases for almost 20 years--they do not always reflect changes in technology or processes, such as those for conducting searches and handling fentanyl. By reviewing and updating policies, CBP could help ensure officers have guidance needed to consistently and properly perform inspections.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-658?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

CBP has various mechanisms at the port, field office, and national levels to monitor inspection activities at land POEs, but opportunities exist to enhance analysis of the results from its national level Self-Inspection Program (SIP) and covert operational testing. The SIP is an annual self-assessment that POEs are to conduct to determine compliance with CBP policies. CBP analyzes the results of the SIP annually to identify systemic compliance issues across CBP that year; however, it does not analyze noncompliance at individual POEs over time. By analyzing these data, CBP could better identify and address deficiencies at individual POEs. In addition, CBP has produced three comprehensive assessments, which analyzed aggregated results for certain types of covert tests, such as fraudulent document tests, conducted at land POEs in fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 2018. However, CBP has not done so for other types of tests, such as canine contraband detection tests, conducted from fiscal years 2013 through 2018. By implementing a policy for periodically conducting such analyses, CBP could identify vulnerabilities, trends, and best practices occurring more broadly.

CBP uses various sets of measures to assess its efforts to detect illegal activity at land POEs. CBP performance measures generally reflect the key attributes of effective measures, but CBP does not set an ambitious and realistic target for one measure. CBP's target for the land border interception rate--the estimated percentage of major violations in privately-owned vehicles that CBP intercepts out of the projected total number of major violations--is lower than the actual reported rate for fiscal years 2015 through 2018. A more ambitious target for the interception rate would better encourage CBP to review past performance of inspection activities that impact the measure and challenge CBP to identify ways to improve performance."

Why GAO Did This Study: "CBP, within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is the lead federal agency charged with a dual mission of facilitating the flow of legitimate travel and trade at the nation's borders while keeping terrorists and their weapons, criminals and their contraband, and inadmissible aliens out of the country. GAO was asked to review CBP's process for inspecting passenger vehicles, pedestrians, and commercial vehicles at land POEs to secure the border. This report examines to what extent CBP (1) has processes and policies for inspections, (2) monitors inspection activities, and (3) has measures to assess its efforts to detect illegal activity of passengers, pedestrians, and commercial vehicles at land POEs. To address these questions, GAO analyzed CBP documents and data related to inbound inspections; interviewed officials; and observed operations at a non-generalizable sample of seven land POEs, selected to reflect a range of traffic volumes and geographic locations, among other things. This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in June 2019. Information that DHS deemed sensitive has been omitted."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that CBP: (1) review and update policies related to land POE inspections in accordance with CBP guidance; (2) analyze the SIP results to identify and address reoccurring inspection deficiencies at individual POEs; (3) implement a policy to conduct periodic comprehensive analyses of covert test findings; and (4) develop a more ambitious target for the land border interception rate measure. DHS concurred."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-658?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Housing Administration

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Distressed Asset Stabilization Program. The report (GAO-19-228) is titled "Federal Housing Administration: Opportunities Exist to Improve Defaulted Single-Family Loan Sales".

The report was sent to Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, on July 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Federal Housing Administration (FHA) uses multiple entities to check loan eligibility ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Distressed Asset Stabilization Program. The report (GAO-19-228) is titled "Federal Housing Administration: Opportunities Exist to Improve Defaulted Single-Family Loan Sales". The report was sent to Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, on July 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Federal Housing Administration (FHA) uses multiple entities to check loan eligibilityfor the Distressed Asset Stabilization Program (DASP)--in which FHA accepts assignment of eligible, defaulted single-family loans from servicers in exchange for claim payments and sells the loans in competitive auctions. After servicers submit loans for sale, FHA and its contractors concurrently check loan data for completeness, validity, and eligibility. FHA relies on servicers to check eligibility a few weeks before and again after the bid date. The status of delinquent loans can be fluid, and a change in eligibility status close to this date may not be detected. GAO's analysis of fiscal year 2016 default data indicates about 2.67 percent of loans that FHA sold were ineligible based on length of delinquency or loss mitigation status. Without checking loan eligibility closer to bidding, FHA risks selling ineligible loans, and borrowers could lose access to benefits.

FHA does not evaluate outcomes for sold loans against similar unsold loans. GAO found that, in aggregate, sold defaulted loans were more likely to experience foreclosure than comparable unsold defaulted loans (see figure). However, GAO's analysis identified varying outcomes by purchasers and sales. For example, some purchasers' loans had higher probabilities of avoiding foreclosure, with borrowers making regular payments again by 24 months after the transfer of loans. Also, loans sold in 2016 sales were less likely to experience foreclosure compared to unsold loans. HUD policy states that the agency's evaluations isolate program effects from other influences. Evaluating outcomes for sold loans against similar unsold loans could help FHA determine whether DASP is meeting its objective of maximizing recoveries to the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund (MMI Fund) and understand the extent to which DASP helps borrowers.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-228?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Changing some of FHA's auction processes may help the MMI Fund. FHA could increase participation and MMI Fund recoveries in its auctions by communicating upcoming sales earlier. One purchaser said that additional notice would allow it time to plan for the capital needed to bid. Also, FHA set reserve prices (minimum acceptable price) based on the amount it expected to recover after loans completed foreclosure--yet GAO estimates that some of these loans will avoid foreclosure (see figure). As a result, FHA risks recovering less for the MMI Fund in loan sales than if the loans had not been sold."

Why GAO Did This Study: "HUD insures single-family mortgage loans and is authorized to sell defaulted loans under the National Housing Act. In fiscal years 2010-2016, FHA auctioned off approximately 111,000 loans to private purchasers under DASP. DASP helped reduce a backlog of federally insured defaulted loans stemming from the 2007-2011 financial crisis and was intended to protect the MMI Fund by paying insurance claims before the costly foreclosure process.

GAO was asked to evaluate DASP. This report examines, among other things, certain DASP procedures, including verifying loan eligibility criteria, and documentation; FHA's evaluation of the identified outcomes of sold loans and how these compare with similar, unsold loans; and the potential effects that changes to DASP might have on the MMI Fund. GAO reviewed FHA policies, contracts, and reports, and interviewed FHA officials, selected servicers and purchasers based on sales participation, and other stakeholders. GAO also conducted a statistical analysis comparing outcome data for sold loans and similar loans that remained FHA-insured and analyzed the effect of loan pool characteristics on bidder participation."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making nine recommendations to FHA, including establishing specific time frames to check loan eligibility, evaluating loan outcome data, and changing auction processes to help protect the MMI Fund. FHA generally agreed with seven recommendations, and neither agreed nor disagreed with two. GAO maintains that all the recommendations are valid."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-228?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Intelligence Community

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Defense Intelligence Agency has planned and overseen the Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence program since 2011. The report (GAO-19-529) is titled "Intelligence Community: Actions Needed to Improve Planning and Oversight of the Centers for Academic Excellence Program".

The report was sent to Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-California, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, and Rep. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Defense Intelligence Agency has planned and overseen the Intelligence Community Centers for Academic Excellence program since 2011. The report (GAO-19-529) is titled "Intelligence Community: Actions Needed to Improve Planning and Oversight of the Centers for Academic Excellence Program". The report was sent to Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-California, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, and Rep.Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, on Aug. 1. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has not sufficiently planned and overseen the Intelligence Community (IC) Centers for Academic Excellence (CAE) program--intended to create an increased pool of culturally and ethnically diverse job applicants for the IC--after the program transitioned from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to DIA in 2011. Specifically, DIA has not applied most of GAO's key practices of sound planning in overseeing the program (see table), thus challenging decision makers' ability to determine the program's return on investment.

View table at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-529?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Specifically, while DIA has developed some short-term goals and plans for the program, DIA has not established results-oriented program goals or an overall strategy that details the agency resources and processes required to achieve the program's mission. Similarly, DIA collected some data for the program and required colleges to provide reports on significant program accomplishments, but these data are not complete or reliable and have not been used to comprehensively evaluate the program's success. As oversight responsibility for the IC CAE program transitions back to ODNI in fiscal year 2020, ODNI will not be able to determine the extent to which the program has been successful in achieving its mission without establishing and documenting goals with targets and milestones; developing strategies to achieve those goals; and defining, collecting, and reporting comprehensive performance measures.

Selected IC elements are participating in the IC CAE program to varying degrees, but DIA has not established a process for monitoring and assessing IC elements' participation or clearly defining IC elements' role in the program. The IC CAE program is a collaborative effort that allows IC elements to participate in college events, such as IC CAE recruitment events. However, not all IC elements participate in the program. As IC CAE program manager, DIA has engaged with IC elements in a variety of ways, but this engagement has not resulted in consistent participation among the IC elements. Moreover, program documentation has not clearly defined IC elements' roles and responsibilities for participation. Without a process for monitoring and assessing IC elements' participation and clearly defining roles and responsibilities, ODNI will neither be able to identify reasons for the lack of IC element engagement nor ensure that IC elements are taking advantage of the IC CAE program and its goal of creating a diverse pool of applicants for the IC."

Why GAO Did This Study: "A trusted, diverse workforce with the right expertise is critical to ensuring the IC achieves its mission of delivering distinctive, timely insights with clarity, objectivity, and independence. ODNI established the IC CAE program in 2005 to educate highly qualified students of diverse backgrounds and encourage them to pursue careers in the IC. ODNI and DIA have provided 29 colleges a total of 46 IC CAE grants through fiscal year 2018, totaling approximately $69 million through fiscal year 2021.

This report evaluates the extent to which (1) DIA has planned and overseen the IC CAE program since 2011 and (2) selected IC elements are participating in the IC CAE program and have clearly defined roles.

GAO reviewed IC CAE documentation related to DIA program planning and oversight from 2011 through 2019 and applied key practices of sound planning to evaluate DIA's management of the program. GAO interviewed selected IC elements and IC CAE college officials and reviewed related documentation to assess program planning and implementation."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations to the Director of National Intelligence, including that ODNI establish and document results-oriented goals and strategies for the IC CAE program; define, collect, and report comprehensive performance measures; and clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the IC elements for participation in the program. ODNI concurred with the recommendations but did not identify steps it plans to take to implement them."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-529?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on State Department Reform Efforts

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of State addressed key practices critical to the successful implementation of agency reform efforts. The report (GAO-19-450) is titled "State Department: Leadership Focus Needed to Guide Agency Reform Efforts".

The report was sent to Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of State addressed key practices critical to the successful implementation of agency reform efforts. The report (GAO-19-450) is titled "State Department: Leadership Focus Needed to Guide Agency Reform Efforts". The report was sent to Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina,chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, and Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, on Aug. 1. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of State (State) is implementing most of the 17 reform projects it reported to Congress in February 2018, but a few are stalled or discontinued. State completed one project streamlining policy formulation, and continues working to implement 13 projects on topics including human resources, information technology, and data analytics. Progress on two projects related to overseas presence has stalled, and State has discontinued a project to consolidate real property management.

State has not addressed certain key practices related to leadership focus and attention in implementing its reform efforts. Multiple transitions in State's leadership and changing priorities contributed to uncertainty about leadership support for reform projects.Top leadership is expected to drive any needed transformation by clarifying priorities and communicating direction to employees and stakeholders.

* In March 2018, the President replaced the Secretary of State, a transition that created uncertainty within the agency regarding the future of ongoing reform projects. While some officials stated that the new Secretary had expressed support for data analytics and cyber security reform efforts, other officials said they were unclear as to whether their projects remained a priority. According to senior officials, the current Secretary has focused on critical needs, such as ending the hiring freeze and increasing recruitment, and on launching new initiatives.

* In April 2018, State disbanded the dedicated teams overseeing its reform efforts and shifted responsibility to bureaus and offices. In some cases, officials assigned to lead reform projects reported receiving little or no direction from department leadership. GAO's prior work has highlighted the benefits of having a dedicated team to manage agency transformations.

* In addition, State officials indicated that the challenges posed by these transitions were compounded by a lack of Senate-confirmed leadership in key positions. Specifically, during the first 2 years of State's reform efforts, bureaus and offices responsible for implementing 12 of State's 13 continuing reform projects reported directly to one or more officials serving in an acting capacity. For example, State did not have a Senate-confirmed Under Secretary for Management from January 2017 to May 2019, which, according to senior officials, hindered State's reform efforts.

According to State officials, taken together these leadership transitions led to several projects being scaled back, slowed down, or both.

Although uncertainties exist about leadership priorities regarding the reform efforts, the bureaus and offices responsible for implementing reform projects have taken steps to manage and monitor them, consistent with key practices. Each of the continuing projects has implementation plans that include milestones and deliverables, and some report their progress publicly. For example, State reports on the progress of some projects in its annual performance plans and reports. The lack of a dedicated team to manage the reform process, however, could slow State's overall efforts."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2017, State initiated a series of reform efforts in response to an executive order by the President and guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget aimed at reorganizing and streamlining the government. GAO's prior work has shown that successful agency reform efforts follow key implementation practices, such as establishing a dedicated team to manage the implementation of reforms, and ensuring transparency by setting public goals and milestones to monitor progress.

This report examines (1) the status of the reform efforts that State reported to Congress in February 2018 and (2) the extent to which State addressed key practices critical to the successful implementation of agency reform efforts. GAO reviewed State's reform plans, proposals, and related documents; met with officials involved in State's reform efforts; and assessed implementation of the reform efforts against relevant key practices identified in GAO's prior work."

What GAO Recommends: "The Secretary of State should (1) determine which unimplemented reform projects, if any, should be implemented and communicate this determination to Congress and appropriate State personnel, and (2) establish a single dedicated team to manage the implementation of all reform efforts that the Secretary decides to pursue. State generally concurred with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-450?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on VA Nursing Home Care

WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Veterans Affairs nursing home care. The report (GAO-19-428) is titled "VA Nursing Home Care: VA Has Opportunities to Enhance Its Oversight and Provide More Comprehensive Information on Its Website".

The report was sent to Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, on July 3. Here are excerpts of summaries ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Veterans Affairs nursing home care. The report (GAO-19-428) is titled "VA Nursing Home Care: VA Has Opportunities to Enhance Its Oversight and Provide More Comprehensive Information on Its Website". The report was sent to Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, on July 3. Here are excerpts of summariesassociated with the report.

What GAO Found: "According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), veterans' use of nursing home care increased 3 percent, from an average daily census of 37,687 to 38,880 veterans, from fiscal years 2012 to 2017. VA projects that use will increase 16 percent from fiscal years 2017 to 2022 with the aging of Vietnam War veterans. VA's nursing home expenditures increased 17 percent (8 percent adjusted for inflation), from $4.9 billion to $5.7 billion, from fiscal years 2012 to 2017.

During the contract year completed in 2018, VA contractors conducted required inspections of community living centers (CLC) (VA-owned and -operated) and state veterans homes (SVH) (state-owned and -operated) to ensure they complied with quality standards. Selected VA medical centers also completed required annual reviews of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data and conducted optional onsite reviews for community nursing homes (CNH), with which VA contracts. However, VA has opportunities to enhance its oversight. For example, VA did not conduct the quarterly monitoring of contractor performance as stipulated in its contract for CLC inspections from April 2017 to April 2018. VA officials also said they intended to regularly observe contractors conducting inspections to ensure they effectively determine compliance with standards, but have not done so due to competing demands. Officials also said they had performed these observational assessments in the past but were unable to provide documentation of them occurring. Conducting and documenting the quarterly observational assessments would allow VA to identify areas for improvements and to take any needed corrective actions.

VA's Access to Care website provides publicly available information about the quality of CLCs and CNHs based on inspections. Veterans and their families can use the website to help inform their decisions on nursing home placement. However, the website does not include any SVH information. Although VA has access to SVH quality information, according to VA officials, they are not required to publicly report it. For some SVHs, VA is the only source for quality care information. Some of the quality information is available locally, but the VA website is an important tool for veterans and their families. Providing SVH information on its website could enhance veterans and their families' ability to evaluate all nursing home options."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VA provides nursing home care for veterans whose health needs are extensive enough to require skilled nursing and personal care in an institutional setting. VA provides or pays for the cost of nursing home care for eligible veterans.

GAO was asked to examine VA nursing home care. In this report, GAO 1) describes utilization of and expenditures for VA-funded nursing home care, 2) examines VA's use of inspections to assess the quality of nursing home care and its oversight of the process, and 3) examines the information VA publicly provides through its website on the quality of nursing home care.

To perform this work, GAO reviewed VA policies and information on inspections and interviewed VA officials. GAO also selected six VA medical centers based on factors such as their participation with CLCs, SVHs, and CNHs and location. For each, GAO interviewed medical center officials and officials from corresponding VA regional offices, CLCs, SVHs, and CNHs."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making four recommendations, including recommendations for VA to enhance its oversight of the quality of care provided to veterans in CLCs, SVHs, and CNHs and include on its website information on the quality of care for SVHs that is comparable to what it provides on CLCs and CNHs. VA concurred with two recommendations and concurred in principle with two recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-428?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Logistics Agency

WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Defense Logistics Agency's reverse engineering efforts including the protection of small businesses' intellectual property. The report (GAO-19-586) is titled "Defense Logistics Agency: Small Businesses Participate in Reverse Engineering of Spare Parts".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, and Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on July 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Defense Logistics ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Defense Logistics Agency's reverse engineering efforts including the protection of small businesses' intellectual property. The report (GAO-19-586) is titled "Defense Logistics Agency: Small Businesses Participate in Reverse Engineering of Spare Parts". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, and Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on July 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Defense LogisticsAgency (DLA) is responsible for providing logistics support to the warfighter, including spare parts for military assets. From fiscal years 2015 through 2018, DLA initiated over 1,600 reverse engineering projects for spare parts at three of its commands--Aviation, Land and Maritime, and Troop Support. DLA uses reverse engineering to identify potential new sources for spare parts that are available from only one source and to achieve savings. DLA funded about 1,000 of the reverse engineering projects, while contractors funded the remaining 600 projects. Nearly two-thirds of all reverse engineering projects involved parts in five categories, with examples of the three largest categories illustrated in the figure.

View figure athttps://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-586?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO found that the majority of contractors conducting reverse engineering for DLA were small businesses. Specifically, DLA identified 124 contractors that conducted reverse engineering projects from fiscal year 2015 through 2018, 103 of which GAO determined were small businesses. According to small business representatives and DLA officials, reverse engineering is beneficial for small businesses and can help provide opportunities for additional business with DLA.

GAO found that the three DLA commands had processes to safeguard certain intellectual property in their reverse engineering efforts. Specifically:

* Officials from all three commands stated they do not release drawings with limited data rights to contractors interested in reverse engineering parts.

* Aviation and Land and Maritime officials stated that they check for patent markings on parts to ensure patented parts are not reverse engineered. Troop Support officials stated they do not check for patent marks because the parts they supply are often too old to have valid patents.

The small businesses GAO met with did not identify concerns with how DLA handles intellectual property. Further, DLA officials stated that they had not received any complaints from small businesses about their intellectual property being used inappropriately."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Department of Defense spends tens of billions of dollars annually to sustain military assets including aircraft, ships, and missiles. In support of this effort, DLA strives to maintain a competitive supplier base through reverse engineering--the process of examining an item, such as a spare part, with the intent of replicating its design. Contractors consider intellectual property, such as their technical data and patented material, essential to their success. DLA also takes steps to safeguard contractors' intellectual property during reverse engineering.

The Senate Armed Services Committee report accompanying a bill for the fiscal year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act included a provision for GAO to review DLA's reverse engineering efforts, including the protection of small businesses' intellectual property. This report describes (1) DLA's reverse engineering programs and the extent to which small businesses participated in these programs from fiscal years 2015 through 2018; and (2) how DLA safeguards certain intellectual property within its reverse engineering efforts.

GAO analyzed data from three DLA commands--Aviation, Land and Maritime, and Troop Support, those that conduct reverse engineering--from fiscal years 2015 through 2018. GAO reviewed a nongeneralizable sample of 19 reverse engineering projects involving 13 parts, selected to include a variety of characteristics, such as the size of the contractors involved. GAO reviewed DLA's guidance and interviewed DLA officials and representatives from small businesses about safeguarding intellectual property as part of reverse engineering."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-586?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Foreign Assistance

WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on guidelines for monitoring and evaluation of U.S. foreign assistance. The report (GAO-19-466) is titled "Foreign Assistance: Federal Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines Incorporate Most but Not All Leading Practices".

The report was sent to Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on guidelines for monitoring and evaluation of U.S. foreign assistance. The report (GAO-19-466) is titled "Foreign Assistance: Federal Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines Incorporate Most but Not All Leading Practices". The report was sent to Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee onState, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, D-New York, chairwoman, and Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, on July 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) foreign assistance Guidelines incorporate most of GAO's leading practices for monitoring and evaluation (M&E), but gaps exist (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-466?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

* Monitoring: The Guidelines define monitoring as the continuous tracking of program or project data to determine whether desired results are as expected during implementation. The Guidelines do not require GAO's leading practices on risk assessments, staff qualifications, and program close-out procedures.

* Evaluation: The Guidelines define evaluation as the systematic collection and analysis of program or project outcomes for making judgments and informing decisions. They do not require GAO's leading practices on developing staff skills and following up on recommendations.

OMB officials indicated the Guidelines are focused on elements required in the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act of 2016 (FATAA), but noted that agencies can add additional requirements to their own M&E policies. FATAA requires the President to set forth guidelines "according to best practices of monitoring and evaluation." OMB staff acknowledged that GAO's leading practices are important, but stated that there is no singular established standard for best monitoring practices. Nevertheless, all of GAO's leading practices can help agencies address impediments, effectively manage foreign assistance, and meet their goals.

When assessing agencies' M&E policies against OMB Guidelines, GAO found that agencies incorporated most of the requirements. However, for monitoring, one of the six agencies GAO reviewed--DOD--did not include the requirements to establish agencies' roles and responsibilities and ensure verifiable data for monitoring activities. For evaluation, agencies required most Guideline requirements, but not all. For example, DOD, HHS, and USDA did not require conducting impact evaluations for pilot programs or projects. Without a clear requirement to do such evaluations, agencies risk duplicating or scaling up programs without fully understanding the factors that could lead to their success or failure. Agencies GAO reviewed have plans or mechanisms in place to oversee the implementation of their M&E policies. For example, State developed a guidance document to operationalize and oversee its M&E policy to ensure the implementation of the Guidelines."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Trump Administration requested $28.5 billion in foreign assistance in fiscal year 2019, to be administered by at least 22 federal agencies. Almost 95 percent of this assistance is administered by six agencies--the Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Defense (DOD), State (State), Health and Human Services (HHS), the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). FATAA required the President to set forth guidelines for M&E of U.S. foreign assistance. In January 2018, OMB issued the required guidelines for federal agencies. FATAA also contained a provision for GAO to analyze the guidelines established by OMB; and assess the implementation of the guidelines by the agencies.

In this report, GAO examined the extent to which (1) OMB's M&E Guidelines incorporate GAO leading practices, and (2) agencies incorporate the OMB Guidelines in their M&E policies and plans. GAO assessed the OMB Guidelines against GAO's 28 leading practices identified in GAO-16-861R . GAO also assessed the six agencies' foreign assistance M&E policies against the Guidelines and interviewed OMB and relevant agency officials in Washington, DC."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making recommendations to OMB, DOD, State, and USDA. OMB did not agree with the recommendation to update the Guidelines, but GAO maintains that doing so can help to emphasize the importance of the M&E practices we identified. DOD, State, and USDA agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-466?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicare Physician Services

WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on billing codes that may be used for longitudinal comprehensive care planning-type services for beneficiaries with a serious or life-threatening illness. The report (GAO-19-557) is titled "Medicare Physician Services: Spending On and Use of Billing Codes for Comprehensive Care Planning Services".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on billing codes that may be used for longitudinal comprehensive care planning-type services for beneficiaries with a serious or life-threatening illness. The report (GAO-19-557) is titled "Medicare Physician Services: Spending On and Use of Billing Codes for Comprehensive Care Planning Services". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, rankingmember of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act (BBA) defined longitudinal comprehensive care planning (LCCP) as services involving an interdisciplinary team of providers who develop and communicate a care plan to Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with a serious or life-threatening illness. GAO identified at least 58 billing codes in Medicare's physician fee schedule that could be used by providers to bill for services that cover some or all of the LCCP service components as defined in the 2018 BBA --referred to by GAO as LCCP-type services. The 58 billing codes may be used individually or in combination, depending on a beneficiary's medical needs. Stakeholders representing providers told GAO their members generally use one or a combination of these codes to bill for LCCP-type services.

* Forty-five of the 58 codes are broadly-defined longstanding codes that can be used for LCCP-type services as well as other services such as the treatment of a specific medical complaint.

* The remaining 13 codes are more recent narrowly-defined codes introduced starting in 2013 that only cover LCCP-type services. They include transitional care management services introduced in 2013, chronic care management starting in 2015, advance care planning in 2016, and behavioral health integration in 2017.

GAO found that overall Medicare spending on LCCP-type services that were billed to the 58 codes increased from $26 billion in 2013 to almost $29 billion in 2017. While narrowly-defined services accounted for a small share of this total spending ($467 million in 2017), spending on these narrowly-defined services such as chronic care management increased rapidly. Moreover, spending growth on narrowly-defined services was driven by increased use of these services rather than increases in reimbursement rates. From 2013 through 2017, more beneficiaries received and more providers billed for narrowly-defined services. The number of Medicare beneficiaries receiving these services grew from about 267,000 to about 2.5 million. The number of providers billing these services grew from about 31,000 to about 100,000."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Medicare's physician fee schedule contains over 8,000 billing codes for office visits, surgical procedures, or other services provided to beneficiaries. Some provider groups have concerns that these codes do not sufficiently account for the LCCP-type services they provide to Medicare beneficiaries with complex medical needs.

The BBA included a provision that GAO examine billing codes that may be used for LCCP-type services for beneficiaries with a serious or life-threatening illness.

GAO identified, among other things, (1) existing Medicare physician fee schedule billing codes that can be used to bill LCCP-type services; and (2) trends in Medicare spending on these services from 2013 through 2017.

GAO reviewed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) billing code manuals and American Medical Association (AMA) code descriptors to identify existing codes containing key components of LCCP-type services; analyzed Medicare Part B claims data from 2013 to 2017 (the most recent available at the time of GAO's review); and interviewed officials from CMS and 19 stakeholders, including the AMA, national physician groups, and other provider groups that had previously given input on the topic to Congress.

GAO provided a draft of this report to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In response, HHS provided technical comments, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-557?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicare Plan Finder

WASHINGTON, July 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the usability of the Medicare Plan Finder and the completeness of its information. The report (GAO-19-627) is titled "Medicare Plan Finder: Usability Problems and Incomplete Information Create Challenges for Beneficiaries Comparing Coverage Options".

The report was sent to Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Medicare Plan Finder (MPF) website--a primary resource for comparing ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the usability of the Medicare Plan Finder and the completeness of its information. The report (GAO-19-627) is titled "Medicare Plan Finder: Usability Problems and Incomplete Information Create Challenges for Beneficiaries Comparing Coverage Options". The report was sent to Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Medicare Plan Finder (MPF) website--a primary resource for comparingMedicare coverage options--is difficult for beneficiaries to use and provides incomplete information, according to stakeholders and research studies. These sources and directors of State Health Insurance Assistance Programs (SHIP) GAO surveyed--who assist beneficiaries with their Medicare coverage choices--reported that beneficiaries struggle with using MPF because it can be difficult to find information on the website and the information can be hard to understand. For example, MPF:

- requires navigation through multiple pages before displaying plan details,

- lacks prominent instructions to help beneficiaries find information, and

- contains complex terms that make it difficult for beneficiaries to understand information.

In response to GAO's survey, 73 percent of SHIP directors reported that beneficiaries experience difficulty finding information in MPF, while 18 percent reported that SHIP counselors experience difficulty.

Stakeholders and SHIP directors reported that MPF provides incomplete estimates of costs under original Medicare, making it difficult to compare original Medicare and Medicare Advantage (MA), the program's private heath plan alternative. Specifically, MPF's plan results pages do not integrate information on Medigap plans. (These plans help cover some of beneficiaries' out-of-pocket costs.) Seventy-five percent of the SHIP directors surveyed reported that the lack of Medigap information in MPF limits the ability of beneficiaries to compare original Medicare to MA.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)--the agency that administers MPF--is aware of the difficulities beneficiaries face using MPF and is planning to launch a redesigned website in August 2019. According to CMS, redesigning MPF involves multiple iterations of changes and ongoing user testing, and CMS will know more about how well the redesigned MPF addresses user needs after it is used by beneficiaries."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Medicare beneficiaries--more than 60 million as of 2019--have a series of decisions to make when selecting their Medicare health and prescription drug coverage. Beneficiaries must first choose between two main options for their Medicare coverage: either original fee-for-service Medicare or MA. Within these two options, beneficiaries have many additional choices, and they are permitted to change their coverage at least annually. These selections can be difficult due to the Medicare program's complexity and can have important implications for beneficiaries' out-of-pocket costs and access to providers.

According to CMS, the MPF website is intended to help beneficiaries make informed decisions regarding their health care and prescription drug coverage. However, some stakeholders have raised concerns that beneficiaries experience challenges using MPF to compare their Medicare coverage options.

GAO was asked to review MPF. This report examines what is known about the usability of MPF and the completeness of its information. GAO reviewed research and CMS documentation on MPF, and surveyed 51 directors of SHIP offices that have counselors who assist beneficiaries with Medicare decisions. Forty SHIP directors completed the survey, resulting in a 78 percent response rate. GAO also interviewed CMS officials and officials with 13 stakeholder groups, including seven beneficiary advocacy groups.

GAO provided a draft of this report to the Department of Health and Human Services. The department provided technical comments, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-627?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicaid

WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Medicaid disproportionate share hospital payments to hospitals. The report (GAO-19-603) is titled "Medicaid: States' Use and Distribution of Supplemental Payments to Hospitals".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on July 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments are one ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Medicaid disproportionate share hospital payments to hospitals. The report (GAO-19-603) is titled "Medicaid: States' Use and Distribution of Supplemental Payments to Hospitals". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on July 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments are onetype of supplemental payment and are designed to help offset hospitals' uncompensated care costs for serving Medicaid beneficiaries and uninsured patients. Under the Medicaid DSH program, uncompensated care costs include two components: (1) costs related to care for the uninsured; and (2) the Medicaid shortfall--the gap between a state's Medicaid payment rates and hospitals' costs for serving Medicaid beneficiaries. GAO's analysis of hospitals receiving DSH payments showed that in 2014, costs related to care for the uninsured comprised 68 percent of total uncompensated care costs, and the remaining 32 percent was the Medicaid shortfall.

Across states, GAO found that total DSH payments varied significantly in 2014. DSH payment levels are generally tied to state DSH spending in 1992 and since 1993 states have been subject to a limit on the amount of federal funding that may be used for DSH payments.

The amount of DSH payments made to hospitals varied significantly by state. Among hospitals receiving DSH payments, nationally:

* Medicaid DSH payments covered 51 percent of the uncompensated care costs. In 19 states, DSH payments covered at least 50 percent of uncompensated care costs.

* DSH payments comprised about 14 percent of total Medicaid payments, yet wide variation existed. For example, DSH payments comprised about 97 percent of Medicaid payments to DSH hospitals in Maine and 0.7 percent of Medicaid payments to DSH hospitals in Tennessee.

Some types of hospitals received a greater proportion of DSH payments relative to their share of total uncompensated care costs. For example, states generally provided more DSH payments to public hospitals (in comparison to private and non-profit hospitals) and teaching hospitals (as compared to non-teaching hospitals) relative to their share of total uncompensated care costs."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Medicaid, the joint federal-state program that finances health care coverage for low-income and medically needy individuals, spent an estimated $177.5 billion on hospital care in fiscal year 2017. About a quarter ($46.3 billion) of those hospital payments were supplemental payments--typically lump sum payments made to providers that are not tied to a specific individual's care. States determine hospital payment amounts within federal limits. In fiscal year 2017, DSH payments totaled about $18.1 billion. Beginning in fiscal year 2020, the amount of DSH payments each state can make is scheduled to be reduced.

GAO was asked to study Medicaid DSH payments to hospitals. Among other things, GAO examined hospital uncompensated care costs and DSH payments by state Medicaid program and hospital characteristics.

GAO analyzed data from the 2014 DSH audits--states' independently audited and certified reports of hospital-level uncompensated care costs and DSH payments--from 47 states and the District of Columbia (48 states). Three states were excluded from the analysis because they either did not make DSH payments or the submitted data were unreliable. The 2014 data were the most recently available audited, hospital-specific, data at the time of GAO's analysis. We provided a draft of this report to HHS for review. HHS provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-603?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nuclear Security

WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the International Atomic Energy Agency's nuclear security program. The report (GAO-19-429) is titled "Nuclear Security: The International Atomic Energy Agency Could Improve Priority Setting, Performance Measures, and Funding Stabilization".

The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Maryland, on July 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the International Atomic Energy Agency's nuclear security program. The report (GAO-19-429) is titled "Nuclear Security: The International Atomic Energy Agency Could Improve Priority Setting, Performance Measures, and Funding Stabilization". The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Maryland, on July 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAOFound: "The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) carries out its nuclear security program under its Division of Nuclear Security through four subprograms. IAEA activities under these subprograms include developing guidance, providing training, and assisting countries in enhancing nuclear and radiological material security.

IAEA plans its nuclear security work through several key documents, including a Nuclear Security Plan, which calls for activities to be prioritized. However, IAEA's planning documents do not include guidelines for prioritization. Instead, IAEA officials said they respond to member states' requests as they arrive and to the extent resources are available. By developing guidelines for prioritizing its nuclear security activities, IAEA could help ensure that it is allocating its resources to the areas of greatest need. IAEA has developed performance measures for its nuclear security program, but these measures do not have baselines or targets. This limits IAEA's ability to demonstrate the results of its nuclear security program.

IAEA member states disagree over the agency's role in nuclear security, and according to U.S. and other member-state officials and experts GAO interviewed, these disagreements create challenges for the agency, such as funding its nuclear security efforts. Officials added that states that do not support the agency's nuclear security role resist efforts to substantially raise the agency's regular budget for nuclear security, contributing to the program's heavy reliance on voluntary, or extra-budgetary, contributions from member states.

GAO previously reported that extra-budgetary funding is unreliable. Reliance on such funding affects nuclear security program planning, human resources, and sustainability. Experts and U.S. agency officials have suggested options to stabilize nuclear security program funding, but IAEA has not analyzed such options. By working with the United States and other member states to analyze options to stabilize nuclear security program funding, IAEA could ensure that it has sufficient, reliable resources to implement the Nuclear Security Plan."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Nuclear terrorism remains a significant threat to the security of the United States and its allies and partners. U.S. efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism include working with IAEA, an autonomous international agency affiliated with the United Nations. The Department of State coordinates the United States' policy with and financial contributions to IAEA. IAEA's nuclear security program aims to assist countries in enhancing the physical protection, control, and accounting of their nuclear and radiological material and nuclear facilities.

GAO was asked to review IAEA's nuclear security program. This report examines (1) the structure and range of nuclear security work that IAEA conducts, (2) how IAEA plans and prioritizes its nuclear security work and measures performance, and (3) the challenges that IAEA's nuclear security program faces. GAO analyzed key IAEA documents and interviewed IAEA officials, U.S. and foreign government officials, and nuclear security experts."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making five recommendations to the Department of State, including that it work with IAEA to develop guidelines for prioritizing IAEA's nuclear security activities, develop program baselines and targets, and work with the United States and other member states to analyze options to stabilize nuclear security funding. State concurred with all five recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-429?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Water Resources Projects

WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has addressed the Water Resources Reform and Development Act feasibility study acceleration provisions. The report (GAO-19-561) is titled "Water Resources Projects: Army Corps of Engineers Can Further Enhance Acceleration of Feasibility Studies".

The report was sent to Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has addressed the Water Resources Reform and Development Act feasibility study acceleration provisions. The report (GAO-19-561) is titled "Water Resources Projects: Army Corps of Engineers Can Further Enhance Acceleration of Feasibility Studies". The report was sent to Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. SamGraves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on July 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has taken steps to address some feasibility study acceleration provisions under the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA 2014) but not others. For example, to implement a provision related to coordination, the Corps in September 2015 issued guidance emphasizing the importance of early coordination with other federal agencies to avoid delays later in the process. However, the Corps has not taken steps to address other provisions, such as one that calls for the Corps to establish a database to make publicly available information on the status of feasibility studies, citing resource constraints. The Corps does not have a plan to address these other provisions. A plan that includes resource estimates would better position the Corps to address the remaining acceleration provisions.

The Corps regularly monitors feasibility studies and has conducted some reviews of its acceleration reforms, such as an analysis that found that some studies were too complex to complete within the agency's timing and cost requirements--i.e., within 3 years and for less than $3 million. However, the Corps has not comprehensively evaluated the reforms' impacts. Corps officials and stakeholders expressed differing views on the reforms' impacts on the costs, time frames, and quality of feasibility studies. For example, many Corps officials GAO interviewed said the reforms' overall goals to reduce studies' cost and time frames were positive, but others raised concerns, such as that the $3 million cost limitation may not be realistic for different geographic areas. Corps officials said they have not conducted a comprehensive impact review in part because they are focused on monitoring ongoing studies. These officials said they see the value in conducting such a review as they complete more studies, but they have not developed a plan to do so. Developing an evaluation plan would help the Corps conduct a timely and effective review.

The Corps has not maintained complete milestone data in its central data system for the 19 feasibility studies GAO reviewed (see figure). For example, 12 studies did not include data for one or more milestones. Corps officials said agency policy requires the entry of information on 10 key milestones in the agency's central data system. However, GAO found that the policy only explicitly requires that two of the key 10 milestones be entered into the agency's central data system. Without clarifying its policy to help ensure officials enter data on all milestones in the central data system, the Corps will not have complete data to efficiently monitor the progress of feasibility studies."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-561?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "Water resources development projects undertaken by the Corps--such as those to reduce the risks from coastal storms--historically have taken years or even decades to complete. To implement these projects, the Corps first conducts a feasibility study, which includes an analysis of the federal interest and the costs, benefits, and environmental impacts of a project; such studies can take several years to complete.

WRRDA 2014 requires the Corps to, among other things, conduct activities to accelerate the completion of feasibility studies. The act also includes a provision for GAO to assess acceleration reforms. This report examines the extent to which the Corps has (1) addressed the WRRDA 2014 feasibility study acceleration provisions, (2) reviewed the impact of its feasibility study acceleration reforms, and (3) maintained complete milestone data for its studies. GAO reviewed WRRDA 2014 and Corps documents; reviewed 19 feasibility studies subject to the act's acceleration provisions; analyzed data on key milestones; and interviewed Corps officials and stakeholders."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations to the Department of Defense to direct the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to (1) develop a plan with resource estimates to address the remaining WRRDA 2014 provisions, (2) develop a plan to comprehensively evaluate the impacts of the agency's acceleration reforms, and (3) clarify its policy to help ensure district officials enter data on required milestones for feasibility studies in its central data system. The agency concurred with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-561?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Wireless Internet

WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on wireless internet access for school-age children in lower-income households. The report (GAO-19-564) is titled "Wireless Internet: FCC Should Assess Making Off-School-Premises Access Eligible for Additional Federal Support".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energy ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on wireless internet access for school-age children in lower-income households. The report (GAO-19-564) is titled "Wireless Internet: FCC Should Assess Making Off-School-Premises Access Eligible for Additional Federal Support". The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energyand Commerce Committee, on July 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "According to GAO's analysis of 2017 Census Bureau Current Population Survey (CPS) data, children ages 6 to 17 in lower-income households are more likely than peers in higher-income households to lack high-speed in-home internet and rely on mobile wireless service. GAO found that students who use mobile wireless for homework may face challenges, including slower speeds and limitations smartphones present in completing tasks like typing papers. These "underconnected" students may seek out ways to access wireless internet outside of the home to do homework; however, these methods also pose challenges (see figure). The inequity in internet access--and therefore in the ease of doing homework involving access--between students of varying income levels is known as the "homework gap."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-564?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Efforts by six selected projects involving seven school districts expanding wireless access for students who may lack it at home varied. According to officials with most school district projects GAO reviewed, rules for the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) E-rate program, which allows schools to purchase discounted internet equipment, may limit schools' ability to provide wireless access off-premises. Specifically, off-premises access is not eligible for E-rate support, and schools that provide such access using existing services supported by E-rate must reduce their E-rate discounts. FCC conducted a pilot project in 2011 and 2012 to help decide whether to make wireless off-premises access eligible for E-rate support, but FCC did not determine and execute a methodology to assess the potential costs, benefits, and challenges of doing so. In 2016, FCC received two requests from school districts seeking waivers of rules to allow them to use E-rate program support to provide off-premises access, but FCC has not made a decision on the waivers. Determining and executing a methodology to analyze data about the potential benefits, costs, and challenges of easing E-rate rules on off-premises use and publishing the results could provide transparency to stakeholders such as school districts. This step could also help FCC act on pending and future waiver-of-rule requests and broader changes to rules that may help schools address the homework gap."

Why GAO Did This Study: "School-age children without internet access may have difficulty in completing homework. Those without in-home fixed access may go online wirelessly outside the home to do homework. A provision was included in statute for GAO to review wireless internet access for school-age children in lower-income households.

This report examines (1) challenges lower-income school-age children who lack in-home fixed internet face in doing homework involving internet access, and (2) selected school district efforts to expand wireless access for students and the federal role in those efforts. GAO analyzed 2017 CPS data; reviewed six local projects that were selected based in part on education industry stakeholders' recommendations, that included a range of geographic locations, and that took steps to address the homework gap; compared FCC efforts to federal standards for internal controls and pilot-program design best practices; reviewed FCC and Department of Education documents; and interviewed 17 stakeholders, including school districts."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that FCC take steps to assess and publish the potential benefits, costs, and challenges of making off-premises wireless access eligible for E-rate support.

FCC agreed with GAO's recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-564?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Wireless Internet

GAO Issues Report on Cybersecurity

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal agencies' cybersecurity risk management programs. The report (GAO-19-384) is titled "Cybersecurity: Agencies Need to Fully Establish Risk Management Programs and Address Challenges".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, on ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on DOD Depot Maintenance

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense depot maintenance. The report (GAO-19-452) is titled "Depot Maintenance: DOD Should Adopt a Metric That Provides Quality Information on Funded Unfinished Work".

The report was sent to Rep. John Garamendi, D-California, chairman, Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado, ranking member of the House Armed Services subcommittee on Readiness, and Rep. Joe Wilson, R-South Carolina, on July 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Each year, billions of dollars of ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense depot maintenance. The report (GAO-19-452) is titled "Depot Maintenance: DOD Should Adopt a Metric That Provides Quality Information on Funded Unfinished Work". The report was sent to Rep. John Garamendi, D-California, chairman, Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado, ranking member of the House Armed Services subcommittee on Readiness, and Rep. Joe Wilson, R-South Carolina, on July 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Each year, billions of dollars ofwork is ordered from maintenance depots that cannot be completed by the end of the fiscal year. The Department of Defense (DOD) refers to this funded but unfinished work as carryover. For fiscal years 2007 through 2018, the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force depots averaged less than 6 months of annual carryover worth $1.0 billion, $0.2 billion, and $1.9 billion, respectively. The Army depots averaged 10 months of annual carryover worth $4.3 billion. Reasons for unplanned carryover include issues with parts management, scope of work, and changing customer requirements.

DOD identified three metrics for calculating allowable carryover in its report to Congress. However, the three metrics identified do not fully meet all key attributes--reliability, completeness, consistency, and appropriateness--for providing quality information to decision makers, although the Office of the Secretary of Defense-proposed carryover metric meets the most attributes.

The three metrics are based on different calculations and would have different implications for depot maintenance management. Specifically,

* The current carryover metric allows for exemptions worth tens of millions of dollars that reduce incentives to improve the effectiveness of depot management.

* The Office of the Secretary of Defense-proposed metric could provide incentives to improve workload planning and the effectiveness of depot management, but uses a ratio instead of dollars to measure carryover.

* The Army-proposed carryover metric is based on labor used to complete depot work, does not include depot maintenance costs such as parts, and carryover amounts are unlikely to exceed the ceiling. This metric is not likely to provide an incentive to improve depot management.

Unless DOD develops and adopts a carryover metric for depots that meets the key attributes of quality information, decisionmakers may not be able to help ensure funds are directed to the highest priority and depots are managed as effectively as possible.

Officials of private industry companies and foreign militaries GAO met with stated they do not have a policy to limit carryover. According to private sector officials, there is no incentive to limit workload if customers' needs can be met within the terms of the contract and the work is likely to be profitable. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and seven foreign militaries GAO interviewed generally use contractors, not depots, to meet most of their depot maintenance requirements and they do not have a carryover policy similar to DOD's."

Why GAO Did This Study: "DOD allows carryover from one fiscal year to the next to ensure the smooth flow of maintenance work performed at depots. DOD has reported that approximately 6 months of carryover is optimal. Excess carryover (i.e., more unfinished work than allowed) may reflect an inefficient use of resources and tie up funds that could be used for other priorities. Congress directed DOD to report on its current DOD carryover metric and consider alternatives. DOD's report discussed three carryover metrics: the current DOD carryover metric, an Office of the Secretary of Defense-proposed carryover metric, and an Army-proposed carryover metric.

Congress asked GAO to review DOD's historical carryover and the metrics presented by DOD. This report, among other things, (1) describes the total carryover for fiscal years 2007 through 2018, and the reasons for it; (2) evaluates the carryover metrics DOD presented in its report to Congress and whether they would provide quality information; and (3) describes private industry and foreign military policies for determining allowable carryover, if any. GAO reviewed DOD budget submissions to identify depot carryover and prior GAO reports to identify reasons for carryover; evaluated carryover metrics against criteria for quality information; and discussed carryover with DOD, private industry, and foreign military officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that DOD develop and adopt a carryover metric for depot maintenance that provides reliable, complete, consistent, and appropriate information. DOD concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-452?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Electronic Health Records

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on key aspects of Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture and the Department of Veterans Affairs's plans for the new acquisition of the Cerner system. The report (GAO-19-125) is titled "Electronic Health Records: VA Needs to Identify and Report System Costs".

The report was sent to Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, and Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, on July 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on key aspects of Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture and the Department of Veterans Affairs's plans for the new acquisition of the Cerner system. The report (GAO-19-125) is titled "Electronic Health Records: VA Needs to Identify and Report System Costs". The report was sent to Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, and Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, on July 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found:"The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has various documents and a database that describe parts of the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA); however, the department does not have a comprehensive definition for the system. For example, VA has identified components that comprise VistA, identified interfaces related to the system, and collected system user guides and installation manuals. VA has also conducted analyses to better understand customization of VistA components at various medical facilities. Nevertheless, the existing information and analyses do not provide a thorough understanding of the local customizations reflected in about 130 versions of VistA that support health care delivery at more than 1,500 sites. Program officials stated that they have not been able to fully define VistA due to the decentralization of the development of the system for more than 30 years. Cerner's contract to provide a new electronic health record system to VA calls for the company to conduct comprehensive assessments to identify site-specific requirements where its system is planned to be deployed. Three site assessments have been completed and additional assessments are planned. If these assessments provide a thorough understanding of the 130 VistA versions, the department should be able to define VistA and be better positioned to transition to the new system.

VA identified costs for VistA and its related activities adding up to approximately $913.7 million, $664.3 million, and $711.1 million in fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017, respectively--for a total of about $2.3 billion over the 3 years. However, of the $2.3 billion, the department was only able to demonstrate that approximately $1 billion of these costs were sufficiently reliable. In addition, the department omitted VistA-related costs from the total. The lack of a sufficiently reliable and comprehensive total cost for VistA is due in part to not following a well-documented methodology that describes how the department determined the costs for the system. As a result of incomplete cost data and data that could not be determined to be sufficiently reliable, the department, legislators, and the public do not have a complete understanding of how much it has cost to develop and maintain VistA. Further, VA lacks the information needed to make decisions on sustaining the many versions of the system.

VA has initiated a number of actions to prepare for the transition from VistA to the Cerner system. These actions include taking steps to establish and begin to staff a program office, forming a governance structure, conducting assessments at the initial sites, preparing program plans to guide the initial system implementation, and setting a program baseline to help guide implementation at the initial sites. The department's actions in these important areas are ongoing. Additional actions are in progress to address GAO's September 2018 recommendation that VA clearly define the role and responsibilities of the joint Department of Defense (DOD) and VA Interagency Program Office in the department's governance plans for the new electronic health record system. VA intends to continue maturing and fully establishing a program management organization and a program governance structure to track program progress."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VA provides health care services to approximately 9 million veterans and their families and relies on its health information system--VistA--to do so. However, the system is more than 30 years old, is costly to maintain, and does not fully support exchanging health data with DOD and private health care providers. Over nearly 2 decades, VA has pursued multiple efforts to modernize the system. In June 2017, the department announced plans to acquire the same system--the Cerner system--that DOD is implementing. VA plans to continue using VistA during the decade-long transition to the Cerner system.

GAO was asked to review key aspects of VistA and VA's plans for the new acquisition of the Cerner system. The objectives of the review were to (1) determine the extent to which VA has defined VistA, (2) evaluate VA's annual costs to develop and sustain VistA, and (3) describe the actions VA has taken to transition from VistA to the Cerner system.

GAO analyzed documentation that defines aspects of VistA and identifies components to be replaced; evaluated the reliability of cost data, including obligations associated with the development and sustainment of VistA for fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017; and reviewed program documentation related to VA's program, governance, and plans to transition to Cerner."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that VA develop and implement a methodology for reliably identifying and reporting the total costs of VistA. VA agreed with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-125?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Information Security

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal agencies' information security policies and practices. The report (GAO-19-545) is titled "Federal Information Security: Agencies and OMB Need to Strengthen Policies and Practices".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, on July 26. Here ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal agencies' information security policies and practices. The report (GAO-19-545) is titled "Federal Information Security: Agencies and OMB Need to Strengthen Policies and Practices". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, on July 26. Hereare excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "During fiscal year 2018, many federal agencies were often not adequately or effectively implementing their information security policies and practices. For example, most of the 16 agencies GAO selected for review had deficiencies related to implementing the eight elements of an agency-wide information security program required by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) (see figure) . Further, inspectors general (IGs) reported that 18 of the 24 Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990 agencies did not have effective agency-wide information security programs. GAO and IGs have previously made numerous recommendations to agencies to address such deficiencies, but many of these recommendations remain unimplemented.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-545?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

With certain exceptions, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) were generally implementing their government-wide FISMA requirements, including issuing guidance and implementing programs that are intended to improve agencies' information security. However, OMB has not submitted its required FISMA report to Congress for fiscal year 2018 and has reduced the number of agencies at which it holds CyberStat meetings from 24 in fiscal year 2016 to three in fiscal year 2018--thereby restricting key activities for overseeing agencies' implementation of information security. Also, OMB, in collaboration with the Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), did not include a metric for system security plans, one of the required information security program elements, in its guidance on FISMA reporting. As a result, oversight of agencies' information security programs was diminished."

Why GAO Did This Study: "For 22 years, GAO has designated information security as a government-wide high-risk area. FISMA requires federal agencies to develop, document, and implement information security programs and have independent evaluations of those programs and practices. It also assigns government-wide responsibilities for information security to OMB, DHS, and NIST.

FISMA includes a provision for GAO to periodically report to Congress on agencies' implementation of the act. GAO's objectives in this report were to (1) describe the reported adequacy and effectiveness of selected federal agencies' information security policies and practices and (2) evaluate the extent to which OMB, DHS, and NIST have implemented their government-wide FISMA requirements. GAO categorized information security deficiencies as reported by 16 randomly selected agencies and their IGs according to the elements of an information security program; evaluated IG reports for 24 CFO Act agencies; examined OMB, DHS, and NIST documents; and interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations to OMB to (1) submit its FISMA report to Congress for fiscal year 2018, (2) expand its coordination of CyberStat meetings with agencies, and (3) collaborate with CIGIE to update the inspector general FISMA reporting metrics to include assessing system security plans. OMB generally agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-545?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Information Security

GAO Issues Report on Federal Rulemaking

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which selected agencies clearly communicate their practices associated with identity information. The report (GAO-19-483) is titled "Federal Rulemaking: Selected Agencies Should Clearly Communicate Practices Associated with Identity Information in the Public Comment Process".

The report was sent to Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommittee on Investigations, Sen. James Lankford, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which selected agencies clearly communicate their practices associated with identity information. The report (GAO-19-483) is titled "Federal Rulemaking: Selected Agencies Should Clearly Communicate Practices Associated with Identity Information in the Public Comment Process". The report was sent to Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommittee on Investigations, Sen. James Lankford,R-Oklahoma, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations, Rep. Yvette D. Clarke, D-New York, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, Rep. Gregory W. Meeks, D-New York, Rep. Paul Tonko, D-New York, and Rep. Nydia M. Velazquez, D-New York, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) governs the process by which many federal agencies develop and issue regulations, which includes the public comment process (see figure below).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-483?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Regulations.gov and agency-specific comment websites collect some identity information--such as name, email, or address--from commenters who choose to provide it during the public comment process. The APA does not require commenters to disclose identity information when submitting comments. In addition, agencies have no obligation under the APA to verify the identity of such parties during the rulemaking process.

GAO found that seven of 10 selected agencies have some internal guidance associated with the identity of commenters, but the substance varies, reflecting the differences among the agencies. The guidance most frequently relates to the comment intake or response to comment phases of the public comment process.

With the discretion afforded by the APA, selected agencies' treatment of commenters' identity information varies, particularly when posting duplicate comments (identical or near-identical comment text but varied identity information). Generally, officials told GAO that their agencies (1) post all comments within the comment system; or (2) maintain some comments outside of the system, such as in email file archives. For instance, one agency posts a single example of duplicate comments and indicates the total number of comments received. However, within these broad categories, posting practices vary considerably--even within the same agency--and identity information is inconsistently presented on public websites.

Selected agencies do not clearly communicate their practices for how comments and identity information are posted. GAO's key practices for transparently reporting government data state that federal government websites should disclose data sources and limitations to help public users make informed decisions about how to use the data. As a result, public users of the comment websites could reach inaccurate conclusions about who submitted a particular comment, or how many individuals commented on an issue."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal agencies publish on average 3,700 proposed rules yearly and are generally required to provide interested persons (commenters) an opportunity to comment on these rules. In recent years, some high-profile rulemakings have received extremely large numbers of comments, raising questions about how agencies manage the identity information associated with comments. While the APA does not require the disclosure of identifying information from a commenter, agencies may choose to collect this information. This report examines (1) the identity information collected by Regulations.gov and agency-specific comment websites; (2) the guidance agencies have related to the identity of commenters; (3) how selected agencies treat identity information; and (4) the extent to which selected agencies clearly communicate their practices associated with identity information.

GAO selected a nongeneralizable sample of 10 federal agencies on the basis of large comment volume. GAO surveyed 52 program offices within these agencies about their comment process; and reviewed comment websites, agency guidance, and posted comment data. GAO also interviewed relevant agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making a total of eight recommendations to the selected agencies to more clearly communicate to the public their policies for posting comments and associated identity information to Regulations.gov and agency-specific comment websites. The selected agencies generally agreed with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-483?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Student Loans

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on indicators of potential fraud or error in income and family size information provided by borrowers on Income-Driven Repayment plans. The report (GAO-19-347) is titled "Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Verify Borrowers' Information for Income-Driven Repayment Plans".

The report was sent to Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, and Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, on June 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on indicators of potential fraud or error in income and family size information provided by borrowers on Income-Driven Repayment plans. The report (GAO-19-347) is titled "Federal Student Loans: Education Needs to Verify Borrowers' Information for Income-Driven Repayment Plans". The report was sent to Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, and Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, on June 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found:"GAO identified indicators of potential fraud or error in income and family size information for borrowers with approved Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) plans. IDR plans base monthly payments on a borrower's income and family size, extend repayment periods from the standard 10 years to up to 25 years, and forgive remaining balances at the end of that period.

* Zero income. About 95,100 IDR plans were held by borrowers who reported zero income yet potentially earned enough wages to make monthly student loan payments. This analysis is based on wage data from the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), a federal dataset that contains quarterly wage data for newly hired and existing employees. According to GAO's analysis, 34 percent of these plans were held by borrowers who had estimated annual wages of $45,000 or more, including some with estimated annual wages of $100,000 or more. Borrowers with these 95,100 IDR plans owed nearly $4 billion in outstanding Direct Loans as of September 2017.

* Family size. About 40,900 IDR plans were approved based on family sizes of nine or more, which were atypical for IDR plans. Almost 1,200 of these 40,900 plans were approved based on family sizes of 16 or more, including two plans for different borrowers that were approved using a family size of 93. Borrowers with atypical family sizes of nine or more owed almost $2.1 billion in outstanding Direct Loans as of September 2017.

These results indicate some borrowers may have misrepresented or erroneously reported their income or family size. Because income and family size are used to determine IDR monthly payments, fraud or errors in this information can result in the Department of Education (Education) losing thousands of dollars of loan repayments per borrower each year and potentially increasing the ultimate cost of loan forgiveness. Where appropriate, GAO is referring these results to Education for further investigation.

Weaknesses in Education's processes to verify borrowers' income and family size information limit its ability to detect potential fraud or error in IDR plans. While borrowers applying for IDR plans must provide proof of taxable income, such as tax returns or pay stubs, Education generally accepts borrower reports of zero income and borrower reports of family size without verifying the information. Although Education does not currently have access to federal sources of data to verify borrower reports of zero income, the department could pursue such access or obtain private data sources for this purpose. In addition, Education has not systematically implemented other data analytic practices, such as using data it already has to detect anomalies in income and family size that may indicate potential fraud or error. Although data matching and analytic practices may not be sufficient to detect fraud or error, combining them with follow-up procedures to verify information on IDR applications could help Education reduce the risk of using fraudulent or erroneous information to calculate monthly loan payments, and better protect the federal investment in student loans."

Why GAO Did This Study: "As of September 2018, almost half of the $859 billion in outstanding federal Direct Loans was being repaid by borrowers using IDR plans. Prior GAO work found that while these plans may ease the burden of student loan debt, they can carry high costs for the federal government.

This report examines (1) whether there are indicators of potential fraud or error in income and family size information provided by borrowers on IDR plans and (2) the extent to which Education verifies this information. GAO obtained Education data on borrowers with IDR plans approved from January 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017, the most recent data available, and assessed the risk for fraud or error in IDR plans for Direct Loans by (1) matching Education IDR plan data for a subset of borrowers who reported zero income with wage data from NDNH for the same time period and (2) analyzing Education IDR plan data on borrowers' family sizes. In addition, GAO reviewed relevant IDR policies and procedures from Education and interviewed officials from Education."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that Education (1) obtain data to verify income information for borrowers who report zero income on IDR plan applications, (2) implement data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to verify borrower reports of zero income, and (3) implement data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to verify borrowers' family size. Education generally agreed with our recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-347?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Student Loans

GAO Issues Report on Nutrition Education

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which Department of Agriculture has information on participation, expenditures and effectiveness for its nutrition education programs. The report (GAO-19-572) is titled "Nutrition Education: USDA Actions Needed to Assess Effectiveness, Coordinate Programs, and Leverage Expertise".

The report was sent to Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut, chairwoman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, on July 25. Here ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which Department of Agriculture has information on participation, expenditures and effectiveness for its nutrition education programs. The report (GAO-19-572) is titled "Nutrition Education: USDA Actions Needed to Assess Effectiveness, Coordinate Programs, and Leverage Expertise". The report was sent to Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut, chairwoman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, on July 25. Hereare excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers five key programs that provide nutrition education and has information on participation, expenditures, and effectiveness for most of these programs. USDA tracks the number of participants in direct education, such as classes and counseling, as well as other measures of program reach. For example, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed), one of USDA's largest nutrition education programs, served 3.8 million participants through direct education in fiscal year 2018. USDA also collects nationwide expenditure data for all of its nutrition education programs, which totaled nearly $907 million in fiscal year 2017--the most recent year with complete data available. In addition, USDA collects some information on the effectiveness of most of its nutrition education programs; yet information USDA collects from states on SNAP-Ed effectiveness cannot be easily aggregated or reviewed. States provide this information in narrative reports, which hinders USDA's ability to assess the effectiveness of interventions used across the country and determine whether SNAP-Ed is achieving its goals.

USDA does not have a formal coordination mechanism for its nutrition education efforts and does not fully leverage the department's nutrition expertise. According to USDA officials, coordinating nutrition education efforts has not been a priority in recent years, and the department does not have a dedicated individual or entity with leadership responsibility for nutrition education. This has resulted in limited coordination across USDA's nutrition education programs, including programs with similar target populations. GAO previously reported that effective coordination can help reduce overlap and duplication. In its absence, USDA's nutrition education programs are missing opportunities to share information and avoid duplicating efforts. Further, some USDA nutrition experts are not located in agencies or offices overseeing the nutrition education programs, and possibly because of this, program staff consult these experts on a limited basis, if at all. Failing to leverage its internal expertise hinders USDA's development of nutrition education materials that are informed by the latest nutrition guidance and research and may reduce the effectiveness of these efforts."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that many Americans' diets lack adequate sources of good nutrition and that this contributes to costly chronic health conditions. USDA funds and administers a variety of nutrition education efforts, which aim to help educate Americans on nutrition and improve their dietary choices. GAO was asked to review these efforts.

This report examines the extent to which USDA (1) has information on participation, expenditures, and effectiveness for its nutrition education programs; and (2) coordinates its nutrition education efforts and leverages internal nutrition expertise for these efforts. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, guidance, and GAO's prior work on nutrition education and leading practices for collaboration; analyzed USDA data on nutrition education participation in fiscal year 2018 and expenditures in fiscal year 2017, the most recent year with complete data available; and reviewed program evaluations and available outcome data for fiscal year 2018. GAO also interviewed USDA officials and representatives of relevant organizations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations to USDA, including that USDA improve how it gathers information on SNAP-Ed effectiveness, develop a formal mechanism for coordinating nutrition education across the department, and take steps to fully leverage the department's nutrition expertise for its nutrition education efforts. USDA generally agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-572?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nutrition Education

GAO Issues Report on Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program

WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Bureau of Justice Assistance's reporting on Public Safety Officers' Benefits claims related to 9/11. The report (GAO-19-521R) is titled "Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program: Improvements Needed to Strengthen Reporting on 9/11-Related Claims".

The report was sent to Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, ranking member of the House ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Bureau of Justice Assistance's reporting on Public Safety Officers' Benefits claims related to 9/11. The report (GAO-19-521R) is titled "Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program: Improvements Needed to Strengthen Reporting on 9/11-Related Claims". The report was sent to Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, ranking member of the HouseJudiciary Committee, on July 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Based on GAO's review, the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) was generally in compliance with the requirement to apply offsets for claimants dually eligible for benefits from both the Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) program and the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund (VCF) from 2013-2018. However, GAO's analysis of 91 dually eligible claims revealed errors in two of them. One claimant was overpaid, and PSOB officials said the error occurred because this claim was processed after the effective date of the law that required offsets, but before VCF and PSOB had an agreement in place regarding how they would coordinate processing offsets. One claimant was underpaid, and PSOB officials acknowledged this and said they intend to work with VCF officials to ensure the claimant receives the compensation they were eligible for.

GAO's analysis also found some errors in the information BJA publicly reported in its 180-day reports. For example, two claims were missing from the total number of final determinations on PSOB claims related to 9/11. BJA also misreported VCF final compensation amounts for 5 claimants. The compensation amounts were listed alongside incorrect claim identification numbers in the 180-day reports. The 180-day reports are reviewed by multiple people to help ensure their accuracy, according to BJA officials; however, these reports are prepared by manually transcribing data from electronic sources, which increases the risk of errors. BJA has no imminent plans to automate production of these reports. As long as these reports are produced manually without more effective quality checks, errors like those described above may continue to occur. In addition, without adequate quality control measures to verify the accuracy of claims data, BJA's 180-day reports may fail to provide policymakers the assurance that PSOB claimants with 9/11-related claims are receiving the correct, offset benefit amounts."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Public safety officers--law enforcement officers, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians, among others--who die or become totally and permanently disabled due to a line-of-duty injury are eligible for benefits from the PSOB program. Since 2013, BJA, which administers the PSOB program, has approved more than 1,700 death and disability claims and provided more than $300 million to eligible officers and their families. Public safety officers who were physically injured or died as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 (9/11), or the debris removal afterward may also be eligible for VCF compensation. Federal law requires benefits under these programs to be offset--reducing one benefit by the amount of the other--when claimants are eligible for both programs. In addition, the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Improvement Act of 2017 requires DOJ to issue public reports every 180 days on PSOB claims. The Act also includes a provision for GAO to conduct a study on BJA's compliance with the requirement to offset PSOB benefits by the amount of VCF compensation paid, and to review BJA's reporting on PSOB claims related to 9/11. This report examines the extent to which BJA is 1) in compliance with requirements to offset benefits for claims that are eligible for both the PSOB program and the VCF program, and 2) accurately reporting information on PSOB claims related to 9/11 in its public reports."

What GAO Recommends: "The Attorney General should direct the Bureau of Justice Assistance to enhance quality checks to ensure the accuracy of information in its 180-day reports about Public Safety Officers' Benefits claims related to public safety officers affected by 9/11. DOJ concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-521R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Civil Monetary Penalties

WASHINGTON, July 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on agencies' compliance with the annual inflation adjustments required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act. The report (GAO-19-567R) is titled "Civil Monetary Penalties: Review of Federal Agencies' Compliance with the 2018 Annual Inflation Adjustment Requirements".

The report was sent to Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Equal Employment Opportunity

WASHINGTON, July 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to identify and address barriers to equal employment opportunity in its workforce. The report (GAO-19-573) is titled "Equal Employment Opportunity: DHS Could Better Address Challenges to Ensuring EEO in Its Workforce".

The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, on July 24. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identified ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to identify and address barriers to equal employment opportunity in its workforce. The report (GAO-19-573) is titled "Equal Employment Opportunity: DHS Could Better Address Challenges to Ensuring EEO in Its Workforce". The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, on July 24. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identifiedbarriers to equal employment opportunity (EEO) and has plans to address them, but lacks performance metrics for tracking its progress towards eliminating these barriers. DHS identified three barriers from fiscal years 2014 through 2017: (1) problems with supervision/management, lack of advancement opportunities, and lack of alternate work schedules, among other things, causing higher-than-expected nonretirement separations for white females and several ethnic and racial groups; (2) the geographic location of jobs, which has contributed to low hiring rates of racial groups in certain major occupations; and (3) the medical and physical requirements of various law enforcement positions, such as the ability to engage in moderate to arduous physical exertion, which limit the eligibility of some applicants with targeted disabilities. While DHS reports some improvements in employee engagement and representation of minorities and women, it does not have complete performance metrics, such as the retention rate of women in law enforcement positions. Implementing performance metrics could help DHS better assess its progress in eliminating barriers.

DHS and its components have identified various deficiencies in their EEO programs, but lack policies and procedures for developing action plans and formal staffing models to address some deficiencies. DHS components did not have action plans to address nearly half (179 out of 369) of the deficiencies self-reported by all components from fiscal years 2014 through 2017. For example, in fiscal year 2017, four DHS components did not have action plans to ensure that their EEO directors report directly to their agency heads. Developing policies and procedures to help ensure components' EEO programs have action plans for addressing deficiencies could help DHS components better comply with Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) requirements. Developing and utilizing formal staffing models for their EEO programs could help DHS and its components to better identify, request, and obtain the staff they need. For example, DHS and its components reported that staffing challenges contributed to some of their EEO program deficiencies, and acknowledged they lack formal models to use their existing staffing to address the deficiencies.

DHS has plans to address the nine areas of noncompliance in its EEO program identified by EEOC. For example, in its most recent review of DHS compliance with EEOC requirements, EEOC identified that DHS did not provide complete demographic data on new hires and promotions in its report to EEOC in fiscal year 2016. DHS officials told us that the department plans to report the data by collecting complete data from DHS components in fiscal year 2019.

DHS's EEO and human capital offices assist and support DHS components in identifying and addressing EEO barriers. However, the EEO office lacks policies and procedures to ensure components respond timely and completely to areas of noncompliance identified in EEOC feedback letters. Additionally, DHS EEO officials said they lack authority to ensure components' compliance with EEOC requirements. Without addressing these issues, DHS may not be effectively positioned to manage its EEO program."

Why GAO Did This Study: "EEOC's Management Directive 715 requires that, to attract and retain top talent, federal agencies are to identify EEO barriers in their workforces and deficiencies in their EEO programs, execute plans to address them, and report annually to EEOC. In 2009, GAO reported that DHS had opportunities to better identify and address barriers to EEO in its workforce, and made recommendations which DHS has taken action to address. GAO was asked to provide an update on DHS's efforts to identify and address barriers to EEO in its workforce. This report examines the steps DHS has taken to (1) identify and address barriers to EEO in its workforce, (2) identify and address EEO program deficiencies, (3) address areas of noncompliance in its EEO program identified by EEOC, and (4) oversee and support component EEO programs. GAO reviewed DHS's and its components' policies, procedures, practices, and reports for their EEO programs for fiscal years 2014 through 2018, interviewed DHS and its component EEO officials, and assessed DHS employee survey results. GAO also reviewed EEOC's feedback on DHS's and its components' EEO programs, and interviewed EEOC officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making six recommendations, including: develop performance metrics for the department's EEO program; develop DHS and component formal staffing models; and analyze options for granting additional authorities to the most senior official for EEO and Diversity. DHS concurred with our six recommendations and described actions the department plans to take to address them."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-573?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on K-12 Education

WASHINGTON, July 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on inspection and remediation efforts that protect children from exposure to lead in schools. The report (GAO-19-461R) is titled "K-12 Education: School Districts' Efforts to Address Lead-Based Paint".

The report was sent to Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, on July 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "An estimated 12 percent of school districts inspected their schools ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on inspection and remediation efforts that protect children from exposure to lead in schools. The report (GAO-19-461R) is titled "K-12 Education: School Districts' Efforts to Address Lead-Based Paint". The report was sent to Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, on July 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "An estimated 12 percent of school districts inspected their schoolsfor lead-based paint in school year 2016-2017, while about three-quarters of school districts had not inspected their schools for lead-based paint during that period, according to GAO's generalizable school district survey. About half of the school districts that inspected found lead-based paint. All school districts that found lead-based paint in their schools reported taking action to reduce or eliminate it or had plans to do so.

An estimated 15.3 million students were in districts that inspected for lead-based paint compared with 22.4 million students in districts that had not inspected.

A higher percentage of the largest school districts inspected their schools for lead-based paint than other school districts. Specifically, according to GAO's survey, an estimated 63 percent of the 100 largest school districts inspected their schools for lead-based paint compared with 12 percent of all other school districts. Also, a higher percentage of the largest school districts found lead-based paint in their schools than other school districts. Specifically, 51 percent of the 100 largest school districts found lead-based paint compared with an estimated 8 percent of other school districts.

Estimates generated from GAO's survey results are generalizable to the 70 percent of school districts nationwide with at least one school built before 1978 and which obtained drinking water from a public water system (the focus of GAO's July 2018 report)."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Recent revelations of lead exposure--in Flint, Michigan through drinking water and in East Chicago, Indiana through contaminated soil and lead dust from past industrial activities--have renewed public awareness about the dangers lead exposure poses to public health, including the health of school-age children. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no safe blood lead level in children has been identified. Even though the extent to which children are exposed to lead has been substantially reduced since the 1970s, it is unclear how many school buildings still have lead-based paint.

GAO was asked to study inspection and remediation efforts that protect children from exposure to lead in schools. In July 2018, GAO reported on lead in school drinking water. In this report, GAO describes the extent to which school districts reported inspecting for, and remediating, lead-based paint in schools.

To do this, GAO used survey and interview data collected as part of its July 2018 work on lead in school drinking water. For that work, GAO surveyed 549 randomly selected school districts from July to October 2017 asking whether they had inspected for, discovered, or remediated lead-based paint in the past 12 months. GAO also visited or interviewed officials in 17 school districts from February to October 2017. These districts were located in five states--Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Texas--and were selected because they vary in population density, geographic location, and the extent to which they required school-based lead testing and remediation with respect to drinking water (the focus of GAO's July 2018 report). GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-461R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nursing Homes

WASHINGTON, July 24 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on abuse of residents in nursing homes. The report (GAO-19-433) is titled "Nursing Homes: Improved Oversight Needed to Better Protect Residents from Abuse".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, and Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommittee on Investigations, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 24 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on abuse of residents in nursing homes. The report (GAO-19-433) is titled "Nursing Homes: Improved Oversight Needed to Better Protect Residents from Abuse". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, and Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommittee on Investigations, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summariesassociated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is responsible for ensuring nursing homes meet federal quality standards, including that residents are free from abuse. CMS enters into agreements with state survey agencies to conduct surveys of the state's homes and to investigate complaints and incidents. GAO analysis of CMS data found that, while relatively rare, abuse deficiencies cited in nursing homes more than doubled, increasing from 430 in 2013 to 875 in 2017, with the largest increase in severe cases. GAO also reviewed a representative sample of abuse deficiency narratives from 2016 through 2017. Physical and mental/verbal abuse occurred most often in nursing homes, followed by sexual abuse, and staff were more often the perpetrators of the abuse deficiencies cited. CMS cannot readily access information on abuse or perpetrator type in its data and, therefore, lacks key information critical to taking appropriate actions.

GAO also found gaps in CMS oversight, including:

Gaps in CMS processes that can result in delayed and missed referrals. Federal law requires nursing home staff to immediately report to law enforcement and the state survey agency reasonable suspicions of a crime that results in serious bodily injury to a resident. However, there is no equivalent requirement that the state survey agency make a timely referral for complaints it receives directly or through surveys it conducts. CMS also does not conduct oversight to ensure that state survey agencies are correctly referring abuse cases to law enforcement.

Insufficient information collected on facility-reported incidents. CMS has not issued guidance on what nursing homes should include when they self-report abuse incidents to the state survey agencies. Officials from all of the state survey agencies in GAO's review said the facility-reported incidents can lack information needed to prioritize investigations and may result in state survey agencies not responding as quickly as needed."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Nursing homes provide care to about 1.4 million nursing home residents--a vulnerable population of elderly and disabled individuals. CMS, an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), defines standards nursing homes must meet to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

GAO was asked to review abuse of residents in nursing homes. Among other objectives, this report: (1) determines the trends and types of abuse in recent years, and (2) evaluates CMS oversight intended to ensure residents are free from abuse.

GAO reviewed CMS's policies, analyzed CMS data on abuse deficiencies from 2013 through 2017, the most recent data at the time of our review, and interviewed officials from CMS and state survey agencies in five states, as well as other key stakeholders in those states such as ombudsmen and law enforcement officials. The states were selected for variation in factors such as number of nursing homes and role of other state agencies in abuse investigations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making six recommendations, including that CMS: require state survey agencies to submit data on abuse and perpetrator type; require state survey agencies to immediately refer to law enforcement any suspicion of a crime; and develop guidance on what abuse information nursing homes should self-report. HHS concurred with all of GAO's recommendations and identified actions it will take to implement them."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-433?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Rail Transit

WASHINGTON, July 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on factors affecting the costs to build transit projects. The report (GAO-19-562) is titled "Rail Transit: Federal Transit Administration Could Improve Information on Estimating Project Costs".

The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies, Rep. David E. Price, D-North Carolina, chairman, and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Florida, ranking member of ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on factors affecting the costs to build transit projects. The report (GAO-19-562) is titled "Rail Transit: Federal Transit Administration Could Improve Information on Estimating Project Costs". The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies, Rep. David E. Price, D-North Carolina, chairman, and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Florida, ranking member ofthe House Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, on July 22. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Rail transit construction project sponsors, typically state or local government entities, have a vested interest in controlling costs. Stakeholders GAO interviewed identified a variety of factors that affect a rail transit construction project's costs (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-562?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Project sponsors and other stakeholders identified various approaches sponsors have used to manage a project's costs. These approaches align with key project management principles GAO identified: (1) ensuring management capability; (2) making informed procurement decisions; (3) managing risk; and (4) managing stakeholder relationships. For example, sponsor officials and a contractor's representative from one GAO case study said they managed risk by cooperating to purchase steel materials early in the project to reduce the risk of additional steel price increases.

The Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) cost estimating information for sponsors aligns with many best practices, but FTA could improve the information's usefulness. GAO found that taken together, FTA's cost estimating information substantially or fully met 7 of the 12 cost estimating steps outlined in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (Cost Guide) but did not align with 5 of the steps. For example, the documents did not discuss sensitivity analyses--an assessment of each factor's effect on cost. Doing so could help sponsors better identify which cost factors are most likely to influence a project's overall costs if assumptions change, thereby improving an estimate's reliability and better informing sponsors' decisions. In addition, sponsors may have difficulty identifying critical cost estimating information because it is distributed across 14 different documents available to sponsors, 11 of which are intended for FTA's oversight contractors. By improving the content and organization of cost estimating information, FTA would help project sponsors increase the reliability of their cost estimates and reduce the risk of cost overruns."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Rail transit projects are complex, and challenge sponsors to maximize limited resources. To help project sponsors build new or extend existing transit projects, Congress appropriated about $2.65 billion for FTA's 2019 Capital Investment Grants program.

Congress included a provision in a committee report for GAO to evaluate factors affecting the costs to build transit projects. This report examines: (1) stakeholders' views on factors that affect rail transit project costs, (2) stakeholders' views on approaches sponsors have used to manage costs, and (3) the extent to which FTA's cost estimating information for sponsors aligns with best practices in GAO's Cost Guide . GAO interviewed academic, construction, and other stakeholders identified through a literature search and referrals. GAO conducted case studies of four U.S. rail transit projects that received FTA grants and that were selected to obtain variation in transit mode, location, and other characteristics, and compared their approaches to GAO-identified key project management principles. GAO also interviewed FTA officials and compared FTA's cost estimating information with GAO's best practices."

What GAO Recommends: "FTA should (1) ensure that FTA's cost estimating information is consistent with all 12 steps in GAO's Cost Guide for developing reliable cost estimates and (2) provide a central, accessible source of cost estimating information for project sponsors. FTA partially concurred with the first and concurred with the second recommendation. GAO believes FTA should fully implement both recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-562?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on 2020 Census

WASHINGTON, July 20 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Census Bureau's progress in opening area census offices. The report (GAO-19-602) is titled "2020 Census: Bureau Is Making Progress Opening Offices and Recruiting, but Could Improve Its Ability to Evaluate Training".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 20 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Census Bureau's progress in opening area census offices. The report (GAO-19-602) is titled "2020 Census: Bureau Is Making Progress Opening Offices and Recruiting, but Could Improve Its Ability to Evaluate Training". The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and GovernmentReform subcommittee on Government Operations, on July 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "To help control the cost of the 2020 Census while maintaining accuracy, the Census Bureau (Bureau) is making significant changes in three areas--office space, recruiting and hiring, and training--compared to prior decennials. The Bureau is reducing its use of office space, hiring fewer census field staff, and adopting a blended training approach of instructor-led, computer-based, and hands-on training (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-602?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO found that the the Bureau generally appears to be positioned to carry out these activities as planned, if implemented properly.

Opening offices. While the Bureau experienced early delays when regions were trying to find office space and acquire leases, Bureau officials said that the deadlines for the later phases of renovations will allow them to make up time lost. As of June 2019, there were signed leases for 247 of 248 offices.

Recruiting and hiring. As of June 2019, the Bureau was exceeding its recruiting goals for early operations, but identified challenges in areas such as completing background checks and hiring during low unemployment, especially for partnership specialist positions. GAO will continue to monitor these challenges, as recruiting and hiring for the census continues.

Training. The Bureau generally followed its training plans for 2020 and generally followed selected leading practices for its training approach. However, GAO found that the Bureau does not have goals and performance measures for evaluating its new training approach. Without goals and performance measures the Bureau will not be able to accurately assess the cost and benefits of its new training approach."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The decennial census is a crucial, constitutionally mandated activity with immutable deadlines. To meet these statutory deadlines, the Bureau carries out thousands of activities that need to be successfully completed on schedule for an accurate, cost-effective head count. These activities include opening area census offices, recruiting and hiring a large temporary workforce, and training that workforce.

GAO was asked to review the Bureau's plans for critical logistical support activities. This report (1) assesses the Bureau's progress in opening area census offices; (2) determines the extent to which the Bureau is following its field hiring and recruiting strategy for the 2020 Census; and (3) determines the extent to which the Bureau has followed its plans for training field staff, and whether this training approach is consistent with selected leading practices.

To assess the extent to which the Bureau is following its plans for opening area census offices, recruiting and hiring, and training, GAO reviewed current Bureau planning documents and schedules, and interviewed Bureau officials, including officials at the Bureau's six regional offices. GAO used its guide to training (GAO-04-546G) as criteria for selected leading practices."

What GAO Recommends: "The Secretary of Commerce should direct the U.S. Census Bureau to revise plans to include goals and performance measures for evaluating its new training approach. The Department of Commerce agreed with GAO's recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-602?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Discretionary Transportation Grants

WASHINGTON, July 20 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Transportation's process for evaluating and selecting applications for awards. The report (GAO-19-541) is titled "Discretionary Transportation Grants: Actions Needed to Improve Consistency and Transparency in DOT's Application Evaluations".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 20 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Transportation's process for evaluating and selecting applications for awards. The report (GAO-19-541) is titled "Discretionary Transportation Grants: Actions Needed to Improve Consistency and Transparency in DOT's Application Evaluations". The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, rankingmember of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-District of Columbia, chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Highways and Transit, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Transportation's (DOT) process for reviewing applications for grants to fund projects under the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) program lacked consistency and transparency in aspects related to following up with applicants and evaluating applications.

* Following up with applicants. DOT must determine that an applicant's project meets statutory requirements in order for the project to be eligible for an INFRA award. DOT initially found that 97 applications had insufficient information for an eligibility determination. DOT followed up with 42 of the 97 applicants to request additional information. DOT did not sufficiently document why it followed up with certain applicants over others. If DOT does not clearly communicate and document its process regarding applicant follow-up, the process lacks transparency and the assurance of fairness.

* Evaluating applications. In addition to the statutory requirements, DOT established merit criteria (e.g., economic vitality) to evaluate projects against, and stated that competitive projects would substantively address all of the criteria. DOT teams scored the projects on how well they addressed each criterion. However, DOT forwarded the information on all 165 projects that were found to be statutorily eligible to the Secretary for potential award, regardless of how well they scored on the merit criteria. In the end, DOT awarded some projects that did not address all of the criteria. Several applicants told GAO they were uncertain how DOT determines which projects should receive awards. In addition, DOT's documentation does not provide insight into why projects were selected for awards, an issue GAO has previously noted and recommended DOT address.

The above limitations reflect long-standing issues GAO has identified in DOT's discretionary grant programs. Specifically, since 2011, GAO has recommended actions to increase consistency and transparency. In some cases, DOT implemented the recommendations for one program, but GAO later found similar problems in other programs. After finding repeated issues, GAO recommended in 2016 that DOT develop a department-wide directive that would, among other things, require that key decisions be documented. DOT agreed with the recommendation. In a March 2019 memo, DOT directed offices to implement GAO's recommendation by June 2019. However, it is unclear how this action will improve transparency and consistency because, among other things, DOT did not communicate how offices should sufficiently document decisions to ensure that the rationale for decisions is clear. The next reauthorization of surface transportation programs provides Congress the opportunity to build requirements for greater consistency and transparency into DOT's grant programs. This is particularly important as DOT has two additional rounds of INFRA funding to award under the FAST Act, and the President's Budget proposal proposed providing an additional $1 billion to INFRA. Absent effective action by DOT going forward, the recurring and long-standing issues GAO has identified could continue to affect DOT's competitive discretionary grant programs."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The cost to repair and upgrade the nation's surface transportation system to meet current and future demands is estimated in the hundreds of billions of dollars. In December 2015, Congress established a DOT discretionary grant program to fund nationally significant freight and highway projects. DOT awarded $1.54 billion for such projects for fiscal years 2017 and 2018. GAO was asked to review DOT's process for evaluating and selecting applications for awards.

This report discusses the consistency and transparency of DOT's process for evaluating and awarding INFRA grants for the fiscal-year 2017-2018 round of funding, among other objectives. GAO reviewed DOT's documentation of its evaluation process, and interviewed DOT staff and officials, as well as 11 INFRA applicants selected to ensure diversity in projects' size, type, location, and award status, as well as type of applicant."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations, including that DOT should communicate and document the rationale for asking specific applicants for more information and provide information to applicants on how, if at all, DOT uses merit criteria scores to advance projects through its evaluation and selection process. Also, Congress should consider directing DOT to develop and implement transparency measures in the next surface-transportation reauthorization bill. DOT concurred with GAO's recommendations and provided technical comments that GAO incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-541?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on VA Mental Health

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on factors that contribute to providers' treatment decisions for veterans with mental health conditions. The report (GAO-19-465) is titled "VA Mental Health: VHA Improved Certain Prescribing Practices, but Needs to Strengthen Treatment Plan Oversight".

The report was sent to Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Michigan, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and Rep. Ann Kuster, D-New Hampshire, on June 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on factors that contribute to providers' treatment decisions for veterans with mental health conditions. The report (GAO-19-465) is titled "VA Mental Health: VHA Improved Certain Prescribing Practices, but Needs to Strengthen Treatment Plan Oversight". The report was sent to Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Michigan, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and Rep. Ann Kuster, D-New Hampshire, on June 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found:"Officials from the five selected Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (VAMC) GAO spoke with reported various factors that contribute to providers' mental health treatment decisions, including decisions regarding the prescribing of psychotropic medications and the offering of non-pharmacologic therapy. Examples of reported factors include: VAMC resources, such as the availability of appointments with mental health providers in specialty care, and the complexity of veterans' mental health conditions, such as the veterans' diagnoses and treatment history.

Officials with VA's Veterans Health Administration (VHA) told GAO that specialty mental health care providers are expected to document mental health treatment plans in an easily identifiable way in veterans' medical records, but VHA has not developed guidance explicitly addressing this expectation. For example, VHA's mental health services handbook requires that treatment plans include certain components, but does not specify where to document the plan within a veteran's medical record. As a result, there is a risk that a provider may be unable to readily access information about a veteran's mental health treatment, including the use of medication or therapy, during changes in a veteran's care.

VHA has not monitored whether mental health providers in specialty care document the required consideration of different treatment options--such as psychotropic medications or non-pharmacologic therapy--within mental health treatment plans. VHA officials told GAO that VHA relies on the Joint Commission (an independent, not-for-profit organization that accredits and certifies health care organizations) to assess specialty mental health treatment plans as part of the organization's accreditation process for each VAMC. However, the Joint Commission's standards do not specifically assess whether providers consider different treatment options. As a result, VHA cannot ensure that providers are considering all available treatment options and providing the most appropriate treatments to each veteran.

VHA has taken steps to improve veterans' mental health treatment through the Psychotropic Drug Safety Initiative (PDSI)--an initiative focused on the safe and effective prescribing of certain psychotropic medications. For example, the first phase included a performance metric aimed at decreasing the percentage of veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder receiving one or more outpatient prescriptions for a benzodiazepine (a medication used to treat anxiety) because of risks associated with the medication. VHA reported a nationwide 5.4 percentage point decrease in the prescribing of this medication for these patients, as well as improvements in the majority of the initiative's other performance metrics."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In fiscal year 2018, of the roughly 6 million veterans who received services from VHA, approximately 2 million had a diagnosis for at least one mental health condition. Treatments for such mental health conditions can include psychotropic medications or non-pharmacologic therapies, which can be prescribed or offered by VA providers in outpatient settings including primary and specialty care.

GAO was asked to review how mental health treatment decisions are made by providers in VAMCs and monitored by VHA. This report examines, among other things, (1) factors that contribute to providers' treatment decisions for veterans with mental health conditions, (2) VHA's guidance for documenting mental health treatment plans, (3) VHA's monitoring of whether providers document their consideration of different treatment options, and (4) VHA's efforts to improve the treatment of veterans prescribed psychotropic medications. GAO reviewed VHA documents and a nongeneralizable sample of veterans' medical records from five VAMCs (selected for variety in facility complexity and location); analyzed data on psychotropic medication prescribing; and interviewed VHA and VAMC officials."

What GAO Recommends: "VHA should (1) disseminate guidance reflecting its expectation that providers document mental health treatment plans in an easily identifiable way, and (2) implement an approach for monitoring whether these treatment plans include consideration of treatment options. VHA agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-465?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Air Traffic Control

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on planned improvements to aircraft surveillance. The report (GAO-19-532) is titled "Air Traffic Control: FAA's Analysis of Costs and Benefits Drove Its Plans to Improve Surveillance in U.S. Oceanic Airspace".

The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) evaluated ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on planned improvements to aircraft surveillance. The report (GAO-19-532) is titled "Air Traffic Control: FAA's Analysis of Costs and Benefits Drove Its Plans to Improve Surveillance in U.S. Oceanic Airspace". The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) evaluatedtwo aircraft surveillance technologies that would allow aircraft to safely fly in closer proximity while in oceanic airspace. Based on its evaluation, FAA committed to using one in the near term and to continue to study another for future use. Specifically, in April 2019, FAA committed to implement by 2022 new international standards that allow reduced distances between aircraft, called minimum separation standards. These reduced distances would be enabled by a surveillance technology known as enhanced Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract (ADS-C). FAA also decided to continue studying the use of another enhanced surveillance technology known as space-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)--to further improve surveillance in U.S. airspace. Both technologies offer increased frequency in reporting of an aircraft's location, which enhances safety, and can support new minimum separation standards. FAA decided to proceed with enhanced ADS-C in the near term because the efficiency benefits to airspace users exceeded the costs of more frequent location reporting and air traffic control system upgrades by 2 to 1. In contrast, FAA determined that the costs of using space-based ADS-B in U.S. oceanic airspace outweigh the efficiency benefits by 6 to 1. FAA officials added that operational challenges to using space-based ADS-B to manage air traffic in U.S. oceanic airspace have not yet been resolved. FAA plans to continue studying potential uses for space-based ADS-B in U.S. airspace to determine if benefits can outweigh the costs (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-532?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO found that most selected airlines (11 of 14) support FAA's overall approach to enhance oceanic surveillance. Selected airlines also said they expect the new minimum separation standards to improve access to more direct and fuel-efficient routes. FAA is taking steps to provide these benefits by restructuring routes in one area of U.S. oceanic airspace and by applying new minimum standards to give aircraft better access to fuel-efficient altitudes. According to FAA officials, however, additional benefits, such as redesigning other U.S. oceanic airspace, expected by selected airlines are limited by (1) relatively low rates of aircraft equipage with the technology that enables reduced separation and (2) the frequency of disruptive weather patterns in parts of U.S. oceanic airspace."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Recent developments in surveillance technologies, which provide an aircraft's location to air traffic controllers, have the potential to improve air traffic operations over the oceans. FAA has explored how to improve surveillance capabilities in U.S. oceanic airspace to take advantage of new international separation standards that could lead to the more efficient use of this airspace.

GAO was asked to review planned improvements to aircraft surveillance. This report examines: (1) FAA's approach to enhancing surveillance capabilities to improve safety and efficiency in U.S. oceanic airspace and (2) selected aviation stakeholders' perspectives on FAA's approach.

GAO reviewed documents related to FAA's planned investment in enhanced oceanic surveillance and interviewed FAA officials working on this effort. Interviews included those with the Air Traffic Organization and air traffic controllers who manage U.S. oceanic airspace. GAO surveyed representatives of 14 commercial airlines, including 11 U.S. and foreign passenger airlines, which were selected based on factors such as flight volume; and 3 U.S. cargo airlines, which were selected based on tons of cargo shipped. GAO also interviewed other aviation stakeholders, including trade associations, unions representing pilots, and foreign air navigation service providers that manage airspace adjacent to U.S. oceanic airspace."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-532?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Army Modernization

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the establishment of Army Futures Command could affect small businesses that support research and development efforts. The report (GAO-19-511) is titled "Army Modernization: Army Futures Command Should Take Steps to Improve Small Business Engagement for Research and Development".

The report was sent to Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Maryland, ranking member of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Army Futures ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the establishment of Army Futures Command could affect small businesses that support research and development efforts. The report (GAO-19-511) is titled "Army Modernization: Army Futures Command Should Take Steps to Improve Small Business Engagement for Research and Development". The report was sent to Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Maryland, ranking member of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Army FuturesCommand, established in June 2018 by combining several existing Army organizations and expected to be fully operational in July 2019, is engaging with small businesses. The command considers small business engagement critical to its success and officials reported it intends to continue the engagement activities of the organizations that are moving into it such as conducting outreach and awarding contracts. The Army recognizes the importance of small businesses and has awarded $2.3 billion to hundreds of small businesses from fiscal year 2013 through 2017. The command is also taking initial steps to enhance small business engagement (see figure). Army officials noted that these new efforts are intended to address concerns raised by small businesses in working with the government, such as delays between initial outreach and entering into contracts.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-511?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

However, the command has not fully leveraged other Army organizations that work with small businesses, such as the Army Office of Small Business Programs. According to command officials, they prioritized setting up the command structure and engaging with small businesses quickly, instead of focusing on coordination. The command has recently been working to improve coordination, but has not formally coordinated such as by establishing agreements with other Army organizations that have small business expertise. Doing so would help Army Futures Command leverage this past experience and avoid missing opportunities to engage with these companies and access innovative research and development.

The command does not track how frequently or in what ways it engages with small businesses for research and development across all command components. Similarly, command officials stated they have considered performance measures to assess the effectiveness of their engagement efforts, but have not yet developed command-wide measures or a plan to assess effectiveness. Tracking and measuring engagement would help ensure the command obtains quality information that may help the Army evaluate, and potentially enhance, its small business engagement."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Army is modernizing its weapon systems to improve its ability to face near-peer adversaries. To consolidate and oversee these efforts, the Army established Army Futures Command. The command plans to work with small businesses to develop innovative capabilities through research and development activities.

GAO was asked how the establishment of Army Futures Command could affect small businesses that support research and development efforts. This report examines, among other objectives, how the command (1) engages with small businesses and coordinates with other Army organizations and (2) plans to track and measure the effectiveness of that engagement.

GAO reviewed the Army's internal analyses of its own modernization efforts; reviewed and analyzed policies and procedures on the command's small business engagement; and interviewed Army officials engaged in modernization efforts as well as two private companies selected because they facilitate Army's work with small businesses."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations including that the Army Futures Command coordinate with relevant Army organizations on small business engagement efforts for research and development; systematically track its small business engagement; and develop command-wide performance measures and a plan to use them to assess the effectiveness of its small business engagement. The Army concurred with all three recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-511?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Border Security

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Border Security Improvement Plan includes the elements required by the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. The report (GAO-19-538R) is titled "Border Security: Assessment of the Department of Homeland Security's Border Security Improvement Plan".

The report was sent to Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-West Virginia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Homeland Security, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-California, chairman, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Border Security Improvement Plan includes the elements required by the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. The report (GAO-19-538R) is titled "Border Security: Assessment of the Department of Homeland Security's Border Security Improvement Plan". The report was sent to Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-West Virginia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Homeland Security, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-California, chairman,and Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on July 16. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The 2018 Border Security Improvement Plan includes some, but not all, of the elements required by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Act, 2018. More specifically, the act set forth 11 required elements for the Border Security Improvement Plan, such as for the plan to include a statement of goals and objectives, a detailed implementation schedule, analyses of alternatives, an identification of staffing requirements, and a description of performance metrics, among other things. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), within DHS, includes some of these elements in the plan. For example, the plan includes CBP's border security initiatives, which it links to its goals and objectives. Likewise, it also includes a description of how CBP measures performance and a reference to other plans where additional detail can be found.

However, the plan does not include many of the other required elements or discuss why those elements were not included in the plan. Specifically, the plan does not provide estimates for the planned obligation of funds through 2027. It also does not include information on all its completed and planned life cycle cost estimates or how the projects under the plan will address the highest priority border security needs. The plan provides CBP's definition of an alternatives analysis, but otherwise does not provide information on alternatives analyses it is conducting or has conducted. Moreover, the plan does not include an assessment of the effects of infrastructure deployment on communities and property owners.

CBP officials stated that the Border Security Improvement Plan may not have included all of the act's required elements because the timing of each fiscal year's appropriation presents challenges in preparing the plan, such as limited time to engage in planning activities. The DHS Appropriations Act, 2019, includes a requirement for DHS to provide Congress and GAO with a risk-based plan for improving border security that includes the same 11 elements required by the 2018 DHS Appropriations Act. Ensuring that the 2019 Border Security Improvement Plan includes the statutorily required elements, or notes why any element was not included, would better position CBP to provide Congress with useful information for overseeing CBP's border security efforts and holding CBP accountable for results."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Within DHS, CBP is the lead law enforcement agency responsible for border security. The DHS Appropriations Act, 2018, required the Secretary of Homeland Security to concurrently submit to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and GAO a risk-based plan for improving security along the borders of the United States, including how CBP intends to use personnel, fencing, other forms of tactical infrastructure, and technology. The act sets forth 11 required elements for this plan--called the Border Security Improvement Plan. The Act also requires GAO to evaluate the plan and report to the appropriations committees on the strengths and weaknesses of the plan. This report addresses the extent to which the Border Security Improvement Plan includes the elements required by the DHS Appropriations Act, 2018. GAO reviewed the 2018 and 2017 plans, as well as other DHS, CBP, and Border Patrol strategic planning documents and guidance. GAO also interviewed officials from CBP and Border Patrol to discuss the report's required elements."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that CBP ensure the fiscal year 2019 Border Security Improvement Plan includes the statutorily required elements, or discloses why any element was not included. DHS concurred with this recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-538R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Consumer Reporting Agencies

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to the consumer reporting market. The report (GAO-19-459) is titled "Consumer Reporting Agencies: CFPB Should Define Its Supervisory Expectations".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, and Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, on July 16. Here are excerpts of summaries ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to the consumer reporting market. The report (GAO-19-459) is titled "Consumer Reporting Agencies: CFPB Should Define Its Supervisory Expectations". The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, and Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, on July 16. Here are excerpts of summariesassociated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Businesses and other entities use consumer reports to make decisions about consumers, such as whether they are eligible for credit, employment, or insurance. Consumer report inaccuracies can negatively affect such decisions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other stakeholders identified various causes of consumer report inaccuracies, such as errors in the data collected by consumer reporting agencies (CRA) and CRAs not matching data to the correct consumer.

In 2010, CFPB was granted supervisory and enforcement authority over CRAs. In using its oversight authorities, CFPB has prioritized CRAs that pose the greatest potential risks to consumers--such as those with significant market shares and large volumes of consumer complaints--for examination. CFPB's oversight has generally focused on assessing compliance with Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requirements regarding accuracy and the investigations CRAs conduct in response to consumer disputes. For example, since 2013, CFPB has conducted examinations of several CRAs and directed specific changes in CRAs' policies and procedures for ensuring data accuracy and conducting dispute investigations.

CFPB has not defined its expectations for how CRAs can comply with key statutory requirements. FCRA requires CRAs (1) to follow reasonable procedures for ensuring maximum possible accuracy and (2) to conduct reasonable investigations of consumer disputes. CFPB has identified deficiencies related to these requirements in its CRA examinations, but it has not defined its expectations--such as by communicating information on appropriate practices--for how CRAs can comply with these requirements. Absent such information, staff from four CRAs GAO interviewed said that they look to other sources, such as court cases or industry presentations, to understand what CFPB will consider to be noncompliant during examinations. A 2018 policy statement issued by CFPB and other regulators highlighted the important role of supervisory expectations in helping to ensure consistency in supervision by providing transparent insight to industry and to supervisory staff. By providing information to CRAs about its expectations for complying with key FCRA requirements, CFPB could help achieve its goal of accurate consumer reporting and effective dispute resolution processes. Such information also could help to promote consistency and transparency in CFPB's supervisory approach."

Why GAO Did This Study: "CRAs collect data from various sources, such as banks and credit card companies, to create consumer reports that they sell to third parties. The three largest CRAs hold information on more than 200 million Americans.

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, enacted in 2018, included a provision for GAO to examine issues related to the consumer reporting market. This report examines, among other objectives, the causes of consumer report inaccuracies and how CFPB has overseen CRAs.

To answer these questions, GAO reviewed relevant laws, regulations, and agency documents related to CRA oversight. GAO interviewed representatives of federal agencies and stakeholders, including a nongeneralizable selection of state agencies from four states that had laws or oversight activities involving CRAs and seven CRAs selected based on size and the type of consumer reports produced. GAO also interviewed groups representing state agencies, consumers, and CRAs selected to reflect a range of stakeholders or based on their work related to CRAs."

What GAO Recommends: "CFPB should communicate to CRAs its expectations regarding (1) reasonable procedures for assuring maximum possible accuracy and (2) reasonable investigations of consumer disputes. CFPB described actions it has taken to provide information to CRAs. GAO maintains that communicating expectations in these two areas is beneficial, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-459?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DATA Act

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. The report (GAO-19-537) is titled "DATA Act: Customer Agencies' Experiences Working with Shared Service Providers for Data Submissions".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommittee ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. The report (GAO-19-537) is titled "DATA Act: Customer Agencies' Experiences Working with Shared Service Providers for Data Submissions". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent subcommitteeon Investigations, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations, and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, on July 18. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "GAO found that the 27 agencies that responded to its survey use federal shared service providers (SSP) for a variety of services, including financial system hosting, general ledger accounting, financial reporting, and various Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) services.

Sixteen of the 27 SSP customer agencies reported that they experienced challenges associated with using an SSP, many of which affected the timeliness, completeness, or accuracy of agency DATA Act submissions. Ten of these agencies experienced challenges with depending on an SSP to take actions before the agency could proceed. Agencies responding to GAO's survey also reported other challenges, such as a lack of guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury), limited customer agency and SSP resources, SSP errors affecting data quality, and inadequate SSP project management activities. Twelve of these 16 agencies stated that they are taking steps to address these challenges--such as increasing communication with their SSPs, making technology improvements, and performing manual work-arounds to reconcile and correct data files. Nine agencies reported remaining additional steps, for example, correcting data errors and developing a reconciliation process and internal guidance on topics such as data quality plans. While agencies are primarily responsible for the quality of DATA Act submissions, five agencies also reported that their SSPs had taken similar steps to address identified challenges.

Twenty of the 27 agencies described useful practices for working with SSPs on DATA Act submissions, including the agency discussing issues with the SSP and obtaining data files from the SSP each month to provide additional time to correct any identified errors. Treasury officials stated prior to GAO's survey that they held workshops for SSPs in the early stages of DATA Act implementation and clarified guidance issued in June 2018 to specifically address their concerns and questions. After GAO's survey, in April 2019, OMB issued a memorandum on shared services that among other things described the process and desired outcomes for shared services and established a governance and accountability model for achieving them."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Over the past 2 decades, the federal government has undertaken efforts to save money and increase efficiencies by encouraging agencies to use administrative and operational services and processes that other federal and external parties provide, commonly referred to as shared services. The DATA Act was enacted to increase accountability and transparency and, among other things, establish government-wide data standards. Certain agencies have used shared services of federal SSPs to implement the act. The act also requires a series of oversight reports by agencies' Offices of Inspector General (OIG) and GAO. OIGs for five agencies have made recommendations related to agencies' use of SSPs for DATA Act services, and four agencies concurred with the recommendations.

The objectives of this report are to describe (1) the types and variations of services that federal SSPs provide to their financial management customer agencies to assist them with implementing the DATA Act and meeting the act's requirements and (2) the challenges federal SSPs and their financial management customer agencies have encountered in their efforts to ensure the quality of data submissions consistent with DATA Act standards and steps they have taken to address those challenges.

To address these objectives, GAO interviewed staff at four federal SSPs, OMB, and Treasury; reviewed selected agreements between the SSPs and their customer agencies; conducted a survey of customer agencies from December 2018 to January 2019; and analyzed the survey responses."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-537?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on IRS Information System Security Controls

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of Internal Revenue Service's corrective actions to address information system control. The report (GAO-19-474R) is titled "Management Report: Improvements Are Needed to Enhance the Internal Revenue Service's Information System Security Controls".

The report was sent to Charles P. Rettig, commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, on July 18. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "During its audit of the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financial ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of Internal Revenue Service's corrective actions to address information system control. The report (GAO-19-474R) is titled "Management Report: Improvements Are Needed to Enhance the Internal Revenue Service's Information System Security Controls". The report was sent to Charles P. Rettig, commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, on July 18. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "During its audit of the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financialstatements, GAO identified new deficiencies in information system security controls that along with unresolved control deficiencies from prior audits collectively represent a significant deficiency in the agency's internal control over financial reporting systems. Specifically, GAO identified 14 new deficiencies in information system security controls over certain IRS financial and tax processing systems that are relevant to internal control over financial reporting. Of the 14 new deficiencies, eight were related to access controls, four were related to configuration management, one was related to segregation of duties, and one was related to contingency planning. In a separately issued LIMITED OFFICIAL USE ONLY report, GAO communicated to IRS management detailed information regarding the 14 new information system security control deficiencies and made 20 recommendations to address them.

In addition, GAO found that as of September 30, 2018, IRS had completed corrective actions to address information system security control deficiencies associated with 46 of the 154 recommendations resulting from GAO's financial audits, and as a result, these recommendations were closed. GAO closed one additional recommendation that was no longer relevant because of changes in the agency's operating environment. In the LIMITED OFFICIAL USE ONLY report, GAO communicated to IRS management the status of previously reported recommendations as of September 30, 2018.

As a result, IRS has 127 GAO recommendations to address--the 107 remaining open recommendations from GAO's prior financial audits and the 20 new recommendations GAO made in the LIMITED OFFICIAL USE ONLY report. Until these new and continuing control deficiencies are fully addressed, IRS financial reporting and taxpayer data will remain unnecessarily vulnerable to inappropriate and undetected use, modification, or disclosure."

Why GAO Did This Study: "This report presents the new information system security control deficiencies identified during GAO's audit of IRS's fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financial statements based on its fiscal year 2018 testing of controls over certain IRS financial and tax processing systems relevant to internal control over financial reporting. This report also includes the results of GAO's fiscal year 2018 follow-up on the status of IRS's corrective actions to address information system control deficiencies and associated recommendations contained in GAO's prior years' reports that were open at the beginning of GAO's fiscal year 2018 audit."

What GAO Recommends: "In a separately issued LIMITED OFFICIAL USE ONLY report, GAO made 20 recommendations to address the 14 new information system security control deficiencies related to access controls, configuration management, segregation of duties, and contingency planning. In commenting on a draft of the separately issued LIMITED OFFICIAL USE ONLY report, IRS agreed with our recommendations and stated that it will ensure that its corrective actions include root cause analysis for sustainable fixes that implement appropriate security controls. GAO will evaluate the effectiveness of IRS's efforts to address these deficiencies during its audit of IRS's fiscal year 2019 financial statements."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-474R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nonimmigrant Investors

WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of State's and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' E-2 adjudication process. The report (GAO-19-547) is titled "Nonimmigrant Investors: Actions Needed to Improve E-2 Visa Adjudication and Fraud Coordination".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of State (State) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) annually adjudicated about ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of State's and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' E-2 adjudication process. The report (GAO-19-547) is titled "Nonimmigrant Investors: Actions Needed to Improve E-2 Visa Adjudication and Fraud Coordination". The report was sent to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, on July 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of State (State) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) annually adjudicated about54,000 visa applications or petitions from fiscal years 2014 through 2018 for foreign nationals seeking E-2 nonimmigrant status, over 80 percent of which were approved. About eighty percent of E-2 adjudications were for State visa applications, and the remaining 20 percent were for USCIS petitions to extend or change to E-2 status. Generally, about half of the foreign nationals seeking E-2 status were investors, managers, or essential employees of an E-2 business, and the other half were their spouses or children.

State and USCIS have guidance, procedures, and training intended to help consular and immigration officers ensure foreign nationals meet E-2 eligibility requirements; however, officials GAO interviewed from both agencies identified challenges in the E-2 adjudication process.

* State. Consular officers noted that E-2 visa adjudications are complicated and resource-intensive, often requiring more documentation and time to complete than other visas. For example, the requirement that the investment in the business be substantial does not prescribe a minimum capital amount. Rather, the investment must be large enough to support the likely success of the business, among other criteria. Consular officers at 10 of 14 posts GAO interviewed indicated that determining the investment's substantiality is difficult for newly encountered business types. Providing additional E-2 training or related resources would help ensure that consular officers and locally employed staff have the necessary knowledge and abilities to carry out their responsibilities.

* USCIS. Officials identified similar challenges with respect to E-2 adjudications. However, officials stated that colocating immigration officers who adjudicate E-2 petitions helps to mitigate the challenges because the officers can communicate with each other on how USCIS has typically adjudicated such cases.

State and USCIS have resources to address E-2 fraud, which includes submitting falsified documents or making false statements material to the adjudication; however, coordination on E-2 anti-fraud efforts is limited. State has anti-fraud efforts in place for all nonimmigrant visa types, but State officials stated that they consider E-2 visa fraud to be lower risk compared to other visas because the large amount of complex paperwork required for the E-2 visa discourages malicious actors. USCIS officials consider E-2 fraud to be a significant issue and have taken steps to identify fraud, such as using fraud assessment technology to determine if a business is financially viable and conducting site visits if fraud is suspected. Both State and USCIS collect information that could be useful to each other's anti-fraud efforts, but interagency coordination on E-2 fraud issues is ad hoc and relatively rare. For example, the main formal mechanism of coordination on E-2 visa issues--a quarterly teleconference--was cancelled 7 out of 8 times in fiscal years 2017 and 2018. Coordinating regularly on fraud issues, which is a best practice from GAO's Fraud Risk Framework, will help both entities to better identify emerging E-2 fraud trends and areas for potential resource sharing."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Foreign nationals from 82 countries may obtain E-2 nonimmigrant investor status in the United States. The E-2 nonimmigrant classification allows an eligible foreign national to be temporarily admitted to the United States to direct the operations of a business in which they have invested a substantial amount of capital, or to work in an approved position (e.g., manager or essential employee). To obtain E-2 status, a foreign national can apply through State for an E-2 visa abroad, or if already in the United States, by petitioning USCIS to extend or change to E-2 status.

GAO was asked to review State's and USCIS' E-2 adjudication process. This report addresses: (1) outcomes and characteristics of foreign nationals who sought or received E-2 status from fiscal years 2014 through 2018, (2) policies and procedures for ensuring that individuals meet E-2 eligibility requirements, and (3) efforts to assess and address potential E-2 fraud. GAO analyzed State and USCIS data on E-2 adjudications, generalizable samples of E-2 visa applications and petitions, and relevant documents. GAO interviewed officials at 14 State posts abroad, selected based on E-2 application volume and other factors, and observed E-2 adjudications at four of these posts and USCIS's California Service Center."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making five recommendations, including that State provide more E-2 training or resources to consular officers, and that State and USCIS establish a regular coordination mechanism to share information on E-2 fraud risks. State and USCIS concurred with all five recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-547?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on EPA Advisory Committees

WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to how the Environmental Protection Agency appoints advisory committee members. The report (GAO-19-280) is titled "EPA Advisory Committees: Improvements Needed for the Member Appointment Process".

The report was sent to Sen. Tom Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colorado, Sen. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to how the Environmental Protection Agency appoints advisory committee members. The report (GAO-19-280) is titled "EPA Advisory Committees: Improvements Needed for the Member Appointment Process". The report was sent to Sen. Tom Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colorado, Sen.Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Sen. Mazie K. Hirono, D-Hawaii, Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Massachusetts, Sen. Gary Peters, D-Michigan, Sen. Bernard Sanders, D-Vermont, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, on July 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Based on GAO's review of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance, the agency's established process for appointing advisory committee members involves three main phases: soliciting nominations, evaluating candidates, and obtaining approvals. Each phase involves several steps. For example, a key step for evaluating candidates involves EPA staff's preparing documents that reflect staff recommendations on the best qualified and most appropriate candidates for achieving balanced committee membership, according to EPA guidance.

EPA generally followed its established process for most of its 22 advisory committees; however, in fiscal year 2018, EPA did not follow a key step for appointing 20 committee members to two committees GAO reviewed: the EPA Science Advisory Board and Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which advise the agency on environmental regulatory matters, among other things. The 2018 appointment packets for these two committees did not contain documents reflecting EPA staff rationales for proposed membership, as called for by EPA's established process. EPA developed guidance to implement the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). By directing officials responsible for appointing committee members to follow a key step in its process to document staff rationales for proposed membership, the agency would have better assurance that it will (1) consistently meet FACA's purpose of encouraging uniform appointment procedures and (2) show how it made appointment decisions to achieve the best qualified and most appropriate candidates for balanced committee membership. EPA also did not consistently ensure that members appointed as special government employees (SGE)--who are expected to provide their best judgment free from conflicts of interest and are required by federal regulations to disclose their financial interests--met federal ethics requirements. For about 23 percent, or 17 of the 74 financial disclosure forms GAO reviewed, an ethics official had not signed and dated that the SGE filing the form was in compliance with federal ethics rules. EPA also did not periodically review its ethics program, as called for by federal regulations, such as through audits or spot-checks, to evaluate the quality of financial disclosure reviews for SGEs. Until EPA's Ethics Office evaluates the quality of financial disclosure reviews of SGEs as part of its periodic review of its ethics program, it will not have reasonable assurance that it will address noncompliance with federal ethics requirements and prevent conflicts of interest on its advisory committees.

Based on GAO's review of the U.S. General Services Administration's (GSA) FACA database, there were notable changes to selected characteristics of EPA advisory committees (i.e. at least a 20 percentage point difference in the change to a characteristic after January 2017 compared to the period after January 2009). Of the four characteristics GAO reviewed--committee composition, regional affiliation, membership turnover, and number of meetings committees held--one or more of the first three changed notably for four of 18 EPA advisory committees after January 2017."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal advisory committees provide advice to federal agencies on many topics. As of March 31, 2018, EPA managed 22 such committees. They advise the agency on such issues as developing regulations and managing research programs. Questions have been raised about EPA's process for appointing committee members after recent policy changes affecting who serves on the advisory committees.

GAO was asked to review issues related to how EPA appoints advisory committee members. This report examines: (1) EPA's process for appointing advisory committee members, (2) the extent to which EPA followed its process for selecting members from October 2016 through March 2018, and (3) how, if at all, selected characteristics of EPA advisory committees changed after January 2017. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance; reviewed documents from committees that appointed members over this period; analyzed information from the GSA's FACA database; and interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that EPA direct (1) officials responsible for appointing committee members to follow a key step in its appointment process to document staff rationales for proposed membership and (2) EPA's Ethics Office to evaluate the quality of financial disclosure reviews of SGEs appointed to advisory committees. EPA disagreed with the first and agreed with the second recommendation. GAO continues to believe that both are valid, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-280?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on K-12 Education Alternative Schools

WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on alternative schools. The report (GAO-19-373) is titled "K-12 Education: Certain Groups of Students Attend Alternative Schools in Greater Proportions Than They Do Other Schools".

The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House on Education and Labor Committee, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Certain groups of students are overrepresented at alternative schools--public schools with a disciplinary or academic focus that serve students ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on alternative schools. The report (GAO-19-373) is titled "K-12 Education: Certain Groups of Students Attend Alternative Schools in Greater Proportions Than They Do Other Schools". The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House on Education and Labor Committee, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Certain groups of students are overrepresented at alternative schools--public schools with a disciplinary or academic focus that serve studentswho have been expelled or suspended from school, or are at risk of educational failure--compared to their enrollment at nonalternative schools. Overall enrollment and discipline of students at these schools dropped between school years 2013-14 and 2015-16, according to GAO's analysis of Department of Education (Education) data. Declines in White and Hispanic student enrollment accounted for most of the drop. Some groups, such as Black boys and boys with disabilities, were overrepresented in alternative schools, particularly those with a discipline focus, compared to their enrollment at nonalternative schools (see figure). While overall discipline dropped for students at alternative schools, school arrests and referrals to law enforcement went up by 33 and 15 percent, respectively, for Black boys and girls between school years 2013-14 and 2015-16.

View figure athttps://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-373?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Alternative schools have some of the most vulnerable students, but lower percentages of alternative schools have various types of support staff than nonalternative schools. Compared to nonalternative schools in 2015-16, a lower percentage of alternative schools had social workers, nurses, and counselors--support staff who serve different roles in addressing the health, behavioral, and emotional needs of students. For example, 47 percent of nonalternative schools had at least one social worker, compared to 26 percent of alternative schools. In every district GAO visited, officials said students had experienced multiple types of trauma, such as gang violence, death of schoolmates or parents, poverty, or homelessness--consistent with research linking trauma with educational and behavioral challenges--and described various strategies they used to meet student needs despite their staffing challenges."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Students who attend public K-12 alternative schools may be at risk of educational failure for many reasons, including poor grades, disruptive behavior, mental health issues, and other life circumstances. Movement of students in and out of alternative schools can be fluid, with some students attending for a few days to a few years, and some cycling in and out of these schools repeatedly. Support staff, such as school psychologists and social workers, can play a role in supporting students' health, behavioral, and emotional needs.

GAO was asked to review alternative schools. This report examines what is known about enrollment, discipline, and support staff in alternative schools, among other objectives. GAO analyzed data on alternative schools for school years 2013-14 and 2015-16 from Education's Civil Rights Data Collection (most recent years available); visited selected school districts and alternative schools in Florida, Illinois, and Texas, selected for a mix of types (regular alternative, charter, and juvenile justice) and focuses (disciplinary or academic) of alternative schools; and interviewed federal officials.

In commenting on this report, Education expressed concern that GAO's analysis could confuse readers about whether race/ethnicity and other demographic variables are the cause of disproportionality or are simply correlated. GAO believes this concern is misplaced because the report clearly states that GAO's analysis is descriptive and does not imply causation or make inferences about disproportionality."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-373?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Medicare Synchronizing Medication Refills

WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the use of medication synchronization. The report (GAO-19-520) is titled "Medicare: Limited Information Exists on the Effects of Synchronizing Medication Refills".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the use of medication synchronization. The report (GAO-19-520) is titled "Medicare: Limited Information Exists on the Effects of Synchronizing Medication Refills". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas,ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on July 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Medication synchronization is a process whereby a pharmacist aligns the refill dates of two or more of a patient's medications to a single day (see figure below). GAO found that no comprehensive national data exist on the extent to which medication synchronization has been used or its potential effects. However, limited information suggests that the use of medication synchronization has increased in recent years and that it may have benefits. According to a study published in the American Journal of Managed Care that examined survey data on retail pharmacies, the number of pharmacies using medication synchronization increased from 3,324 in 2013 to 5,534 in 2014. Most of the studies that GAO identified found positive effects from medication synchronization, primarily on patients. For example, a 2018 study reported a 3 percent improvement in medication adherence among patients using medication synchronization than those who were not. Several stakeholders also identified potential limitations of using medication synchronization. For example, some patients may not be able to afford paying all the copayments for their medications at one time each month, and some patients prefer the social interaction of multiple trips to the pharmacy each month.

View figure athttps://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-520?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a regulation and some states enacted laws that may help support the use of medication synchronization. While CMS does not have a formal medication synchronization policy for Medicare, a CMS regulation allows for reduced beneficiary cost sharing (for example, a lower copayment) when the beneficiary receives less than a month's supply of a medication. Similar laws pertain to private health plans that provide prescription drug coverage for patients in the five states GAO selected--Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Texas, and Washington. Such measures support medication synchronization because initially aligning the refill dates of multiple medications may require one or more of these medications to be refilled with a quantity that is less than a month's supply. Officials from CMS and four of the selected pharmacies said that lowering the copayments for these refills reduces the financial burden on patients when they first have their medications synchronized. They noted that requiring full copayments for a shorter supply may have discouraged or prevented patients from using medication synchronization."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Medication adherence--that is, taking medications as prescribed--is important because not doing so increases the risk of hospitalization and can result in avoidable medical costs. According to some pharmacy industry groups, medication synchronization may help improve medication adherence, particularly for patients with multiple chronic conditions. More than 40 percent of Medicare beneficiaries had two or more chronic conditions in 2015.

Congress included a provision in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 for GAO to review and report on the use of medication synchronization. In this report, GAO examines (1) what is known about the use and potential effects of medication synchronization and (2) steps CMS and selected states have taken to support its use.

GAO identified and reviewed 22 peer-reviewed studies on medication synchronization. In addition, GAO interviewed CMS officials and 30 stakeholders to gather a wide range of perspectives on medication synchronization. Among others, GAO interviewed six selected pharmacies and two selected Medicare health plans. GAO also reviewed CMS regulations as well as medication synchronization laws from five selected states that vary by geographic region.

GAO provided a draft of this report to the Department of Health and Human Services, which provided technical comments. GAO incorporated these comments, as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-520?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Agricultural Lending

WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on agricultural credit services provided to socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. The report (GAO-19-539) is titled "Agricultural Lending: Information on Credit and Outreach to Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Is Limited".

The report was sent to Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Rep. Collin C. Peterson, D-Minnesota, chairman, Rep. K. Michael Conaway, R-Texas, ranking member of the House ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on agricultural credit services provided to socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. The report (GAO-19-539) is titled "Agricultural Lending: Information on Credit and Outreach to Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Is Limited". The report was sent to Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Rep. Collin C. Peterson, D-Minnesota, chairman, Rep. K. Michael Conaway, R-Texas, ranking member of the HouseAgriculture Committee, on July 11. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Information on the amount and types of agricultural credit to socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers (SDFR)--which the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines as members of certain racial and ethnic minority groups and women--is limited. Comprehensive data on SDFRs' outstanding agricultural debt are not available because regulations generally prohibit lenders from collecting data on the personal characteristics of applicants for loans other than certain mortgages. A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rulemaking pursuant to a provision in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that requires collection of such data in certain circumstances would modify this prohibition for certain loans, possibly including some agricultural loans. The bureau delayed the rulemaking in 2018 due to stated resource constraints and other priorities, but reported that it plans to resume work on the rule later in 2019. An annual USDA survey of farmers provides some insights into agricultural lending to SDFRs but, according to USDA, may underrepresent SDFRs compared to more inclusive estimates from the 2017 Census of Agriculture. In the 2015-2017 surveys, SDFRs represented an average of 17 percent of primary producers in the survey, but they accounted for 8 percent of outstanding total agricultural debt. Loans to purchase agricultural real estate accounted for most of SDFRs' outstanding debt (67 percent).

SDFRs reportedly face a number of challenges that hamper their ability to obtain private agricultural credit. According to SDFR advocacy groups, lending industry representatives, and federal officials, SDFRs are more likely to operate smaller, lower-revenue farms, have weaker credit histories, or lack clear title to their agricultural land, which can make it difficult for them to qualify for loans. SDFR advocacy groups also said some SFDRs face actual or perceived unfair treatment in lending or may be dissuaded from applying for credit because of past instances of alleged discrimination. Additionally, they noted that some SDFRs may not be fully aware of credit options and lending requirements, especially if they are recent immigrants or new to agriculture.

Private lenders and federal agencies conduct outreach to SDFRs, but the effectiveness of these efforts in increasing lending is unknown. For example, lenders have sponsored educational events targeted to SDFRs and translated marketing materials for non-English speakers. Farm Credit Administration regulations require Farm Credit System lenders to prepare marketing plans that include specific outreach actions for diversity and inclusion. The Farm Credit Administration examines these plans and indicated that it has prescribed corrective actions in some cases. However, the Farm Credit Administration does not require lenders to meet specific lending goals, and the regulatory data restrictions noted previously constrain the Farm Credit Administration's ability to assess the effect of outreach efforts. USDA conducts outreach to SDFRs and lenders about its loan programs and collects data on the personal characteristics of loan applicants. However, USDA officials said they face challenges evaluating the impact of their outreach efforts, in part because outreach participants are reluctant to provide their demographic information."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2017, there were about 2 million farm and ranch operations nationwide. Farmers and ranchers often require loans to buy agricultural real estate, make capital improvements, and purchase supplies and equipment. However, minorities and women comprise a disproportionately small share of agricultural producers, and certain minority groups have alleged discrimination in obtaining agricultural credit. Most agricultural lending is done by either commercial banks or the Farm Credit System, a network of lenders regulated by the Farm Credit Administration. USDA accounts for a small share of agricultural credit, but it makes direct loans and guarantees loans made by private lenders. USDA and Farm Credit System lenders have responsibilities to expand credit access.

Congress included a provision in statute for GAO to study agricultural credit services provided to SDFRs. USDA direct loans were outside the scope of GAO's review. This report examines (1) what is known about the amount and types of agricultural credit to SDFRs, (2) challenges SDFRs reportedly face in obtaining agricultural credit, and (3) outreach efforts to SDFRs regarding agricultural credit and related services.

GAO analyzed survey, census, and other USDA data; reviewed statutes and regulations governing collection of personal data on borrowers; and reviewed Farm Credit Administration and USDA documentation on outreach to SDFRs. GAO also interviewed SDFR advocacy groups, lending industry groups, and officials from the Farm Credit Administration, USDA, and the federal depository institution regulators."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-539?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Border Infrastructure

WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on land border crossing infrastructure. The report (GAO-19-534) is titled "Border Infrastructure: Actions Needed to Improve Information on Facilities and Capital Planning at Land Border Crossings".

The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Martha McSally, R-Arizona, and Rep. Filemon Vela, D-Texas, on July 11. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Customs and ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on land border crossing infrastructure. The report (GAO-19-534) is titled "Border Infrastructure: Actions Needed to Improve Information on Facilities and Capital Planning at Land Border Crossings". The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Martha McSally, R-Arizona, and Rep. Filemon Vela, D-Texas, on July 11. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Customs andBorder Protection (CBP) reported infrastructure constraints at land border crossings including limited inspection capacity, technology challenges, and security limitations. However, CBP does not have complete information on infrastructure conditions at all land border crossings. Specifically, CBP assessed facility conditions at four of the 40 land border crossings it owns from 2016 through 2018. Further, CBP has not developed a plan to ensure it conducts such assessments, consistent with DHS policy which calls for them every three years. Developing and implementing a plan to ensure CBP executes its facility condition assessment program would enable CBP to collect more complete and current infrastructure information. In addition, while CBP and the General Services Administration (GSA) both assess facility conditions at 101 GSA-owned land border crossings, they do not consistently share or use each other's information. Doing so could enable CBP and GSA to improve the accuracy and completeness of their respective assessments.

CBP prioritizes land border crossing capital projects in a five-year plan, which by statute is to be submitted with DHS's annual budget request to Congress. In fiscal years 2014 through 2018, CBP submitted two plans on time, submitted two plans more than 100 days after submission of the budget request, and did not submit a plan in one year due to delays in the plan's review and approval process. By establishing timeframes for the review process, CBP would be better positioned to identify and address sources of delay in the review process, and improve its ability to meet statutory reporting requirements by including its five-year plan with its annual budget submission to Congress.

The 10 completed or ongoing GSA land border crossing capital projects in fiscal years 2014 through 2018 generally experienced schedule growth ranging from 0 to 59 percent, but stayed within a 10 percent cost contingency allowance. Circumstances contributing to increased project costs or schedule growth include funding lags between project design and construction, and CBP-requested changes during construction to meet evolving mission needs, according to GSA and CBP officials."

Why GAO Did This Study: "CBP and GSA own, lease, or manage all of the nation's 167 land border crossings. CBP facilitates trade and travel at these crossings and has identified significant capital investment needs at these facilities.

GAO was asked to review land border crossing infrastructure. This report examines (1) infrastructure constraints CBP faces and the extent CBP and GSA have information on infrastructure condition, (2) the extent CBP prioritizes capital projects and (3) the extent recent GSA capital projects met cost, schedule, and scope goals and challenges CBP and GSA reported.

GAO analyzed land border crossing data and documentation, including CBP and GSA facility assessments, CBP capital investment plans for fiscal years 2014 through 2018, and data for GSA capital infrastructure projects active during those years. GAO also interviewed officials from CBP field offices that oversee all crossings about infrastructure constraints and visited 16 crossings selected based on high traffic volume and border crossings CBP has prioritized for infrastructure improvement."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations, including that CBP develop a plan to ensure it conducts facility condition assessments consistent with DHS policy; that CBP and GSA share and use each other's information on facility conditions at land border crossings; and that CBP establish review timeframes for its capital investment plan."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-534?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Acquisitions

WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Department of Defense implements acquisition-related National Defense Authorization Act provisions in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement and communicates with stakeholders throughout that process. The report (GAO-19-489) is titled "Defense Acquisitions: DOD Needs to Improve How It Communicates the Status of Regulation Changes".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Department of Defense implements acquisition-related National Defense Authorization Act provisions in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement and communicates with stakeholders throughout that process. The report (GAO-19-489) is titled "Defense Acquisitions: DOD Needs to Improve How It Communicates the Status of Regulation Changes". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. RichardShelby, R-Louisiana, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on July 11. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The staff of the Defense Acquisition Regulations System are responsible for making changes in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS)--the Department of Defense's (DOD) regulation augmenting the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which guides government purchases of products and services. They begin their process by first tracking legislation that may affect acquisition regulations before Congress enacts the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). After enactment, they identify which provisions to implement through regulatory changes and which to implement through other means. In certain circumstances, rather than change the DFARS, DOD can issue a class deviation, which allows its buying organizations to temporarily diverge from the acquisition regulations. The figure below shows the primary means DOD uses to implement NDAA provisions, and the mechanisms DOD uses to make information on the status of any changes available to the public and others.

Department of Defense's (DOD) Methods to Implement and Report on Actions Taken on National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Provisions

View figure athttps://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-489?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD does not have a mechanism to clearly communicate to Congress, industry, and other interested parties the status of regulatory or other changes based on NDAA provisions. Using only publicly-available reports and information, it is difficult for an interested party to find the implementation status of any given acquisition-related NDAA provision. This is because no single DOD source communicates the status of regulatory or other changes in a manner that links the changes to specific NDAA provisions. As a result, interested parties are not always aware of what provisions have been implemented and when. This information is important for congressional oversight and to industry for planning and compliance purposes. Federal internal control standards state that management should address the communication expectations of external users.

GAO found that DOD has taken action to address 180 acquisition-related provisions since 2010. On average, implementation was completed within 1 year from enactment. Some complicated provisions took more than 2 years to implement. For example, a fiscal year 2016 NDAA provision, directing a regulatory change for commercial item procurements, took more than 2 years to implement because DOD was reconciling a prior year's related but different NDAA commercial item provision into one DFARS change."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Congress has pursued acquisition reforms to make DOD's acquisition process more efficient and timely. Some statutes have directed DOD to revise or consider revising its acquisition regulations.

The House Armed Services Committee's report accompanying the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2019 included a provision for GAO to review DOD's regulatory implementation of acquisition-related provisions in the NDAAs from fiscal years 2010 through 2018. This report (1) determines how DOD implements acquisition-related NDAA provisions in the DFARS and communicates with stakeholders throughout that process, and (2) identifies the status of implementation of provisions enacted in the specified NDAAs.

To conduct this work, GAO reviewed DOD documents and interviewed DOD officials regarding the process for implementing acquisition-related NDAA provisions. GAO also analyzed DOD's data and reports on the implementation status of provisions enacted in NDAAs for fiscal years 2010 through 2018. GAO selected 12 of these provisions as case studies based on factors such as year enacted and time taken for implementation to obtain a mix of older and newer provisions, and shorter and longer implementation timeframes."

What GAO Recommends: "DOD should develop a mechanism to better communicate the implementation status of acquisition-related NDAA provisions, particularly those that direct a change or consideration of a change to the DFARS. DOD concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-489?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Retirement Security

WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the trends in corporate restructuring. The report the trends in corporate restructuring is titled "Retirement Security: Trends in Corporate Restructurings and Implications for Employee Pensions".

The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House on Education and Labor Committee , on July 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Over the past 20 years, corporate restructurings, particularly mergers and acquisitions (M&A) tended to happen more frequently ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the trends in corporate restructuring. The report the trends in corporate restructuring is titled "Retirement Security: Trends in Corporate Restructurings and Implications for Employee Pensions". The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House on Education and Labor Committee , on July 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Over the past 20 years, corporate restructurings, particularly mergers and acquisitions (M&A) tended to happen more frequentlyduring periods of economic expansion. GAO's analysis found that from 1999 through 2018, M&A activity comprised the largest share of corporate restructurings. In terms of dollar value of completed deals, M&A activity experienced relative peaks in 2000, 2007, 2015-2016, and 2018. The number of M&A deals followed a similar trend. Further, GAO found that company takeovers comprised the largest share of completed M&A activity during the time period, and many completed deals included private equity involvement, that is generally a transaction involving equity capital not quoted on a public exchange.

Since 2009, M&A deals, on average, have tended to be completed in shorter time frames. In contrast, large bankruptcies--those $305 million or more in 2018 dollars--occurred during periods of economic distress and peaked during the two most recent recessions.

The effects of corporate restructuring on retirement plans are generally unclear. Limited data make it difficult to understand or determine the effects, if any, of corporate restructurings on pension benefits. Two key sources of data we analyzed, the Bloomberg Terminal and the UCLA LoPucki Bankruptcy Research Database, may not contain the full array of restructuring events and do not include data or other key information on pension plans. In addition, pension benefit changes may be made with or without regard to any underlying restructuring event and such restructurings could result in business and economic efficiencies. One expert stated that, as with corporate restructuring events, the acquiring firm will often harmonize their benefits so the target firm's benefits are made similar to the acquiring firm. Thus, some employees could obtain access to another company's pension and benefit programs. Other experts told GAO that a restructuring may prompt a company to re-think its employee benefit structures. Moreover, a few experts said there is less time for some stakeholders, including employees and retirees, to determine how the restructuring will impact their pension plan. As a consequence, these experts said affected stakeholders, including retirees and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation may be excluded from certain negotiations.

As noted in previous GAO work, bankruptcy transactions may have adverse effects for employees as bankruptcy can be a contentious process where stakeholders compete for assets that are often diminishing in size. On average, firms that emerge from bankruptcy do so with over one-quarter fewer employees than they had prior to filing for bankruptcy."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Participants' retirement benefits are often dependent on the financial well-being of their employers. Employers offer pensions on a voluntary basis, and may decide to freeze or terminate a defined benefit plan at any time for financial and non-financial reasons. For defined contribution (DC) plans, such as employer-sponsored 401(k) plans, financial difficulties could also diminish an employer's ability to make employer contributions. Recent examples of corporate restructurings, such as M&A or bankruptcy restructurings, show they can result in a change or elimination of retirement benefits thus affecting the financial wellbeing of workers and retirees.

GAO was asked to describe the trends in corporate restructuring over the last 20 years, and what is known about the effects, if any, they have on pension benefits for employees and retirees. This report provides information on the trends in corporate restructuring--in particular, M&A activity--since 1999, and the implications for such events on employee and retiree pension benefits. To conduct this work, we obtained and analyzed available data; interviewed agency officials as well as pension and corporate restructuring experts; and reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations.

GAO is not making recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-447R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Drug Control

WASHINGTON, July 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the structure of the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security joint task forces in combating the flow of illicit drugs. The report (GAO-19-441) is titled "Drug Control: Certain DOD and DHS Joint Task Forces Should Enhance Their Performance Measures to Better Assess Counterdrug Activities".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, and Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, on July ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the structure of the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security joint task forces in combating the flow of illicit drugs. The report (GAO-19-441) is titled "Drug Control: Certain DOD and DHS Joint Task Forces Should Enhance Their Performance Measures to Better Assess Counterdrug Activities". The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, and Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, on July9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Many federal agencies are involved in efforts to reduce the availability of illicit drugs by countering the flow of such drugs into the United States. Among them are the Department of Defense (DOD), which has lead responsibility for detecting and monitoring illicit drug trafficking into the country, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is responsible for securing U.S. borders to prevent illegal activity. DOD and DHS lead and operate task forces--Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF)-South, JIATF-West, and three DHS Joint Task Forces (JTF)--to coordinate and conduct counterdrug missions and activities. Task force officials reported that the task forces coordinated effectively with each other when they had shared purposes and overlapping or shared geographical boundaries (see map). The task forces also used coordination mechanisms that align with best practices, such as working groups and liaison officers, to minimize duplication of their missions and activities.

View map at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-441?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Each of the five task forces GAO reviewed has performance measures, but only JIATF-South uses output (e.g., number of detected smuggling events) and outcome-based measures to assess the effectiveness of its activities. Specifically, JIATF-South developed an outcome-based measure of its overall effectiveness: the percentage of smuggling events it detected and provided to law enforcement that resulted in disrupted or seized illicit drugs. JIATF-West evaluates its numerous initiatives and activities, for instance, by determining if they were executed as planned, but has not established a vital few performance measures that consistently convey the overall effectiveness of its activities. Lastly, the DHS JTFs' performance measures are not outcome-based and do not fully assess the effectiveness of the task forces' activities. Enhancing their measures would better position JIATF-West and the JTFs to demonstrate contributions and convey trends in the overall effectiveness of their activities."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The U.S. government has identified illicit drugs, as well as the criminal organizations that traffic them, as significant threats to the United States. In 2017, over 70,000 people died from drug overdoses, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. DOD and DHS created joint task forces to help facilitate and strengthen interagency efforts in combating the flow of illicit drugs, particularly in the maritime domain.

GAO was asked to review the structure of these task forces and their ability to coordinate and conduct missions effectively. Among other objectives, this report (1) assesses the extent to which the task forces coordinate effectively to minimize duplication, and (2) examines how the task forces measure the effectiveness of their missions and activities. GAO reviewed and assessed documentation on the task forces' missions, coordination efforts, and performance assessments and compared them to best practices from prior work, departmental guidance, and federal internal control standards. GAO also met with task force officials to discuss and observe planning and coordination activities."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations, including that JIATF-West establish a vital few, consistent performance measures for its overall performance; and that DHS develop outcome-based performance measures for the JTFs' activities. DOD and DHS concurred with the three recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-441?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Dam Safety

WASHINGTON, July 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Army Corps of Engineers' decisions regarding cost sharing with irrigation districts for the repair project at the Harlan County Dam. The report (GAO-19-593R) is titled "Dam Safety: Army Corps' Decisions about and Status of Repayment for Harlan County Dam Repairs".

The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 10 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Army Corps of Engineers' decisions regarding cost sharing with irrigation districts for the repair project at the Harlan County Dam. The report (GAO-19-593R) is titled "Dam Safety: Army Corps' Decisions about and Status of Repayment for Harlan County Dam Repairs". The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, rankingmember of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, chairman, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on July 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In January 2019, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) decided to apply a formerly unused provision in law to lower the share of costs of repairing the Harlan County Dam to be paid by irrigation districts that benefit from the dam. The repair project involved addressing a design deficiency with the dam's "Tainter gates"--a commonly used type of gate to control the flow of water over the dam. In initial planning for the major repair project in 2012, the Corps determined that the irrigation districts were to pay their full share of costs for these repairs--that is, the same share of costs the districts pay for routine operations and maintenance costs. Although the repairs to the Tainter gates were needed to meet updated design standards and address safety concerns, the Corps had initially followed long-standing policy to not use a provision--called the state-of-the-art provision--that lowers a user's share of costs when repairs are needed to meet updated design or construction criteria deemed necessary for safe operation of the dam. However, GAO recommended in December 2015 and a provision in law subsequently required that the Corps clarify policy guidance on when the state-of-the-art provision might apply. Since then, the Corps and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works had been contemplating changes to the policy and, in January 2019, decided to apply this provision for the first time to the portion of the major repairs needed to address changes in design criteria for Tainter gates at the Harlan County Dam. More broadly, in March 2019, the Corps began implementing a new policy that allows for use of the state-of-the-art provision across its dam portfolio.

The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the agency responsible for managing contracts with irrigation districts at the Corps' dams in western states, executed repayment contracts in 2016 with the two irrigation districts that use water from the Harlan County Dam, and the irrigation districts began making payments that year. The existing repayment contracts allow the irrigation districts to pay their full cost share for the roughly $30 million major repair project with interest over 50 years. Following the January 2019 decision, the Corps reexamined the project's costs and concluded that a majority of these costs was attributable to work covered by the state-of-the-art provision and thus subject to a lower cost share. Overall, with this decision, the irrigation districts' repayment obligation is expected to be reduced to approximately $2.1 million, which is about half of the original amount owed. Reclamation is taking steps to update contracts given these changes; these steps include amending existing contracts to reflect the lower amount owed for repairs not subject to the lower cost share and executing new contracts for costs to be repaid at the lower cost share. Completing these contract actions will take several months, according to Reclamation officials."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Corps operates over 700 dams that provide a wide range of benefits such as flood control and irrigation. In Nebraska, the Corps operates the Harlan County Dam, which is a source of water used by two irrigation districts. The irrigation districts are responsible for paying a share of costs incurred by the Corps to operate and maintain as well as make major repairs to the dam. In 2018, the Corps completed a roughly $30 million major repair project of this dam's Tainter gates out of concern that they might fail due to a deficient design. For this major repair project and others, some users of dams have raised questions about how the Corps determines what share of costs the users have to pay.

The America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 included a provision for GAO to review the Tainter gate repair project at the Harlan County Dam. This report examines, among other things, (1) the Corps' decisions regarding cost sharing with irrigation districts for the repair project at the Harlan County Dam and (2) the status of irrigation districts' repayment for their share of costs for the repair project.

To address these objectives, GAO examined the Corps' policy documents and reports, reviewed repayment contracts for the repair project managed by Reclamation, and interviewed Corps and Reclamation officials.

GAO is not making recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-593R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Individual Retirement Accounts

WASHINGTON, July 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service collaborate on oversight of prohibited transaction rules for individual retirement accounts. The report (GAO-19-495) is titled "Individual Retirement Accounts: Formalizing Labor's and IRS's Collaborative Efforts Could Strengthen Oversight of Prohibited Transactions".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service collaborate on oversight of prohibited transaction rules for individual retirement accounts. The report (GAO-19-495) is titled "Individual Retirement Accounts: Formalizing Labor's and IRS's Collaborative Efforts Could Strengthen Oversight of Prohibited Transactions". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. WhatGAO Found: "The Department of Labor (DOL) has a process to grant administrative exemptions for individual retirement account (IRA) transactions that would otherwise be prohibited by law, such as an IRA buying investment property from the IRA owner. DOL evaluates applications using statutory criteria and follows administrative procedures codified in regulations. Applications for proposed transactions that are substantially similar to certain other transactions previously granted exemptions may follow an expedited process.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-495?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

As shown in the figure, GAO found that roughly half (56) of the IRA prohibited transaction exemption applications it reviewed were withdrawn by the applicant before the review process was completed. In reviewing processed applications, GAO found that most of the prohibited transactions for which an exemption was sought involved the sale of IRA assets. With regard to DOL's application review process, GAO found that DOL has not sufficiently documented internal policies and procedures to help ensure effective internal control of its process. Documenting procedures could increase transparency about how applications are handled, reduce the risk of DOL employees carrying out their duties inconsistently, and provide a means to retain organizational knowledge should key personnel leave unexpectedly.

Although DOL and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) share some information as part of their oversight responsibility for prohibited IRA transactions, no formal mechanism exists to help guide collaboration between the agencies. Of the 124 IRA applications GAO reviewed, only eight reflected DOL contact with IRS. GAO found that DOL has information about requested exemptions to prohibited IRA transaction rules that could be useful to IRS in carrying out its oversight responsibilities. For example, DOL does not share information on denials--information that could be useful as prohibited transaction examples for IRS examiner training and educational outreach to IRA owners. In prior work on interagency collaboration, GAO has found that formal agreements, such as a memorandum of understanding, can help agencies monitor, evaluate, and update interagency collaboration. Formalizing the sharing of information between DOL and IRS regarding IRA prohibited transaction exemptions could help the agencies better support their current coordination efforts and identify additional opportunities for greater collaboration."

Why GAO Did This Study: "IRA owners are able to invest in a wide variety of assets, but they are prohibited from engaging in certain transactions involving IRA assets. IRA owners who engage in prohibited transactions may incur increased income tax liability, additional taxes, and the loss of the tax-advantaged status of their accounts. DOL can grant exemptions from the prohibited transaction rules. IRS enforces tax laws relating to IRAs and can assess additional taxes.

GAO was asked to examine (1) DOL's process for granting exemptions for prohibited IRA transactions and outcomes of that process, and (2) the extent to which DOL and IRS collaborate on oversight of prohibited transaction rules for IRAs. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations; examined agency guidance, exemption process documentation, and application case files; assessed interagency coordination using internal control standards and prior work on interagency collaboration; and interviewed DOL and IRS officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that DOL and IRS establish a formal means--such as a memorandum of understanding or other mechanism--to collaborate on oversight of prohibited IRA transaction exemptions. GAO is also recommending that DOL document policies and procedures for managing the exemptions process. DOL and IRS generally agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-495?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Construction

WASHINGTON, July 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal construction contract change processes and timeframes. The report (GAO-19-500) is titled "Federal Construction: Army Corps of Engineers and GSA Need to Improve Data on Contract Changes".

The report was sent to Rep. Nydia M. Velazquez, D-New York, chairwoman, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Small Business Committee, and Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Florida, on July 2. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Multiple factors affect the time it takes to ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 3 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal construction contract change processes and timeframes. The report (GAO-19-500) is titled "Federal Construction: Army Corps of Engineers and GSA Need to Improve Data on Contract Changes". The report was sent to Rep. Nydia M. Velazquez, D-New York, chairwoman, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Small Business Committee, and Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Florida, on July 2. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Multiple factors affect the time it takes tofinalize a construction contract change. For example, preparing cost estimates can be time consuming, particularly for complex changes. Yet the time may be used to help ensure the government has adequate cost data to inform negotiations. In addition, according to agency officials, miscommunication during the contract change process--which can lead to problems such as unauthorized work undertaken by the contractor--can result in additional reviews and longer time frames. According to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) data, most of its construction contract changes are finalized within 60 days. Some take much longer, however (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-500?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Agency officials and industry representatives agreed that perceptions differ about the length of the contract change process. For example, because a change can impact the contractor's cost and schedule immediately, the contractor typically perceives that the process starts earlier--and lasts longer--than the government does.

Neither GSA nor USACE regularly monitors how long it takes to finalize construction contract changes, limiting management's ability to identify and respond to problems. Internal controls require agencies to collect and use quality data for management purposes such as monitoring agency activities. GSA systems do not collect data that permit analysis of contract change timeframes at the headquarters level. USACE systems produce contract change data for its districts, but data consolidation and calculations must be done manually and are not done regularly. Neither agency has a strategy in place to address these issues. Without regular review of these timeframes, USACE and GSA contracting officials may be unaware of any existing or potential problems, such as long process times that may affect project schedules. In addition, these data system limitations are likely to create difficulties for agencies when providing the information required by new legislation."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In fiscal year 2018, federal agencies spent more than $36 billion on construction contracts, with more than 45 percent going to small business. Typically, construction projects involve some degree of change as the project progresses. Some federal construction contractors have raised concerns that delays in processing contract changes and making payments creates challenges, particularly for small businesses. Section 855 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 requires agencies to report information related to how quickly they finalize contract changes.

GAO was asked to review federal construction contract change processes and timeframes. GAO (1) identified factors that affect the time it takes to finalize contract changes, and (2) assessed the extent to which selected agencies monitor time frames for finalizing contract changes. GAO reviewed relevant regulations and agency policies, analyzed available data, and interviewed officials from GSA's Public Buildings Service and USACE--two agencies with large amounts of obligations on construction--and two industry associations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making two recommendations: that GSA's Public Buildings Service and USACE each develop a strategy to routinely collect information on and monitor time frames for construction contract changes at the headquarters level. Both agencies concurred with our recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-500?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Oil, Gas Royalties

WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Office of Natural Resources Revenue's federal oil and gas royalty compliance efforts. The report (GAO-19-410) is titled "Federal Oil and Gas Royalties: Additional Actions Could Improve ONRR's Ability to Assess Its Royalty Collection Efforts".

The report was sent to Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, and Rep. Alan Lowenthal, D-California, chairman of the House Natural Resources subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, on May 31. Here are excerpts of summaries ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Office of Natural Resources Revenue's federal oil and gas royalty compliance efforts. The report (GAO-19-410) is titled "Federal Oil and Gas Royalties: Additional Actions Could Improve ONRR's Ability to Assess Its Royalty Collection Efforts". The report was sent to Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, and Rep. Alan Lowenthal, D-California, chairman of the House Natural Resources subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, on May 31. Here are excerpts of summariesassociated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of the Interior's (Interior) Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) reported that it met its annual performance goals for its royalty compliance program in 6 of the 8 years from fiscal years 2010 through 2017. Under this program, ONRR conducts three levels of compliance activities--audits, compliance reviews, and data mining--to help ensure that oil and gas royalty payments submitted by companies that produce oil and gas from federal leases are accurate and comply with federal laws and regulations (see figure). Specifically, GAO's analysis of Interior's annual budget justifications for fiscal years 2010 through 2017 found that ONRR reported meeting its compliance goals for 6 of the 8 fiscal years. According to ONRR officials, ONRR did not report meeting its compliance goals for 2 years because of a shift in the agency's goals that created a short-term misalignment of planned work and available resources. ONRR's fiscal year 2017 goals for its compliance program were (1) to obtain a return of $2 of additional royalties for every dollar spent on compliance activities and (2) to collect a defined amount of additional royalties. ONRR's compliance goals generally aligned with the agency's requirement that resources should not be expended without an expected return. However, these goals may not align with the agency's mission to collect, account for, and verify royalty payments and other statutory requirements because the goals do not address accuracy--or the extent to which its compliance work is covering, for example, royalty payments. By establishing a goal that addresses accuracy, for example, by covering a portion of royalty payments with its compliance activities, ONRR could increase the extent to which it had reasonable assurance that its compliance program is fully accounting for federal oil and gas royalty payments."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-410?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "Royalties paid on the sale of oil and gas extracted from leased federal lands and waters are a significant source of revenue for the federal government. However, Interior has faced challenges verifying the accuracy of royalty payments. In the 2000s, GAO issued reports highlighting weaknesses in Interior's royalty compliance program. In 2011, GAO added Interior's management of federal oil and gas resources to its High-Risk List, in part because its work showed Interior did not have assurance that it was collecting its share of revenue from oil and gas produced on federal leases. Interior has taken steps to operate more effectively.

GAO was asked to examine ONRR's federal oil and gas royalty compliance efforts. This report examines, among other objectives, the extent to which ONRR reported meeting its compliance goals for fiscal years 2010 through 2017, the most recent data available. GAO reviewed relevant laws, regulations, agency guidance, and Interior's annual performance plan and report and annual budget justifications for the period; analyzed ONRR compliance data for the period; and interviewed ONRR officials and state auditors who conducted work in coordination with ONRR."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations, including that ONRR establish an accuracy goal that addresses coverage that aligns with its mission. Interior concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-410?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Health Centers

WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the sources and amounts of health center revenue. The report (GAO-19-496) is titled "Health Centers: Trends in Revenue and Grants Supported by the Community Health Center Fund".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Health centers' revenue more than doubled from calendar years 2010 through 2017, from $12.7 billion to $26.3 ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the sources and amounts of health center revenue. The report (GAO-19-496) is titled "Health Centers: Trends in Revenue and Grants Supported by the Community Health Center Fund". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Health centers' revenue more than doubled from calendar years 2010 through 2017, from $12.7 billion to $26.3billion. Health centers' revenue comes from a variety of sources, including reimbursements from Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance, and federal and state grants. While total health center revenue increased from 2010 through 2017, the share of revenue from each source changed in different ways. In particular, revenue from federal and state grants decreased from 38.0 percent of total revenue in 2010 to about 30.2 percent of total revenue in 2017 while reimbursements from Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance increased. Over the same time period, the number of health centers increased from 1,124 centers in 2010 to 1,373 centers in 2017. In addition, the number of patients served over the same time period increased by 7.7 million patients, from 19.5 million to 27.2 million.

GAO's analysis of Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) data shows that from fiscal years 2011 through 2017, health centers received approximately $15.8 billion in federal grants funded by the Community Health Center Fund (CHCF), which was established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010. Of this total amount, 79.7 percent--or $12.6 billion--was awarded for the purpose of maintaining operations at existing health centers (see figure). According to HRSA officials, these CHCF grants are used to fill the gap between what it costs to operate a health center and the amount of revenue a health center receives. As such, officials explained, the awards are a primary means through which health centers provide health care services that may be uncompensated, including services for uninsured patients or services not typically reimbursed by other payers, such as adult dental care. The remaining $3.2 billion in CHCF grants were made to increase the amount of services provided at existing health centers; increase the number of health centers and sites; and other special initiatives, such as implementing health information technology."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-496?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2017, nearly 1,400 health centers provided care to more than 27 million people, regardless of their ability to pay. Health centers were established to increase the availability of primary and preventive health services for low-income people living in medically underserved areas. Health centers rely on revenue from a variety of public and private sources, including revenue from CHCF grants. HRSA began awarding grants funded by the CHCF in fiscal year 2011.

GAO was asked to review the sources and amounts of health center revenue. This report describes (1) trends in health centers' revenue and (2) the purposes for which CHCF grants have been awarded.

GAO analyzed HRSA data collected from health centers and compiled in its Uniform Data System to identify the sources and amounts of revenue health centers received from 2010 through 2017, the most recent data at the time of GAO's analysis. GAO also reviewed HRSA grant documentation for grants funded by the CHCF for fiscal years 2011-2017--the most recent data at the time of GAO's analysis--including information on the award amount and purpose of the grant, and reviewed published studies that described the purposes for which CHCF grants have been made. Additionally, GAO interviewed HRSA officials, authors of the published studies, and an association representing health centers.

GAO provided a draft of this report to HHS. HHS provided technical comments, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-496?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Rail Safety

WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the safety and other impacts of longer freight trains. The report (GAO-19-443) is titled "Rail Safety: Freight Trains Are Getting Longer, and Additional Information Is Needed to Assess Their Impact".

The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Daniel Lipinski, D-Illinois, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, Rep. Andre Carson, D-Indiana, Rep. Jim Cooper, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 2 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the safety and other impacts of longer freight trains. The report (GAO-19-443) is titled "Rail Safety: Freight Trains Are Getting Longer, and Additional Information Is Needed to Assess Their Impact". The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Daniel Lipinski, D-Illinois, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, Rep. Andre Carson, D-Indiana, Rep. Jim Cooper,D-Tennessee, and Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Freight train length has increased in recent years, according to all seven Class I freight railroads. Data on train length are not publicly available; however data provided to GAO by two Class I railroads indicated that their average train length has increased by about 25 percent since 2008, with average lengths of 1.2 and 1.4 miles in 2017. Officials from all seven Class I railroads said they are currently operating longer than average trains on specific routes, although some said such trains are a small percentage of the trains they operate. One railroad said it runs a 3-mile-long train twice weekly. Officials identified increased efficiencies and economic benefits among the advantages of longer freight trains.

Stakeholders said that the arrangement of train cars and locomotives--known as "train makeup"--and the potential for blocking highway-railroad crossings are issues to consider to safely operate longer freight trains. To prevent derailment, stakeholders said it is important that longer trains are arranged appropriately and that crews are trained to operate them. While Class I railroads and others said that longer trains may decrease the frequency of blocked crossings, some state and local officials said these trains can prolong their duration, posing challenges for emergency responders unable to cross the tracks.

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is studying the safety risks of and strategies for operating longer trains. As part of the study, FRA plans to analyze train-handling and braking capabilities under varying conditions. FRA officials said they plan to share their research results with relevant stakeholders; however, FRA currently has no documented strategy for sharing the results of its research. FRA officials are also analyzing which parts of the country are reporting frequently blocked crossings. However, FRA officials said they do not plan to use information from either of these efforts to determine whether longer freight trains might contribute to increases in blocked crossings, and the officials believe the issues are unrelated. Developing and implementing a strategy for sharing FRA's research results and identifying any potential impacts of longer freight trains on highway-railroad crossings would enable FRA and stakeholders to better determine what, if any, actions are needed to ensure the safe operation of longer freight trains."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2017, the U.S. freight rail system moved over 1.5-billion tons of goods. The largest freight railroads--Class Is--dominate the industry and account for more than 90 percent of its annual revenue. In recent years, railroad workers and local communities have expressed safety concerns related to longer freight trains, and recent accidents involving such trains are currently under investigation by FRA. FRA does not currently place limits on freight train length.

GAO was asked to review the safety and other impacts of longer freight trains. This report examines: (1) changes in freight train length over time, (2) safety considerations for operating longer freight trains, and (3) the extent to which FRA is assessing any safety risks. GAO reviewed relevant statutes, regulations, and federal agencies' reports and plans; analyzed available data on freight train length from railroads; and interviewed federal officials and various stakeholders, including state and local officials and first responders from five states (selected to represent different railroads and regions), and officials from the railroad industry, unions, and advocacy groups."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that FRA develop and implement a strategy to share the results of its study on longer trains and work with railroads to engage state and local governments to identify and reduce impacts of longer freight trains on highway-railroad crossings. FRA concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-443?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Business Transformation

WASHINGTON, June 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the cross-enterprise activities of inspector general offices within the Department of Defense. The report (GAO-19-559R) is titled "Defense Business Transformation: Cross-Enterprise Activities of Selected DOD Inspector General Offices".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the cross-enterprise activities of inspector general offices within the Department of Defense. The report (GAO-19-559R) is titled "Defense Business Transformation: Cross-Enterprise Activities of Selected DOD Inspector General Offices". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee,on June 28. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Within the Department of Defense (DOD) and its components, such as military departments, combatant commands, defense agencies, and field activities, more than 30 inspector general (IG) offices have been established to provide oversight and assistance through audits, inspections, investigations, and evaluations. GAO did not identify significant examples of fragmentation, overlap, or duplication in selected cross-enterprise activities (human resources, contracting, and public affairs) conducted by the selected DOD IG offices that GAO reviewed. To accomplish the selected cross-enterprise activities, the DOD Office of Inspector General (OIG) uses its own resources or DOD-wide shared services, and the remaining IG offices that GAO reviewed use their DOD components' resources or DOD-wide shared services. Specifically, GAO found that other than DOD OIG, the remaining selected IG offices did not use their own resources to perform cross-enterprise activities because of their limited budget authority and independence from the DOD components in which they were established and their relative size. Based on those factors, GAO found that it is reasonable for the majority of the selected IG offices to accomplish cross-enterprise activities through the use of their DOD components' resources.

In prior work, GAO identified opportunities to reduce or better manage potential fragmentation, overlap, or duplication related to cross-enterprise activities within DOD and its components. While this prior work was not related to the selected IG offices, the recommendations that GAO made would be relevant to IG office activities. GAO has seven open recommendations in this area. Although GAO did not identify any significant examples of fragmentation, overlap, or duplication in the selected IG offices, as DOD works to address these recommendations, its efforts might also reduce or better manage any potential fragmentation, overlap, or duplication affecting the cross-enterprise activities of the IG offices.

GAO provided a draft of this report to DOD for review and comment. DOD informed GAO that it had no comments on the report."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, enacted in August 2018, includes a provision for GAO to review the cross-enterprise activities of IG offices within DOD. The cross-enterprise activities included in the provision were public affairs, human resources, services contracting, other contracting, and any other cross-enterprise activities that GAO deemed appropriate. GAO was to identify opportunities to maximize efficiency and minimize duplication of effort--including through reduction or elimination of duplicative functions--and any matters considered appropriate.

This report (1) examines selected cross-enterprise activities for selected DOD IG offices and determines whether significant examples of fragmentation, overlap, or duplication exist and (2) determines what opportunities, if any, exist to reduce or better manage any fragmentation, overlap, or duplication associated with the selected cross-enterprise activities of DOD IG offices GAO reviewed.

GAO selected six IG offices to review, including the DOD OIG and IG offices of the Department of the Navy, U.S. Southern Command, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Contract Management Agency, and Defense Media Activity. The cross-enterprise activities GAO reviewed were human resources, contracting (services and other contracting), and public affairs. Within human resources, GAO specifically focused on payroll (e.g., time and attendance systems, personnel actions, and payroll processing), hiring, training, and performance management. GAO reviewed DOD guidance, interviewed IG officials and officials from DOD's Office of the Chief Management Officer, and analyzed documentation describing how the selected DOD IG offices accomplish the selected cross-enterprise activities."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-559R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on U.S. Territories

WASHINGTON, June 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. territories public debt outlook. The report (GAO-19-525) is titled "U.S. Territories: Public Debt Outlook - 2019 Update".

The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, chairman, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, on June 28. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Puerto ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. territories public debt outlook. The report (GAO-19-525) is titled "U.S. Territories: Public Debt Outlook - 2019 Update". The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, chairman, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, on June 28. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "PuertoRico: Puerto Rico has finalized two out of six total debt restructuring agreements to date. Through this restructuring process, Puerto Rico's bonds are replaced by bonds with new repayment terms. Public debt was 93 percent of Gross National Product in fiscal year 2016, the most recent fiscal year for which audited financial statements were available. Puerto Rico's general revenue decreased by 11 percent and longstanding deficits persisted during this period. Puerto Rico's capacity for debt repayment depends primarily on the outcomes of the ongoing debt restructuring process and its ability to generate sustained economic growth. While federal hurricane recovery grants are likely to stimulate the economy in the short term, it is unclear whether the resulting economic benefits will be sustainable.

United States Virgin Islands (USVI): USVI has not been able to access capital markets at favorable interest rates since early 2017 and it has not issued any new bonds. It has, however, received federal loans for hurricane recovery, which may contribute to its overall debt burden if they are not forgiven. Public debt decreased from 72 to 68 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) between fiscal years 2015 and 2016, the most recent year for which audited data were available. While general revenue increased by 40 percent during this time period, longstanding deficits persisted. USVI's continued ability to repay public debt depends primarily on whether it can access capital markets at favorable rates in the future, its ability to create economic growth, and its ability to address its pension liabilities and the pending insolvency of its public pension system.

American Samoa: American Samoa's public debt increased from 13 to 19 percent of GDP between fiscal years 2015 and 2017. This increase was due largely to a single bond issued in early 2016 to fund various infrastructure projects. General revenue fluctuated during this period and the territory had a deficit in 2017. The territory continues to face fiscal risks that may affect repayment of public debt, such as a reliance on the tuna canning and processing industry and significant pension liabilities.

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI): CNMI has not issued any new debt since fiscal year 2007, and as such, public debt decreased from 16 to 8 percent of GDP between fiscal years 2015 and 2017. During this period, CNMI's general revenue increased by 48 percent and it operated with a surplus. CNMI's potential labor shortages due to federal restrictions on foreign workers have been mitigated. However, pension liabilities and future reductions in revenue from recent typhoons present fiscal risks that may affect repayment of public debt in the future.

Guam: Guam's public debt increased by 6 percent between fiscal years 2015 and 2017, growing from 44 to 45 percent of GDP. New debt has primarily been used to refinance existing debt and fund infrastructure projects. Guam's general revenue increased by 12 percent during this period and it operated with a surplus. Pension liabilities continue to present a fiscal risk that may affect repayment of public debt in the future."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The five U.S. territories--Puerto Rico, USVI, American Samoa, CNMI, and Guam--borrow through financial markets. Puerto Rico, in particular, has amassed large amounts of debt, and began to default on debt payments in 2015. In 2017, Hurricanes Irma and Maria caused widespread damage and destruction in Puerto Rico and USVI, placing additional financial pressures on their already strained economies.

In June 2016, Congress passed and the President signed the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA). It contains a provision for GAO to review the public debt of each of the five territories every two years. GAO issued the first report on the territories' public debt in October 2017, reporting on trends in public debt between fiscal years 2005 and 2015.

In this report, for each U.S. territory, GAO updates (1) trends in public debt, its composition, and drivers; (2) trends in revenue and its composition, and overall financial condition; and (3) what is known about the ability to repay public debt.

GAO analyzed the territories' single audit reports for fiscal years 2016 and 2017, as available; reviewed relevant documentation and analyses; and interviewed officials from the territories' governments, federal agencies, credit rating agencies, and subject matter experts.

In commenting on a draft of this report, the governments of Puerto Rico and Guam raised concerns about some aspects of the analysis of their debt. GAO maintains its analysis is correct, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-525?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DOD Contract Financing

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense contract financing policy. The report (GAO-19-406) is titled "Contract Financing: DOD Should Comprehensively Assess How Its Policies Affect the Defense Industry".

The report was sent Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense contract financing policy. The report (GAO-19-406) is titled "Contract Financing: DOD Should Comprehensively Assess How Its Policies Affect the Defense Industry". The report was sent Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman,Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on June 27. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Congress and the Department of Defense (DOD) have changed the contract financing legislative and regulatory framework since DOD last performed a comprehensive assessment, including eliminating a requirement that contracting officers justify a need for contract financing and establishing a preference for performance-based payments. However, Defense Contract Management Agency data indicates that the amount of performance-based payments it administered fell from 2010 to 2016 (see figure).

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-406?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD officials acknowledged that DOD has not comprehensively analyzed how its policies affect the defense industry since 1985. Industry and economic conditions, however, have since changed, including lower interest rates and the emergence of contractors who do not typically work with DOD. In August 2018, DOD proposed introducing performance-based elements into its process for setting progress payment rates. DOD officials stated that since the proposed rule focused on incentivizing contractors' performance, they did not assess how it would affect defense contractor profitability or whether other financing or profit policies changes would be needed. DOD withdrew the proposed rule in October 2018. GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government call for organizations to monitor the effectiveness of their policies on a recurring basis. In December 2018, DOD officials acknowledged the need to do so. Until DOD conducts a comprehensive assessment and ensures they are done on a recurring basis, it will not be in a position to understand whether current or future contract financing policies are achieving their intended objectives."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Each year, DOD provides contractors with billions of dollars in contract financing on fixed-price contracts for major weapons systems and other long-term efforts. Contract financing helps contractors manage expenses until they begin delivering the contracted items to DOD. Contract financing can take several forms, including:

- progress payments based on the cost incurred by the contractor, and

- performance-based payments, in which the government pays the contractor an agreed-to amount for achieving certain milestones.

DOD last performed a comprehensive assessment of its contract financing polices in 1985.

The Conference Report accompanying the Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense and Auhorization Act included a provision for GAO to analyze the level of financing currently provided to contractors, among other things. This report (1) describes changes in DOD contract financing policy since 1985 and (2) assesses the extent to which DOD has analyzed the effect of its contract financing policies on the defense industry. GAO assessed relevant legislation and DOD regulations; obtained data on DOD's use of progress and performance-based payments from fiscal years 2010 through 2018; and interviewed cognizant DOD and industry officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that DOD ensure it conducts a comprehensive assessment of the effect that its contract financing and profit policies have on the defense industry and update that assessment on a recurring basis. DOD concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-406?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on International Trade

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent of foreign sourcing in government procurement across countries. The report (GAO-19-414) is titled "International Trade: Foreign Sourcing in Government Procurement".

The report was sent to Sen. Jeffrey A. Merkley, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy and Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent of foreign sourcing in government procurement across countries. The report (GAO-19-414) is titled "International Trade: Foreign Sourcing in Government Procurement". The report was sent to Sen. Jeffrey A. Merkley, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy and Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated withthe report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. government awarded contracts valued at about $12 billion to foreign-located firms, of which about $5 billion went to firms with reported locations in the other six main parties to the World Trade Organization Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (see figure). Conversely, government procurement databases indicated the central governments of these parties awarded an estimated $7 billion to foreign sources, out of which about $2 billion was U.S.-sourced. Canada and Mexico awarded most of the U.S.-sourced contracts. GAO was able to determine that the U.S. government awarded more, by contract value, to foreign-owned firms located abroad than to foreign-owned, U.S.-located firms. Moreover, more than 80 percent of U.S. government contracts awarded to foreign-owned firms located abroad were Department of Defense contracts performed abroad. Overall, while available contract data enable broad cross-country comparisons, they do not necessarily show where the goods are produced, where the services are delivered, or where the profits go, among other economic effects.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-414?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Foreign sourcing by the seven GPA and NAFTA parties within the scope of the study, using two alternative methods, is less than 20 percent of overall central government procurement. Foreign sourcing by central governments, estimated from government procurement databases of the United States and the other six main parties, varied in value by party from about 2 to 19 percent of overall central government procurement. Foreign sourcing by all levels of government, estimated from data on trade and public sector purchases, showed that the governments' imports likely ranged from about 7 to 18 percent of the goods and services the governments purchased. In addition, contract data show that U.S., South Korean, and Mexican central government foreign sourcing was greater in value under contracts covered by GPA and NAFTA than under noncovered contracts, but the opposite was true for Canada and Norway. For the European Union and Japan, GAO found little difference or could not calculate an estimate."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Globally, government procurement constitutes about a $4 trillion market for international trade. However, little is known about foreign sourcing in government procurement--how much governments procure from foreign-located suppliers or how much they acquire in foreign-made goods. GAO was asked to review the extent of foreign sourcing in government procurement across countries. GAO focused on the United States and the other six main parties to the GPA and NAFTA, selected international agreements that open procurement markets on a reciprocal basis. This report, the fourth of a related series, (1) provides broad estimates of foreign sourcing by the U.S. government and central governments of the other six main parties, and (2) assesses foreign sourcing as a share of estimated central government procurement and of estimated procurement by all levels of government, and the extent to which central government contracts that are covered under selected international procurement agreements are foreign-sourced.

GAO analyzed the most recent comparable data available from two sources: (1) government procurement databases used in Canada, the European Union, South Korea, Mexico, Norway, and the United States, for 2015, and (2) 2014 trade data merged with data on the types of goods and services purchased by the public sector. Since Japan does not have a government procurement database, data for Japan were based on its 2015 GPA submission of 2013 data. GAO also interviewed cognizant government officials in Washington, D.C.; Ottawa, Canada; Mexico City, Mexico; Seoul, South Korea; and Tokyo, Japan."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-414?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Military Personnel

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's officer appointment processes. The report (GAO-19-527R) is titled "Military Personnel: Factors Affecting Approval Time for Officer Appointments".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on June 27. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's officer appointment processes. The report (GAO-19-527R) is titled "Military Personnel: Factors Affecting Approval Time for Officer Appointments". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on June 27. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with thereport.

What GAO Found: "Similar processes are used for approving original appointments of military officers, such as those who graduate from a military academy, and federally recognizing state promotions of National Guard officers. The military services develop and submit to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) officer appointment packages, which include one or more "scrolls" (lists of names nominated for appointment). OSD completes quality assurance steps and facilitates a legal review of the packages, which are then approved by the Secretary of Defense or, if required, sent to the White House for the President's signature and then to the Senate for a confirmation vote.

The Secretary of Defense approved, or the Senate confirmed, 2,832 original appointment and federal recognition scrolls that included 111,837 names submitted to OSD during fiscal years 2017 and 2018. GAO found that 2,619 scrolls (about 92 percent) were approved by the Secretary of Defense and 213 scrolls (about 8 percent) were approved by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The Department of Defense (DOD) identified three factors that affect the time it takes to approve officer appointments.

(1) Presidential approval and Senate confirmation. GAO found that appointments requiring presidential approval and Senate confirmation took, on average, an additional 34 business days (about 7 weeks) to process after OSD's review and approval--based on analysis of data from fiscal years 2017 and 2018.

(2) Appointments for officer transfers. Service officials told GAO that obtaining Secretary of Defense or Senate approval for officers transferring between active and reserve components may affect processing time, and that obtaining such approval from military department secretaries--instead of going to higher levels for approval--could be faster. Additionally, service officials said appointments for transferring officers are redundant because existing officers have already gone through the approval process for their current appointment. However, OSD officials stated that such appointments are required under current law.

(3) Inaccurate information in appointment packages. OSD officials told GAO that the services often submit inaccurate information in appointment packages, which can delay approval until corrected. According to military service officials, the current appointments process is not automated and is labor intensive because DOD does not currently have an information system to automate the process for developing, reviewing, and approving officer appointments.

DOD officials told GAO that they are taking steps to address these factors, including tasking RAND's National Defense Research Institute to conduct a study--planned for completion by the end of 2019--to identify improvements to DOD's officer appointment processes."

Why GAO Did This Study: "To function effectively, DOD must have sufficient numbers of qualified officers. As of December 2018, over 360,000 officers were serving in the military services' active and reserve components. Officers must be appointed to a service, component, and pay grade. "Original appointments" are made to new officers, such as those who graduate from a military academy, as well as to existing officers who transfer to another service or between the active and reserve components within a service. A "promotion" is an appointment of an officer to a higher pay grade. States promote National Guard officers, but these promotions must be federally recognized for officers to wear the insignia or to receive the pay of their new grade when under federal orders.

Senate Report 115-262, accompanying a bill for the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, included a provision for GAO to review DOD's officer appointment processes. This report describes: (1) the processes used for approving original appointments and federal recognition of National Guard promotions; (2) the number of original appointment and federal recognition scrolls that were approved from fiscal years 2017 and 2018; and (3) factors that affect the time it takes to approve officer appointments.

To address these objectives, GAO reviewed relevant sections of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Code, executive orders, and DOD policies; analyzed data from OSD's appointments database to identify the number of approved scrolls and the amount of time it took to process them; and met with officials from OSD, the military services, the White House Military Office, and the Senate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-527R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Military Personnel

GAO Issues Report on Northern Border Security

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Customs and Border Protection's efforts to secure the northern border between ports of entry. The report (GAO-19-470) is titled "Northern Border Security: CBP Identified Resource Challenges but Needs Performance Measures to Assess Security Between Ports of Entry".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, and Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Customs and Border Protection's efforts to secure the northern border between ports of entry. The report (GAO-19-470) is titled "Northern Border Security: CBP Identified Resource Challenges but Needs Performance Measures to Assess Security Between Ports of Entry". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, and Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. WhatGAO Found: "U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) identified staffing and resource challenges affecting its enforcement activities along the U.S.-Canada (northern) border and actions to address them, but faces competing priorities. The U.S. Border Patrol (Border Patrol) and Air and Marine Operations (AMO) are the components within CBP responsible for securing U.S. borders between ports of entry in the land, air, and maritime environments. Border Patrol identified an insufficient number of agents that limited patrol missions along the northern border. AMO identified an insufficient number of agents along the northern border, which limited the number and frequency of air and maritime missions. Border Patrol and AMO also identified a variety of resource challenges along the northern border, such as limited radar and surveillance technology coverage and inadequate facilities to process and temporarily hold apprehended individuals. While the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and CBP identified actions to address staffing and resource challenges, it is unknown whether these challenges will be addressed. This is primarily because CBP's priority is to secure the U.S.-Mexico (southwest) border. Issued in January 2017, Executive Order 13767 directed DHS to take actions to secure the southwest border by, among other things, constructing physical barriers and hiring thousands of agents.

While CBP has performance measures that assess selected border security operations or programs, some of which include data from the northern border, it does not have specific measures to assess its effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry. For example, Border Patrol has performance measures that assess security in remote areas on the northern border, but the measures do not include data from maritime border areas. Developing and implementing such measures could help Border Patrol and AMO better assess the effectiveness of their northern border operations between ports of entry, including addressing challenges due to limited staffing and resources."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The United States and Canada share the longest common non-militarized border between two countries, spanning nearly 4,000 miles of land and maritime borders from the states of Washington to Maine. CBP, within DHS, has primary responsibility for securing U.S. borders at and between ports of entry.

GAO was asked to review CBP's efforts to secure the northern border between ports of entry. This report examines, among other things, (1) the staffing and resource challenges that CBP identified and actions it has taken to address those challenges and (2) the extent to which CBP has developed and implemented performance measures to assess its effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry. GAO reviewed agency documentation and met with DHS and CBP officials in headquarters and field locations. This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in March 2019. Information that DHS deemed sensitive has been omitted."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making two recommendations, that Border Patrol and AMO each develop and implement performance measures to assess their effectiveness at securing the northern border between ports of entry. DHS concurred with both recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-470?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on U.S. Airlines

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. airlines' foreign ownership and control laws. The report (GAO-19-540R) is titled "U.S. Airlines: Information on DOT's Oversight of and Stakeholders' Perspectives on Foreign Ownership".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, and Rep. Mark Green, R-Tennessee, on June 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for overseeing U.S. airlines' compliance with foreign ownership and ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on U.S. airlines' foreign ownership and control laws. The report (GAO-19-540R) is titled "U.S. Airlines: Information on DOT's Oversight of and Stakeholders' Perspectives on Foreign Ownership". The report was sent to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, and Rep. Mark Green, R-Tennessee, on June 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for overseeing U.S. airlines' compliance with foreign ownership andcontrol laws, which limit foreign ownership to 25 percent of the voting stock of U.S. airlines, among other control requirements. DOT guidance states that it is to examine new airline applicant's ownership structure to ensure that it meets statutory requirements for ownership and control, and is under the actual control of U.S. citizens. DOT officials determine actual control on a case-by-case basis, considering factors such as a shareholder's influence and business relationships. According to DOT officials, this determination sometimes may involve a review of complex airline documentation to fully understand the layers of ownership and types of investors. DOT officials said they assess continued compliance with ownership and control requirements about every 5 years, as required by Federal Aviation Administration regulation, and when notified of substantial changes.

Selected stakeholders GAO interviewed--including representatives of U.S. and foreign airlines, aviation industry associations, aviation labor unions, consumer groups, travel industry groups, and investment banks--generally stated that increasing allowable foreign ownership of U.S. airlines to 49 percent, while retaining actual control by U.S. citizens, would likely result in minimal effects on competition, employment, and national security. In particular, several stakeholders told GAO that such a change would likely have little effect on levels of foreign investment, and therefore competition. These stakeholders cited several reasons why levels of foreign investment would be unlikely to change, including a perceived lack of U.S. airline interest in seeking additional capital, ready access to domestic capital, and likely limited foreign interest, particularly if a foreign investor cannot exert control over the airline. According to DOT officials, no U.S. airline has foreign investment that approaches the current limit. However, assuming that a change in foreign investment did occur, several stakeholders said that airport infrastructure limitations can limit entry of any new airlines or expansion of existing airlines into large airports. Similarly, several stakeholders stated that increasing allowable foreign ownership, without changes to effective control of the airline, would likely have no effects on airline employment, although representatives from a labor union expressed concern over foreign entities' control of U.S. airlines, with respect to their willingness to negotiate on labor issues. Finally, Department of Defense officials stated that with a foreign ownership change at this level without any change in control, any resulting effects to national security would be manageable."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal laws on foreign investment in U.S. airlines date back to the 1920s and establish the limits of allowable foreign ownership and control. Periodically, there is renewed interest in increasing the limits of allowable foreign ownership in U.S. airlines. In 1992 and 2003, GAO reported on, among other things, the potential effects an increase in allowable foreign ownership to 49 percent of voting shares could have on domestic competition, international competition, employment, safety, and national security.

Given the time since its last report and changes in the aviation industry, GAO was asked to review U.S. airlines' foreign ownership and control laws. This report presents information (1) on how DOT oversees U.S. airlines' compliance with foreign ownership and control laws and (2) on selected stakeholders' perspectives regarding how increasing allowable foreign ownership of U.S. airlines to 49 percent of voting shares might affect competition, employment, and national security. GAO reviewed DOT documents and interviewed DOT officials on how they oversee foreign ownership and control requirements; interviewed a non-generalizable selection of 20 aviation stakeholders on how increasing allowable foreign ownership of U.S. airlines to 49 percent of voting shares might affect competition and employment; and interviewed DOD officials on how such an increase might affect national security."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-540R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on U.S. Airlines

GAO Issues Report on USCG Management of Great Lakes Pilotage Program

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Coast Guard's management of the Great Lakes Pilotage Program. The report (GAO-19-493) is titled "Coast Guard: Stakeholders' Views on Issues and Options for Managing the Great Lakes Pilotage Program".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, Sen. Todd Young, R-Indiana, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Coast Guard's management of the Great Lakes Pilotage Program. The report (GAO-19-493) is titled "Coast Guard: Stakeholders' Views on Issues and Options for Managing the Great Lakes Pilotage Program". The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, Sen. Todd Young, R-Indiana, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, on June 26. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found:"The Coast Guard manages the Great Lakes Pilotage Program to implement federal requirements that any oceangoing or foreign commercial vessel entering the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway use a registered marine pilot to safely navigate the vessel through the system. The Coast Guard employs several mechanisms for communicating with stakeholders and obtaining their input on the program. These include the federal rulemaking process, meetings of the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee, and ad-hoc communications with local pilotage stakeholders. Since 2016, when the Coast Guard implemented several programmatic changes, shipping industry stakeholders and pilots have identified a number of issues that they would like to have considered for the program. The issues cited by shipping industry stakeholders relate, in large part, to the financial impacts associated with the Coast Guard's methodology for calculating pilotage rates. The issues raised by Great Lakes pilots and their representatives are varied and include changes that may be needed to respond to the increasing volume and variety of vessels needing Great Lakes pilotage services, such as cruise ships.

Shipping industry stakeholders and others have suggested potential alternatives to the structure and governance of Great Lakes pilotage. The proposed alternatives include consolidating the three U.S. pilot associations and districts, revising the existing governance structure and entities responsible for pilotage rate-setting, and introducing some level of competition for providing pilotage services. Each of these options presents various tradeoffs. For example, it is unclear if consolidating the three associations and districts would result in cost savings because there are relatively few administrative positions that could be reduced. According to the Coast Guard and pilot representatives, the specialized training and local experience needed to become registered pilots also presents a challenge to implementing competition because there is generally a limited supply of pilots available to compete in the same geographic area. Further, many of the governance structures and procedures of the existing Great Lakes pilotage system were established by statute and revisions would require legislative changes."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway maritime transportation system is the longest inland navigation system in the world. In 2016, the Coast Guard implemented a number of changes, including amending its methodology for setting the rates charged to shippers for using U.S. marine pilotage services in these waters.

GAO was asked to review the Coast Guard's management of the Great Lakes Pilotage Program. This report (1) describes how the Coast Guard obtains stakeholder input on the Great Lakes Pilotage Program, and identifies key stakeholder issues that exist; and (2) discusses alternatives to the current structure and governance of the Great Lakes pilotage system identified by stakeholders, and the reported tradeoffs they may present.

GAO reviewed applicable laws, Coast Guard rulemakings from 2016-2019, Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee meeting minutes for 2017 and 2018, and issues identified by stakeholders. GAO also interviewed a range of stakeholders, including shipping industry and pilot representatives, to obtain perspectives on the Coast Guard's management of the program and any alternative governance options that may exist."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-493?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Voter Registration

WASHINGTON, June 28 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Justice's efforts to ensure states and localities comply with the National Voter Registration Act requirements to offer registration opportunities and administer voter registration list maintenance programs, and address potential instances of election fraud. The report (GAO-19-485) is titled "Voter Registration: Information on Federal Enforcement Efforts and State and Local List Management".

The report was sent to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Voter Registration

GAO Issues Report on Civilian Marksmanship Program

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on matters related to the transfer and subsequent sale of the surplus Army firearms to the Civilian Marksmanship Program. The report (GAO-19-555R) is titled "Civilian Marksmanship Program: Army Funded Report Addresses Various Aspects of the Sale of Surplus Firearms".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Defense Infrastructure

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's management of historic properties in use on U.S. installations. The report (GAO-19-335) is titled "Defense Infrastructure: Additional Actions Could Enhance DOD's Efforts to Identify, Evaluate, and Preserve Historic Properties".

The report was sent to Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veteran's Affairs, and Related Agencies, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, chairman, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's management of historic properties in use on U.S. installations. The report (GAO-19-335) is titled "Defense Infrastructure: Additional Actions Could Enhance DOD's Efforts to Identify, Evaluate, and Preserve Historic Properties". The report was sent to Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veteran's Affairs, and Related Agencies, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, chairman,Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs, and Related Agencies, and Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, on June 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense (DOD) reported that it has identified and evaluated about 60,000 of its approximately 375,000 properties on installations as historic as of October 2017. DOD's practice is to identify and evaluate property for historic significance as installations have an identified need for or a project planned for the property, according to DOD officials. However, GAO identified opportunities for DOD to enhance its efforts in several areas.

* DOD lacks complete and consistent data on historic properties. Specifically, GAO identified data gaps and discrepancies between the data reported at the installation and department levels for fiscal year 2017. For example, for one installation, GAO found that 150 more historic properties were listed in its installation data than were listed in department-level data for that installation. In November 2018, GAO reported on issues concerning DOD's data and made recommendations to improve the data quality. DOD concurred and reported actions it plans to take to improve data quality. Doing so would help DOD to ensure it has complete information on properties of historic significance and prevent further data discrepancies.

* DOD has limited visibility of privatized homes that could be historic. When the military departments transferred military homes to private developers, DOD officials said they also transferred the responsibility to identify and evaluate homes for historic significance to the private developers. However, the military departments do not verify that private developers are doing so. Private developers at seven of the nine installations with privatized housing that GAO visited said they do not identify or evaluate homes for historic significance. Taking steps to verify that private developers carry out this responsibility could help DOD ensure that renovations or repairs are not made to privatized properties that could compromise their historic nature.

Additionally, DOD does not routinely assess the condition of its historic properties and a lack of guidance on training could hamper maintenance and preservation efforts. First, inventories of historic properties, including physical inspections, required every 3 years, are not being conducted at six of the 10 installations GAO visited. Officials at these six installations said that the inventory was not conducted because they were unaware of or misunderstood the requirement. Second, while each installation GAO visited had an established process for approving maintenance work orders, DOD officials reported problems with the maintenance of historic properties at these installations, ranging from maintenance personnel not addressing issues, to maintenance being conducted improperly. At nine of the 10 installations GAO visited, individuals who work in historic buildings said that they believed maintenance personnel did not know what maintenance could or could not be done to the historic buildings, and installation officials expressed concerns about a lack of training related to historic preservation. By clarifying the requirement to conduct a physical inventory and developing guidance on training, DOD would be better positioned to preserve the historic properties under its purview."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires each federal agency to establish a preservation program that ensures properties are identified and evaluated for historic significance, as well as managed and maintained in a way that considers their preservation.

Senate Report 115-130 accompanying a bill for the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2018, included a provision that GAO assess DOD's management of historic properties in use on U.S. installations. This report examines the extent to which DOD (1) identifies and evaluates properties for historic significance, including those that have been privatized, and (2) assesses the condition of its historic properties and has guidance on the training of installation personnel maintaining and those working in historic properties. GAO reviewed DOD fiscal year 2017 real property data and policies and procedures; visited a non-generalizable sample of 10 installations, selecting them based factors such as military service representation and concentration of historic properties; and interviewed DOD officials, privatized housing developers, and installation personnel."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations, including that DOD take steps to verify that privatized military homes are identified and evaluated for historic significance; clarify the inventory requirement for historic properties; and develop guidance related to historic preservation training. DOD concurred with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-335?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Housing Administration

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Federal Housing Administration's effectiveness and efficiency in reaching determinations of conveyable condition. The report (GAO-19-517) is titled "Federal Housing Administration: Improved Procedures and Assessment Could Increase Efficiency of Foreclosed Property Conveyances".

The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies, Rep. David E. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Federal Housing Administration's effectiveness and efficiency in reaching determinations of conveyable condition. The report (GAO-19-517) is titled "Federal Housing Administration: Improved Procedures and Assessment Could Increase Efficiency of Foreclosed Property Conveyances". The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies, Rep. David E.Price, D-North Carolina, chairman, and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Florida, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, on June 20. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "From July 2010 through December 2017, the process for conveying foreclosed properties to the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) took a median of 70 days. The conveyance process--which GAO measured from a mortgage servicer's obtaining title to and possession of the property to FHA's marketing of the property--involves servicers making repairs, transferring ownership, and filing a mortgage insurance claim, and FHA inspecting the property. FHA attributes the length of time to complete the process partly to foreclosure processing delays that left properties vulnerable to damage and vandalism, which can increase the time servicers need to bring properties into conveyance condition. Property damage also may increase the likelihood that FHA will reconvey a property (transfer it to the servicer) for not complying with condition standards, further extending the conveyance process. For about 55 percent of properties conveyed in July 2010-December 2017, servicers exceeded the required time to obtain title and possession of a foreclosed property and convey it to FHA. For 2017 alone, the corresponding figure was 72 percent. As a result, servicers were not eligible to be reimbursed for all repairs and interest expenses for those properties when filing insurance claims with FHA.

In recent years, FHA changed aspects of its conveyance process to help address some of the execution challenges the agency and servicers have faced. For example, in 2016, FHA enhanced its data system for conveyed properties to reduce manual administrative processing. FHA also began a pilot program in 2017 to decrease the number of properties FHA reconveys by inspecting properties before conveyance. However, GAO found shortcomings in FHA policies, procedures, and assessment efforts that are inconsistent with federal evaluation criteria and internal control standards, as follows:

* FHA's policies and procedures lack detail that could help servicers and contractors determine if a property is in compliance, and the agency has not examined alternative methods of communicating this information. Fifteen of the 20 servicers GAO interviewed said existing policies, procedures, and communications often were not clear or specific enough to address property conditions or repair decisions they encountered. FHA also relies on brief written policies to explain standards and makes limited or no use of other methods, such as photographs or industry-wide calls.

* FHA has not provided written direction on when to use alternatives to reconveyance--such as agreements under which servicers make repairs or repay FHA for any repair costs after conveyance--for properties not meeting condition standards. In the absence of such direction, FHA may not be addressing these properties in the most consistent or effective manner.

* FHA has not developed a plan to assess the outcome of its inspection pilot. Without rigorous assessment, FHA risks making decisions about the future of the pilot based on inaccurate or incomplete information.

Addressing these shortcomings could help improve the efficiency and effectiveness of FHA's property conveyance process."

Why GAO Did This Study: "FHA insures hundreds of thousands of single-family home mortgages annually. When an FHA borrower defaults, the mortgage servicer in many cases forecloses, obtains title to the property, and conveys ownership to FHA. FHA inspects the property, acquires it if it complies with condition standards and title requirements, and lists the property for sale. FHA may reconvey noncompliant properties to servicers. During conveyance, homes may sit vacant for months and can deteriorate, contributing to neighborhood blight.

Senate Report 114-243 included a provision for GAO to review FHA's effectiveness and efficiency in reaching determinations of conveyable condition. This report discusses (1) timelines for FHA property conveyances in 2010-2017 and whether servicers and FHA met time requirements, and (2) changes FHA has made to the conveyance process in recent years and any ongoing process challenges. GAO analyzed FHA data on properties conveyed in 2010-2017, reviewed FHA's policies and procedures, and interviewed 20 randomly selected mortgage servicers accounting for more than one-third of active FHA mortgages."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that FHA (1) enhance the content and communication of policies and procedures on conveyance condition, (2) provide written direction on alternatives to reconveyance, and (3) develop a plan to assess a pilot program. FHA agreed with the second and third recommendations and did not agree or disagree with the first."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-517?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Housing Administration

GAO Issues Report on Foster Care

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on supervised independent living arrangements and services for older youth. The report (GAO-19-411) is titled "Foster Care: States with Approval to Extend Care Provide Independent Living Options for Youth up to Age 21".

The report was sent to Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Illinois, chairman, Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Indiana, ranking member of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Worker and Family Support, on May 21. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The 26 states that have approval ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on supervised independent living arrangements and services for older youth. The report (GAO-19-411) is titled "Foster Care: States with Approval to Extend Care Provide Independent Living Options for Youth up to Age 21". The report was sent to Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Illinois, chairman, Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Indiana, ranking member of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Worker and Family Support, on May 21. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The 26 states that have approvalto receive federal funding to support their extended foster care programs for youth ages 18 up to 21 reported providing a range of supervised independent living arrangements. These arrangements include transitional living programs, private residences, and other settings (see figure). Officials we spoke with in five selected states said transitional living programs typically involve private child welfare agencies that lease apartments or facilities for youth, either at a single site or scattered across a geographic area, and offer on-site case management and supports to help youth build independent living skills. For private residences, youth may choose where to live, such as a private or shared apartment. In these cases, youth are typically responsible for their own lease, and may receive minimal supervision compared to youth in transitional living programs. For other settings, states reported options such as college dorms and residential employment training programs. Nineteen states also reported allowing youth under 18 to live in supervised independent living settings in certain instances, such as when they are pregnant, parents, or attending college, although such placements are generally not eligible for federal funding.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-411?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Factors that most states reported considering when placing youth in supervised independent living arrangements include the youth's life skills--for example, their ability to budget finances and schedule medical appointments--as well as their education and employment status. Officials in selected states also said they consider the availability of housing, which may be limited in certain localities due to a lack of affordable housing options or other factors, and the options available to youth with complex needs, such as those who are pregnant and parents.

Officials in four selected states said they help prepare youth in extended foster care to live independently by providing targeted trainings and other supports, such as financial literacy training. In all five selected states, youth can also learn independent living skills through services offered more broadly to all older youth in foster care, officials said, including assistance with housing, education, employment, and daily living skills, such as grocery shopping and budgeting."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Youth who leave the foster care system at age 18 are often ill-prepared to live on their own and may face challenges as they transition to adulthood, such as difficulties finding stable housing. The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 allowed states to receive federal reimbursement through title IV-E of the Social Security Act for a portion of the cost of extending care to certain eligible youth up to age 21. The Act also allows youth ages 18 up to 21 to live in a supervised setting in which the individual is living independently. One such setting may be an apartment, with monthly check-ins with a case worker (referred to as supervised independent living arrangements).

GAO was asked to review supervised independent living arrangements and services for older youth. Among other things, this report examines (1) the types of supervised independent living arrangements available; (2) factors states reported considering when placing youth in these living arrangements; and (3) how selected states prepare youth to live independently.

GAO surveyed state child welfare agencies in the 26 states approved by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to receive federal funding to support their extended foster care programs; interviewed state and local child welfare officials and stakeholders in five states selected for factors such as variation in child welfare administration systems; reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance; and interviewed HHS officials."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-411?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Land, Water Conservation Fund

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The report (GAO-19-346) is titled "Land and Water Conservation Fund: Variety of Programs Supported, but Improvements in Data Collection Needed at BLM".

The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on May 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "From fiscal years 2014 through 2018, Congress appropriated nearly $1.9 billion from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The report (GAO-19-346) is titled "Land and Water Conservation Fund: Variety of Programs Supported, but Improvements in Data Collection Needed at BLM". The report was sent to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on May 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "From fiscal years 2014 through 2018, Congress appropriated nearly $1.9 billion from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).About half supported federal land acquisition across four agencies--Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (Park Service) in the Department of the Interior, and the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture--and half supported five other programs. These five programs provided states or local governments with funds for a variety of conservation and recreation purposes, such as conserving private forests or battlefields.

BLM, FWS, the Park Service, and the Forest Service use similar processes to select federal land acquisition projects involving local land units (such as national parks), regional offices, and headquarters. In general, land units identify projects and send them to regional offices for review before headquarters' offices assess the projects. Conservation organizations can also play a role in assisting federal agencies to acquire lands by identifying willing sellers, among other things.

In fiscal years 2013 through 2017, the four land agencies used LWCF appropriations to acquire over 850,000 acres. Most of these lands were acquired within the boundaries of their land units, according to agency officials. The agencies acquired land for various reasons, such as to protect wildlife habitat or improve recreational access. All four agencies acquired a little more than half of the land on a fee simple basis, which means all rights to the land were obtained; for the remaining land, the agencies acquired less than full ownership of all of the land rights. In addition, these agencies primarily acquired land by purchasing land from a landowner or receiving land donated by a landowner.

GAO found two limitations with BLM's data on land acquisitions.

* BLM does not maintain centralized data on the acquisition methods or land interests for the lands it obtains because such information was not considered necessary when BLM's data system was developed. BLM officials said they are considering including this information in changes to its data system, but they have yet to finalize plans for these changes.

* Some information entered in BLM's data system was not properly coded. Therefore, BLM could not identify all lands acquired with LWCF funds.

In contrast, FWS, the Park Service, and the Forest Service maintain centralized data on acquisition method and interests acquired, which officials from these agencies said were key data elements for maintaining an inventory of the lands they manage and to respond to information requests from Congress. Federal internal control standards call for agencies to obtain relevant data from reliable internal sources. Maintaining centralized data on land acquisition methods and interests acquired would help BLM maintain a more complete inventory of its lands, respond more quickly to information requests from Congress, and provide additional information to manage its lands. In addition, without more specific guidance to ensure that relevant data on LWCF land acquisitions are entered in its data system, BLM will not be able to use its system to identify all of the lands acquired using LWCF funds to track program outcomes and inform management decisions."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The LWCF is a U.S. Treasury fund that is used for land conservation and recreational purposes, through land acquisition and other means. The LWCF is authorized to accrue a minimum of $900 million annually, primarily from oil and gas leasing fees. Congress appropriates money from the fund for various programs. Four federal land management agencies--BLM, FWS, the Park Service, and the Forest Service--are responsible for implementing these programs.

GAO was asked to review the LWCF. This report examines (1) LWCF appropriations for fiscal years 2014 through 2018 and the programs supported by these funds; (2) the process for selecting federal land acquisition projects to fund using the LWCF; and (3) the federal lands that were acquired using LWCF funds for fiscal years 2013 through 2017, reasons for acquiring lands, and acquisition methods. GAO reviewed agency guidance; analyzed agency data, including appropriations data, for the most recent data available; and interviewed agency officials at the headquarters, regional, and land unit levels based on geographic diversity and other factors, along with officials at conservation groups identified by federal agencies."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that BLM collect centralized data on the acquisition method and interest acquired for the lands it obtains using the LWCF and that the agency develop more specific guidance to ensure that land acquisition data are entered properly in its data system. Interior concurred with these recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-346?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on NASA Commercial Crew Program

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the the extent to which the Commercial Crew Program and its contractors have made progress towards certification. The report (GAO-19-504) is titled "NASA Commercial Crew Program: Schedule Uncertainty Persists for Start of Operational Missions to the International Space Station".

The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-New York, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the the extent to which the Commercial Crew Program and its contractors have made progress towards certification. The report (GAO-19-504) is titled "NASA Commercial Crew Program: Schedule Uncertainty Persists for Start of Operational Missions to the International Space Station". The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-New York,chairman, and Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, on June 20. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Both of the Commercial Crew Program's contractors, Boeing and SpaceX, have made progress on their crew transportation systems. However, neither is ready to begin carrying astronauts into space as both continue to experience delays to certification. Certification is a process that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will use to ensure that each contractor's spacecraft, launch vehicle, and ground support systems meet its requirements for human spaceflight before any operational missions to the International Space Station (ISS) can occur. Factors contributing to schedule uncertainty include:

Fluctuating schedules. As the contractors continue to build and test hardware--including SpaceX's March 2019 uncrewed test flight-- their schedules for certification change frequently. As of May 2019, both contractors had delayed certification nine times, equating to more than 2 years from their original contracts (see figure). This includes several delays since GAO last reported in July 2018.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-504?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Program Workload. NASA's ability to process certification data packages for its two contractors continues to create uncertainty about the timing of certification. The program has made progress conducting these reviews but much work remains. In addition, the program allowed both contractors to delay submitting evidence that they have met some requirements. This deferral has increased the amount of work remaining for the program prior to certification.

In February 2019, NASA acknowledged that delays to certification could continue, and announced plans to extend U.S. access to the ISS through September 2020 by purchasing seats on the Russian Soyuz vehicle. However, this arrangement does not fully address GAO's July 2018 recommendation to develop a contingency plan for ensuring access to the ISS until a Commercial Crew Program contractor is certified. NASA concurred with the recommendation but has not yet implemented it. Continued NASA attention on this issue is needed given the uncertainty associated with the final certification dates."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2014, NASA awarded two firm-fixed-price contracts to Boeing and SpaceX, worth a combined total of up to $6.8 billion, to develop crew transportation systems and conduct initial missions to the ISS. In July 2018, GAO found that both contractors continued to delay their certification dates and that further delays were likely. NASA must certify the contractors' crew transportation systems before the contractors can begin operational missions to the ISS. The contractors were originally required to provide NASA all the evidence it needed to certify that their systems met its requirements in 2017.

The House Committee on Appropriations included a provision in its 2017 report for GAO to continue to review NASA's human space exploration programs. This is the latest in a series of reports addressing the mandate. This report examines the extent to which the Commercial Crew Program and its contractors have made progress towards certification.

To do this work, GAO analyzed contracts, schedules, and other documentation and spoke with officials from the Commercial Crew Program, Boeing, and SpaceX."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO continues to believe that NASA should develop a contingency plan to ensure uninterrupted access to the ISS if delays persist beyond September 2020. NASA generally agreed with GAO's findings."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-504?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on NASA Human Space Exploration

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on NASA's human space exploration programs. The report (GAO-19-377) is titled "NASA Human Space Exploration: Persistent Delays and Cost Growth Reinforce Concerns over Management of Programs".

The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Appropriations ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on NASA's human space exploration programs. The report (GAO-19-377) is titled "NASA Human Space Exploration: Persistent Delays and Cost Growth Reinforce Concerns over Management of Programs". The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Appropriationssubcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, on June 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Due to continued production and testing challenges, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) three related human spaceflight programs have encountered additional launch delays and cost growth. In November 2018, within one year of announcing an up to 19-month delay for the three programs--the Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle, the Orion spacecraft, and supporting ground systems--NASA senior leaders acknowledged the revised date of June 2020 is unlikely. Any issues uncovered during planned integration and testing may push the launch date as late as June 2021. Moreover, while NASA acknowledges about $1 billion in cost growth for the SLS program, it is understated. This is because NASA shifted some planned SLS scope to future missions but did not reduce the program's cost baseline accordingly. When GAO reduced the baseline to account for the reduced scope, the cost growth is about $1.8 billion.

In addition, NASA's updated cost estimate for the Orion program reflects 5.6 percent cost growth. The estimate is not complete, however, as it assumes a launch date that is 7 months earlier than Orion's baseline launch date. If the program does not meet the earlier launch date, costs will increase further. Updating baselines to reflect current mission scope and providing complete cost estimates would provide NASA management and Congress with a more transparent assessment of where NASA is having difficulty controlling costs.

NASA paid over $200 million in award fees from 2014-2018 related to contractor performance on the SLS stages and Orion spacecraft contracts. But the programs continue to fall behind schedule and overrun costs. Ongoing contract renegotiations with Boeing for the SLS and Lockheed Martin for the Orion program provide NASA an opportunity to reevaluate its strategy to incentivize contractors to obtain better outcomes."

Why GAO Did This Study: "NASA is undertaking a trio of closely related programs to continue human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. All three programs (SLS, Orion, and supporting ground systems) are working toward a launch readiness date of June 2020 for the first mission.

The House Committee on Appropriations included a provision in its 2017 report for GAO to continue to review NASA's human space exploration programs. This is the latest in a series of reports addressing the mandate. This report assesses (1) how NASA's human space exploration programs are performing relative to cost and schedule commitments, and (2) the extent to which NASA's use of contract award fees is achieving desired program outcomes. To do this work, GAO examined program cost and schedule reports and contractor data, and interviewed officials. This report does not assess the effect, if any, of the government shutdown that ended in January 2019."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making four recommendations to NASA, including that the SLS program should calculate cost growth based on costs that are currently included in the first mission and the Orion program should update its cost estimate to reflect the schedule agreed to in its baseline. In addition, the SLS and Orion programs should reevaluate their strategy for incentivizing contractors. NASA concurred with three recommendations, and partially concurred with the recommendation related to the Orion program's cost estimate. GAO believes the recommendation remains valid, as discussed in the report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-377?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on NASA Human Space Exploration

GAO Issues Report on Veterans Health Administration

WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's oversight of Veterans Integrated Service Networks. The report (GAO-19-462) is titled "Veterans Health Administration: Regional Networks Need Improved Oversight and Clearly Defined Roles and Responsibilities".

The report was sent to Rep. Julia Brownley, D-California, chair, Rep. Neal Dunn, R-Florida, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs subcommittee on Health, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, Rep. Ann Kuster, D-New Hampshire, and Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio,on June 19. Here ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 21 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's oversight of Veterans Integrated Service Networks. The report (GAO-19-462) is titled "Veterans Health Administration: Regional Networks Need Improved Oversight and Clearly Defined Roles and Responsibilities". The report was sent to Rep. Julia Brownley, D-California, chair, Rep. Neal Dunn, R-Florida, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs subcommittee on Health, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, Rep. Ann Kuster, D-New Hampshire, and Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio,on June 19. Hereare excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Veterans Health Administration's (VHA) oversight of its regional health care networks is limited. Within VHA, these networks--known as Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN)--manage the day-to-day functions of medical centers and also provide administrative and clinical oversight of medical centers. VHA's approach for overseeing VISNs does not include an assessment of each VISN as a whole. Instead, to assess VISN operations, VHA primarily relies on performance assessments of individual VISN directors, which are based in part on medical center performance data. VHA officials acknowledged that a VISN director's individual performance is not always indicative of the VISN's performance as a whole. VHA supplements these assessments with periodic meetings with VISN leadership, including quarterly reviews on specific topics, such as patient quality assurance metrics and best practices. However, GAO found that these quarterly reviews do not typically include discussion of VISN-level performance measures, or how VISNs manage and oversee medical centers. By establishing a process for assessing the overall performance of VISNs in managing and overseeing medical centers, VHA would be better able to determine if a VISN's performance is positive, if it is functioning poorly, or if it requires remediation.

VHA also lacks a comprehensive policy to define VISN roles and responsibilities. VHA and VISN officials told GAO they have several documents they believe help VISNs understand these roles and responsibilities. However, these documents either focus on specific policies and programs, or are tied to individuals. The lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities at the VISN level makes it difficult for VHA to develop an effective oversight process that ensures adequate monitoring of VISN activities.

VHA primarily oversees VISN staffing by using standardized staffing levels and positions, but does not ensure VISNs adhere to them. VHA has a standardized VISN organizational chart, which includes recommended staffing levels for each of the 18 VISNs--63 to 66 full-time-equivalent staff--and 28 key positions, including a chief medical officer and mental health lead, to be in place at each VISN. VHA officials told GAO they expect VISNs to adhere to the standardized chart, and that they conducted a one-time review that included checking that VISNs' total full-time equivalents were within the allotted allowance. However, VHA's review did not ensure that VISN organizational charts always included the 28 key positions laid out on the standardized chart. GAO found one to five key positions were not listed on the organizational charts of more than a third of VISNs, among those with organizational charts that VHA had reviewed and approved. For example, one VISN was missing both the primary care and geriatrics positions on its organizational chart. VISN officials provided various reasons for the positions not being listed on the organizational charts, including that these responsibilities were being performed as a collateral duty for VISN or medical center staff. Without effective oversight, VHA leadership cannot provide reasonable assurance that VISNs are appropriately staffed, which may hinder implementation of programs, and ultimately, the care veterans receive."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VHA operates one of the nation's largest health care systems with 18 regional networks--VISNs--that manage and oversee 172 medical centers within defined geographic areas. VHA expects to provide care to more than 7 million veterans in fiscal year 2019, and demand for its services is expected to grow over time.

GAO was asked to conduct a review of VISNs, including VHA's oversight of VISNs. This report examines (1) the extent to which VHA oversees VISNs' management and oversight of medical centers and (2) how VHA oversees VISN staffing.

GAO reviewed VHA policies, guidance, and staffing data regarding VISNs. GAO also interviewed officials from VHA, all 18 VISNs, and four medical centers selected for variation in geography, urban or rural location, and complexity."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that VHA (1) develop a process to assess the overall performance of VISNs in managing and overseeing medical centers, (2) establish a comprehensive policy that clearly defines VISN roles and responsibilities for managing and overseeing medical centers and (3) establish a process to routinely oversee VISN staffing. VHA concurred with the first and third recommendations, and concurred in principle with the second."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-462?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on K-12 Education

WASHINGTON, June 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the number of districts that reported all zeros or that left fields blank pertaining to restraint and seclusion. The report (GAO-19-551R) is titled "K-12 Education: Education Should Take Immediate Action to Address Inaccuracies in Federal Restraint and Seclusion Data".

The report was sent to Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 19 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the number of districts that reported all zeros or that left fields blank pertaining to restraint and seclusion. The report (GAO-19-551R) is titled "K-12 Education: Education Should Take Immediate Action to Address Inaccuracies in Federal Restraint and Seclusion Data". The report was sent to Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut,chairwoman, and Rep. Tom Cole, R-Oklahoma, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, on June 18. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "GAOs' review found that data the Department of Education (Education) uses in its enforcement of civil rights laws does not accurately or completely reflect all incidents of restraint and seclusion of public school students. Education has stated that restraint and seclusion should only be used when a child's behavior poses imminent danger of serious physical harm to self or others. GAO's review of the most recent Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), school year 2015-16, found that 70 percent of the more than 17,000 school districts in the U.S. reported zero incidents of restraint and zero incidents of seclusion. However, GAO's analysis and documents from Education showed substantial evidence that nine of the 30 largest districts (those with more than 100,000 students) inaccurately reported zeros when they actually had incidents or did not have the data. Moreover, Education officials have said very large districts are likely to have incidents of restraint and seclusion. For example, Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia, which has about 186,000 students, reported zero incidents in school year 2015-16 but recently acknowledged that it had over 1,600 incidents of restraint or seclusion in school year 2017-18.

Documents from Education also showed that several of the very largest school districts reporting zero incidents were instead not collecting data on restraint and seclusion for the CRDC at all, contrary to Education's guidance and policy. While Education requires districts to provide plans for collecting data that are missing or incomplete, GAO found that several of the largest districts reporting zero either did not provide plans or provided incomplete plans. These districts were able to bypass the CRDC system requirement to submit plans because they reported zero incidents instead of leaving the fields blank to indicate the data were missing. Education created a tip sheet to instruct districts on when to report zeros and how to report that data are not available, but the tip sheet is difficult to find on the CRDC website and not available on the screen where districts submit data. Further, Education has not corrected the data for the nine largest districts that inaccurately reported zero restraints and seclusions.

While it is difficult to know the full extent of underreporting, the problems that GAO found with the largest districts reporting zero incidents when in fact the data were missing raise questions as to whether other school districts correctly reported zero incidents of restraint and seclusion. GAO found documents from Education that indicated other, smaller districts also might have misreported zeroes.

Education describes its civil rights data as a key part of its enforcement strategy to protect students from discrimination and ensure equal access to education. Without adequate systems in place to ensure the accurate, complete reporting of restraint and seclusion data, districts may continue to erroneously report zero incidents and Education may be hindered in its enforcement of civil rights laws."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Every 2 years, Education collects data, including data on restraint and seclusion, from almost all public school districts. Education uses this data in its enforcement of federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or disability. Education has been collecting data on restraint and seclusion since school year 2009-10 and is currently collecting data for school year 2017-18.

GAO has work underway on reporting of restraint and seclusion data in response to a provision in the explanatory statement from the House Committee on Appropriations accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018. As part of data reliability testing for that work, GAO analyzed the number of districts that reported all zeros or that left fields blank pertaining to restraint and seclusion. The data reliability testing raised questions about the completeness and accuracy of the CRDC restraint and seclusion data. GAO subsequently reviewed the explanations required by Education of the largest districts if they report zero incidents of restraint and seclusion, and documentation on Education's investigations that found underreporting. This report focuses on the issues GAO has identified to date regarding potentially incomplete data."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that Education (1) immediately remind and clarify for school districts when to report zeros for incidents of restraint and seclusion and when to leave cells blank, (2) follow up with districts reporting zero incidents in the 2017-18 collection, (3) ensure plans for providing data in the future are submitted and complete, and (4) prominently disclose the potential problems with the previous CRDC restraint and seclusion data . Education agreed with the first three recommendations and disagreed with the fourth, which we have revised above."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-551R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Nuclear Weapons

WASHINGTON, June 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the National Nuclear Security Administration's high explosive capabilities specific to nuclear weapons. The report (GAO-19-449) is titled "Nuclear Weapons: Additional Actions Could Help Improve Management of Activities Involving Explosive Materials".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen.Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the National Nuclear Security Administration's high explosive capabilities specific to nuclear weapons. The report (GAO-19-449) is titled "Nuclear Weapons: Additional Actions Could Help Improve Management of Activities Involving Explosive Materials". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen.Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Appropriationssubcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, chairman, and Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies, on June 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Five National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) contractor-operated sites conduct activities to design and produce explosive materials. There are about 100 different nuclear weapon components that contain explosive materials (see figure). Each site assumes primary responsibility for certain activities, but most activities require collaboration by multiple sites, according to NNSA officials and contractor representatives. In 2018, NNSA began adopting a centralized approach to managing these activities and coordinating them across its sites.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-449?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Notes: Symbols do not show actual designs. Detonators enable components to function. Main charges compress the nuclear core, or pit, creating a nuclear reaction. Neutron generators facilitate the reaction, which can be enhanced by gas transfer systems that inject gases into the pit. Arming, fuzing, firing, and surety systems ensure that weapons will operate safely, securely, and reliably and only when authorized. Spin rocket motors perform an arming function in nuclear bombs.

NNSA officials and contractor representatives identified several challenges related to explosives activities, such as the agency's dwindling supply of explosive materials, aging and deteriorating infrastructure, and difficulty recruiting and training qualified staff. For example, only a single container of one specialized material remains. NNSA officials and contractor representatives indicated that the agency is taking some actions to address these challenges, such as working to replenish the supply of dwindling, highly specialized materials.

NNSA's strategic plan for explosives activities addresses some of the challenges agency officials and contractor representatives have identified, and NNSA followed several key leading practices in developing its strategic plan. However, some of the plan's elements have not been fully developed consistent with selected leading practices. For instance, the plan does not include a fully developed mission statement, and some performance goals are not quantifiable. NNSA officials stated that they are aware of the strategic plan's limitations and that they released it quickly to ensure that the explosives community could use it as soon as possible. NNSA officials said that they intend to revise the strategic plan in the next year or so. As NNSA revises its strategic plan, by including fully developed elements of an effective strategic plan, NNSA would help make the strategic plan more useful in measuring goal achievement and assessing accountability."

Why GAO Did This Study: "NNSA is responsible for the management and security of the U.S. nuclear stockpile. NNSA has ongoing and planned efforts to modernize nearly all of the weapons in the stockpile, which require new explosive components. The production of some key explosives ceased in the early 1990s, and much of the infrastructure supporting this work is aging, making it expensive and difficult to maintain.

The Senate Report accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 included a provision for GAO to review NNSA's high explosive capabilities specific to nuclear weapons. This report examines (1) explosives activities that NNSA and its sites conduct and how NNSA manages them; (2) challenges NNSA officials and contractor representatives identified in conducting these activities and the extent to which NNSA has taken actions to address them; and (3) the extent to which NNSA's strategic plan for explosives activities describes further actions, if any, to address the challenges identified and follows leading practices for strategic planning. GAO reviewed NNSA documents related to explosives activities, including its strategic plan; compared the plan with leading practices; and interviewed NNSA officials and site representatives."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations, including that NNSA, as it revises its strategic plan for explosives activities, include fully developed elements of an effective strategic plan. NNSA agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-449?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Transitioning Servicemembers

WASHINGTON, June 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Military Employment Assistance Centers. The report (GAO-19-438R) is titled "Transitioning Servicemembers: Information on Military Employment Assistance Centers".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on June 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Military Employment Assistance Centers. The report (GAO-19-438R) is titled "Transitioning Servicemembers: Information on Military Employment Assistance Centers". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on June 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. WhatGAO Found: "About 300 employment assistance centers have been established at military installations worldwide. These centers operate the mandatory Transition Assistance Program (TAP), which provides counseling, employment assistance, and information on veterans' benefits to help separating servicemembers transition to civilian life. Other employment and family support services are also available at the centers. Complete and reliable data on the use of all of the support services administered by the centers is not available, but efforts are underway to collect such data.

Regarding TAP, DOD reported that 138,256 (90 percent) of eligible separating active duty servicemembers; 12,069 (57 percent) of National Guard members; and 13,630 (64 percent) of eligible Reserve service members participated in TAP in fiscal year 2018. Though not required, according to DOD officials, the agency collected data for fiscal year 2017 from each military branch of service on the employment readiness and other family support services provided at the centers. However, DOD officials stated that the centers were reporting the information differently. As a result, DOD is planning to revise the reporting requirements and method of data collection to gather more accurate information.

The Coast Guard also collects TAP participation data, but GAO's recent prior work found that the data were unreliable and the agency has not yet implemented GAO's recommendation to establish policies and procedures to improve the reliability and completeness of the data. Coast Guard officials reported that they do not collect data on the other employment services provided at its centers beyond TAP, and the agency is not required to do so.

DOD and the Coast Guard use several databases and documents to record servicemembers' training that may be applicable to future civilian employment. For example, the Verification of Military Experience and Training (VMET) is a key document that compiles information from the military branches' databases and lists the training servicemembers received and their military occupations in civilian terms. Agency officials said TAP guidance helps ensure that servicemembers have access to the VMET and similar documents, which the servicemember may then share with civilian entities, such as potential employers and state employment agencies. According to DOD officials, as part of completing TAP, servicemembers must confirm that they either have hard copies of their documents or understand how to access them online. According to these officials, DOD does not share servicemembers' information directly with external entities, unless requested by a servicemember."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Approximately 200,000 servicemembers transition from military service to civilian life each year, according to DOD. Some veterans may experience difficulty finding civilian employment after leaving the service. For example, a veteran may be unfamiliar with effective job search strategies, and may not know how their military experience and training could apply to jobs in the civilian workforce. Federal law requires DOD and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish permanent employment assistance centers at appropriate military and Coast Guard installations. In addition, under the law, DOD and DHS are required to take other steps that may help servicemembers apply their skills and experience to civilian employment. Specifically, the agencies must provide servicemembers a certification or verification of any job skills and experience acquired while on active duty that may be applicable to civilian employment and must develop procedures for sharing certain information with civilian entities, such as potential employers and state employment agencies.

The conference report accompanying the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 included a provision for GAO to review the employment assistance programs authorized by 10 U.S.C. Sec. 1143. This report describes (1) the number and locations of employment assistance centers currently in operation, and what is known about how frequently servicemembers use them, and (2) how DOD and the Coast Guard record servicemembers' training that may be applicable to future civilian employment, and what procedures are in place to share such information with civilian entities.

GAO reviewed a list of the military installations with employment assistance centers from DOD and DHS as well as agency documents on the use of employment services at the centers, and the various databases and documents used to record the training servicemembers received. GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and agency policies for TAP. GAO also reviewed DOD data on TAP participation for fiscal 2018. Lastly, GAO interviewed officials from the Coast Guard, DHS, DOD, and the Department of Labor."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-438R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Data Protection

WASHINGTON, June 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal agencies' actions to ensure the effectiveness of agencies' remote identity proofing processes. The report (GAO-19-288) is titled "Data Protection: Federal Agencies Need to Strengthen Online Identity Verification Processes".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Federal Retirement

WASHINGTON, June 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on potential improvements in federal retirement processing at the Office of Personnel Management. The report (GAO-19-217) is titled "Federal Retirement: OPM Actions Needed to Improve Application Processing Times".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Army Corps of Engineers

WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Army Corps of Engineers prioritizes funding for Section 219 projects. The report (GAO-19-487) is titled "Army Corps of Engineers: Process for Selecting Section 219 Projects for Funding Could Be Strengthened".

The report was sent to Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Tom Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Army Corps of Engineers prioritizes funding for Section 219 projects. The report (GAO-19-487) is titled "Army Corps of Engineers: Process for Selecting Section 219 Projects for Funding Could Be Strengthened". The report was sent to Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, chairman, Sen. Tom Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,and Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "From fiscal years 2013 through 2017, the most recent available data, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) spent approximately $81 million on 29 Section 219 projects to develop drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. For example, through the St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin Section 219 project, the Corps assisted with improvements to a wastewater treatment plant. Of the 29 projects, the Corps spent over half of the funding during this period on four projects: (1) Calumet Region, Indiana; (2) Desoto County, Mississippi; (3) Jackson County, Mississippi; and (4) Lakes Marion and Moultrie, South Carolina.

The Corps generally follows its standard budget prioritization process--which involves districts, divisions, and headquarters ranking each project and headquarters making final funding decisions--to prioritize Section 219 funding. However, the Corps has not developed criteria to guide this process. GAO found the Corps varies in the factors it uses to rank Section 219 projects. For example, one district considers whether a project can be completed within the fiscal year, while another considers the level of congressional support and dollar value of the project. Headquarters officials said the agency views Section 219 projects as outside its core mission areas and therefore has not developed written criteria. Congressional direction has indicated that the Corps is to consider characteristics--such as projects with the greater economic impact--in prioritizing Section 219 project funding. While aware of this direction, Corps officials said they do not consider it when ranking projects. Federal standards for internal control states that agencies should use quality information to achieve their objectives. By establishing written criteria, the Corps would have greater assurance that its Section 219 project selections align with a clear set of priorities, such as those identified by recent congressional direction."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Under Section 219 of the 1992 Water Resources Development Act, as amended, Congress authorized the Corps to provide assistance for the design and construction of environmental infrastructure projects, known as Section 219 projects. Such projects include the development of water transmission lines. Congress typically provides a lump sum appropriation for the Corps' construction account, out of which Section 219 and other environmental infrastructure projects are funded.

GAO was asked to review projects carried out under the Section 219 program. This report examines (1) the number and type of Section 219 projects and expenditures from fiscal years 2013 through 2017, and (2) how the Corps prioritizes funding for Section 219 projects. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and agency guidance; analyzed agency data for fiscal years 2013 through 2017, the most recent time period for which data were available; and interviewed agency officials at headquarters, three divisions, and three districts-selected based on geographic distribution and the amount of Section 219 project expenditures."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Corps develop written criteria for ranking Section 219 projects for funding, taking into account a clear set of priorities, such as those identified by recent congressional direction. The agency concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-487?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Tobacco Taxes

WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the market shifts among smoking tobacco products. The report (GAO-19-467) is titled "Tobacco Taxes: Market Shifts toward Lower-Taxed Products Continue to Reduce Federal Revenue".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Large federal excise tax disparities among similar tobacco products after enactment of the Children's Health ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the market shifts among smoking tobacco products. The report (GAO-19-467) is titled "Tobacco Taxes: Market Shifts toward Lower-Taxed Products Continue to Reduce Federal Revenue". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Large federal excise tax disparities among similar tobacco products after enactment of the Children's HealthInsurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) of 2009 led to immediate market shifts (see figure). Specifically, CHIPRA created tax disparities between roll-your-own and pipe tobacco and between small and large cigars, creating opportunities for tax avoidance and leading manufacturers and consumers to shift to the lower-taxed products. Following the market shifts after CHIPRA, the lower-taxed products have sustained their dominant position in their respective markets.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-467?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Market shifts to avoid increased tobacco taxes following CHIPRA have continued to reduce federal revenue. GAO estimates that federal revenue losses due to market shifts from roll-your-own to pipe tobacco and from small to large cigars range from a total of about $2.5 to $3.9 billion from April 2009 through September 2018, depending on assumptions about how consumers would respond to a tax increase.

Federal revenue would likely increase if Congress were to equalize the tax rate for pipe tobacco with the rates currently in effect for roll-your-own tobacco and cigarettes. GAO estimates that federal revenue would increase by a total of approximately $1.3 billion from fiscal year 2019 through fiscal year 2023 if the pipe tobacco tax rate were equalized with the higher rate for roll-your-own tobacco and cigarettes. While equalizing federal excise taxes on small and large cigars should raise revenue based on past experience, the specific revenue effect is unknown because data for conducting this analysis are not available. These data are not collected by the Department of the Treasury because such data are not needed to administer and collect large cigar taxes under the current tax structure."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2009, CHIPRA increased and equalized federal excise tax rates for cigarettes, roll-your-own tobacco, and small cigars but did not equalize tax rates for pipe tobacco and large cigars--products that can be cigarette substitutes. GAO reported in 2012 and 2014 on the estimated federal revenue losses due to the market shifts from roll-your-own to pipe tobacco and from small to large cigars.

This report updates GAO's prior products by examining (1) the market shifts among smoking tobacco products since CHIPRA, (2) the estimated effects on federal revenue if the market shifts had not occurred, and (3) what is known about the revenue effects if Congress were to eliminate current tax disparities between smoking tobacco products. GAO analyzed data from the Department of the Treasury and U.S. Customs and Border Protection to identify sales trends for domestic and imported smoking tobacco products, to estimate the effect on tax collection if market substitutions had not occurred, and to model the effects of equalizing tax rates for smoking tobacco products."

What GAO Recommends: "In its 2012 report, GAO recommended Congress consider equalizing tax rates on roll-your-own and pipe tobacco and consider options for reducing tax avoidance due to tax differentials between small and large cigars. Treasury generally agreed with GAO's conclusions and observations. As of May 2019, Congress had not passed legislation to reduce or eliminate tax differentials between smoking tobacco products. Treasury also generally agreed with this report's findings."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-467?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on VA Real Property

WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Department of Veterans Affairs incorporates veterans' changing needs and expectations into facility planning. The report (GAO-19-440) is titled "VA Real Property: Improvements in Facility Planning Needed to Ensure VA Meets Changes in Veterans' Needs and Expectations".

The report was sent to Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how the Department of Veterans Affairs incorporates veterans' changing needs and expectations into facility planning. The report (GAO-19-440) is titled "VA Real Property: Improvements in Facility Planning Needed to Ensure VA Meets Changes in Veterans' Needs and Expectations". The report was sent to Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, on June 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated withthe report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) analyzes demographic trends to assess veterans' future health-care needs, such as the need for more long-term care or women's health care services. VA does not, however, systematically collect data concerning whether demographic groups differ in their expectations for how they will receive care, such as whether some groups expect different levels of privacy. VA officials said they gauge expectations by surveying veterans and talking to veterans service organizations. GAO's review, however, found the amount of information VA collected through these methods is limited. Without robust data about veterans' expectations and assessing how changes would affect facilities' space needs, VA cannot readily anticipate and adapt to meet veterans' changing expectations--a goal in its FY 2018-2024 Strategic Plan .

In addition to identifying meeting veterans' changing needs and expectations as a national strategic goal, VA defined a national set of VA-delivered core medical services called "foundational health services" to, in part, meet veterans' expectations of consistent care offerings across VA medical centers (VAMC) and also to focus VA's resources on its highest priority services. However, based on GAO's survey of VAMCs and discussions with selected facility-planning officials, GAO found that VA did not clearly instruct VAMCs in how to apply VA's strategic goal or foundational health services to facility planning. Accordingly, more than three quarters of VAMC facility-planning officials responding to GAO's survey indicated additional instruction from VA for the strategic goal and foundational health services would be useful. Without providing clear instruction, VA increases its risk that its strategic goal and foundational health services are not meeting their objective to incorporate veterans' changing needs and expectations.

Most facility-planning officials had concerns with using estimated space needs derived from VA's Strategic Capital Investment Planning (SCIP) process, which converts estimated needs for veterans' health care into future space needs for the VAMCs. Specifically, the officials (1) did not understand how the SCIP process converts health care needs into physical space and (2) questioned how accurately the space estimates reflected the future health-care needs for local facilities. For example, 72 percent of facility-planning officials responding to GAO's survey reported that at least one of SCIP's 12 space category estimates was "generally inaccurate" at reflecting projected space needs for their facility. As a result, instead of relying on SCIP's space estimates as a starting point to incorporate veterans' changing needs into facility planning, VAMC facility planners told GAO that they may instead use locally identified health care needs and priorities to determine space needs. Without a process for VA to understand and address concerns about the SCIP process, VAMCs may spend time and resources on capital projects that do not necessarily meet veterans' future needs as VA intended. This approach may therefore impede VA's ability to respond to veterans needs as this population changes."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VA provides for care to over 9-million veterans in its health care system, including 172 VAMCs. As veterans' demographics shift, such as by age or gender, their needs for health care and their expectations for how they receive that care may also change. Along with the VA MISSION Act of 2018, which requires VA to assess its facilities for realignment and modernization, these changes could have implications for VA's capital-planning efforts.

GAO was asked to review how VA incorporates veterans' changing needs and expectations into facility planning. This report examines: (1) VA's efforts to assess trends in veterans' future needs and expectations; (2) VA's efforts to help VAMCs address these changes through facility planning; and (3) how VAMCs use VA's process for identifying facilities' future space needs.

GAO surveyed all VAMCs, visited nine VAMCs, reviewed VA's planning documents and data, and interviewed officials from VA and veterans service organizations. GAO's survey response rate was 99 percent.
What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends VA: (1) assess changes in veterans' expectations; (2) instruct facility planners on how to incorporate veterans' changing needs and expectations; (3) clarify foundational health services implementation; and (4) assess concerns with the SCIP process and make needed adjustments. VA agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-440?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Climate Resilience

WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's progress in developing a means to account for potentially damaging weather in its facilities project designs. The report (GAO-19-453) is titled "Climate Resilience: DOD Needs to Assess Risk and Provide Guidance on Use of Climate Projections in Installation Master Plans and Facilities Designs".

The report was sent to Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Defense's progress in developing a means to account for potentially damaging weather in its facilities project designs. The report (GAO-19-453) is titled "Climate Resilience: DOD Needs to Assess Risk and Provide Guidance on Use of Climate Projections in Installation Master Plans and Facilities Designs". The report was sent to Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs,and Related Agencies, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida, chairwoman, Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, and Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Department of Defense (DOD) installations have not consistently assessed risks from extreme weather and climate change effects or consistently used projections to anticipate future climate conditions. For example, DOD's 2018 preliminary assessment of extreme weather and climate effects at installations was based on the installations' reported past experiences with extreme weather rather than an analysis of future vulnerabilities based on climate projections. Fifteen of the 23 installations GAO visited or contacted had considered some extreme weather and climate change effects in their plans as required by DOD guidance, but 8 had not. For example, Fort Irwin, California, worked with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to improve stormwater drainage after intense flash flooding caused significant damage to base infrastructure. By contrast, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, did not include such considerations in its plans, although it is located in an area subject to tropical storms and where further sea level rise is anticipated.

GAO also found that most of the installations had not used climate projections, because they lack guidance on how to incorporate projections into their master plans. Not assessing risks or using climate projections in installation planning may expose DOD facilities to greater-than-anticipated damage or degradation as a result of extreme weather or climate-related effects.

Eleven of the 23 installations we reviewed had designed one or more individual facilities projects to increase the resilience of the facilities to extreme weather and climate change effects. However, project designs generally did not consider climate projections, according to installation officials. These officials told us that DOD lacks guidance on how to use climate projections that involve multiple future scenarios and different time periods. Until DOD updates its facilities design standards to require installations to consider climate projections in project designs, identify authoritative sources for them to use, and provide guidance on how to use projections, installation project designers may continue to exclude consideration of climate projections from facilities project designs, potentially making investments that are planned without consideration of climate-related risks."

Why GAO Did This Study: "DOD manages a global real-estate portfolio with an almost $1.2 trillion estimated replacement value. Since 2010, DOD has identified climate change as a threat to its operations and installations. In January 2019, DOD stated that the effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to the department's missions, operational plans, and installations. GAO was asked to assess DOD's progress in developing a means to account for potentially damaging weather in its facilities project designs.

GAO examined the extent to which DOD has taken steps to incorporate resilience to extreme weather and climate change effects into (1) selected installation master plans and related planning documents, and (2) selected individual installation facilities projects.

GAO reviewed DOD documents related to increasing climate resilience, conducting installation master planning, and designing facilities projects. GAO visited or contacted a non-generalizable sample of 23 installations that had been associated with one or more climate vulnerabilities."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making eight recommendations, including that the military departments work together to update master planning criteria to require an assessment of extreme weather and climate change risks and to incorporate DOD guidance on the use of climate projections into facilities design standards. GAO also recommends that DOD issue guidance on incorporating climate projections into installation master planning and facilities project designs. DOD concurred with all eight of GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-453?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Commercial Aviation

WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on airline information technology outages. The report (GAO-19-514) is titled "Commercial Aviation: Information on Airline IT Outages".

The report was sent to Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Transportation (DOT) and, within it, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have limited roles overseeing or addressing the effects of outages ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on airline information technology outages. The report (GAO-19-514) is titled "Commercial Aviation: Information on Airline IT Outages". The report was sent to Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Department of Transportation (DOT) and, within it, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have limited roles overseeing or addressing the effects of outagesfrom information technology (IT) systems that airlines rely on to schedule and transport passengers (e.g., reservation or flight planning systems).

* FAA's operations and oversight. At an airline's request, FAA may halt the operation of all or part of that airline's flights during an outage and work with the airline to reintegrate flights upon recovery. FAA does not directly oversee airline IT systems but works with airlines to ensure that airline data interfaces correctly with FAA's operational systems.

* DOT's consumer protection. Airline IT outages are not specifically addressed in DOT's consumer protections for passengers, although other protections may apply, such as restrictions on tarmac delays if a passenger is held on a flight during an outage. DOT oversees airlines' adherence to their contracts with passengers. These may include specific provisions such as refund procedures and responsibility for delayed flights, among other things. DOT also receives consumer complaints and uses complaint data to initiate investigations that may result in fines or enforcement actions.

* DOT's data collection. DOT requires large airlines to report information about on-time performance to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), including the causes of flight delays and cancellations in several broad categories (e.g., airline caused, weather, and late-arriving aircraft).

Using multiple sources, GAO identified 34 IT outages from 2015 through 2017, affecting 11 of 12 selected airlines. No government data were available to identify IT outages or determine how many flights or passengers were affected by such outages. BTS data provide information to consumers about airline performance broadly but are not designed to identify the effects of individual events, such as the number of flight delays and cancellations resulting from IT outages. According to GAO's validation of multiple sources, however, about 85 percent of the identified outages resulted in some flight delays or cancellations. Because of limited data, information about how passengers have been inconvenienced from outages is largely anecdotal (see figure for examples of inconveniences). Further, airlines vary in what they provide to these passengers (e.g., food, hotel, or rebooking on another airline) when IT outages occur. Consumer complaints stemming from IT outages accounted for less than one percent of all complaints received by DOT from 2015 through June 2018, and according to agency officials, these complaints raised concerns similar to complaints resulting from other causes of flight disruption. Complaints reviewed by GAO included the lack of food, a hotel, or compensation, among other things."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-514?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "In recent years, the airline industry experienced several well-publicized IT system outages to reservation, check-in, flight planning, and other systems. Such outages can result in widespread disruption to air travel, inconveniencing passengers, who may be delayed or face out-of-pocket costs, and can also affect airlines' revenue and operations. Airlines are responsible for operating and maintaining their IT systems.

GAO was asked to review airline IT outages. GAO examined: (1) DOT's and FAA's roles related to airline IT outages and (2) what is known about these outages and their effects on passengers. GAO identified relevant federal laws and responsibilities and interviewed DOT and FAA officials. In the absence of DOT and FAA data to identify airline IT outages, GAO identified outages using open source documents for the 12 airlines reporting to BTS from 2015 through 2017 and validated these outages using a multi-step process with publicly available airline information, interviews with airline representatives, and FAA and DOT data. GAO also reviewed airlines' contracts of carriage, which are legally binding contracts between airlines and passengers, to understand how airlines accommodate passengers inconvenienced by IT outages, as well as 140 consumer complaints related to airline IT outages received by DOT from 2015 through June 2018."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-514?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DOD Health Care

WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the referral management process facilitates the coordination of primary and specialty care for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries. The report (GAO-19-488) is titled "DOD Health Care: Improvements Needed for Tracking Coordination of Specialty Care Referrals for TRICARE Prime Beneficiaries".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the referral management process facilitates the coordination of primary and specialty care for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries. The report (GAO-19-488) is titled "DOD Health Care: Improvements Needed for Tracking Coordination of Specialty Care Referrals for TRICARE Prime Beneficiaries". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry,R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Defense's (DOD) Defense Health Agency (DHA) has limited information about the extent to which the referral management process facilitates the coordination of primary and specialty care for beneficiaries enrolled in TRICARE Prime--a managed care option--because information about their specialty care referrals is not always complete or accurate. The coordination of care for these beneficiaries is important because they may move between military treatment facilities (MTF) and civilian providers to obtain needed care. DHA requires specialty care providers to share documentation about the care they provided for referring primary care managers to review. This and other information is to be documented in the Referral Management Suite (RMS), the information technology system used by MTF officials to track and process referrals. However, GAO found that the five MTFs it visited had incomplete and unreliable data in RMS due to lack of training and insufficient staff. For example, GAO found that some MTFs were not tracking referral results in RMS due, in part, to lack of training. Officials with each of the military services told GAO that they are aware of RMS reliability issues and have been working to address them through system updates, training, and hiring staff.

DHA has begun to replace RMS and other existing information technology systems with Military Health System (MHS) Genesis, a new electronic health record system. The implementation of MHS Genesis began in 2017 at four MTFs, which have experienced difficulties with system implementation, including with referral management.

* GAO found that the four MTFs using MHS Genesis were not adequately trained on how to use its referral management component prior to the system's deployment. This limited the MTFs' ability to process and track referrals, and led to concerns about the reliability of the system's referral data. While MHS Genesis training on referral management has been redesigned for the next round of MTFs slated for implementation in summer 2019, officials said that it remains unclear whether this training will provide the guidance needed for MTF officials to accurately process and capture information on specialty care referrals. Without adequate training, DHA cannot ensure that the referral data in MHS Genesis accurately reflects the referral experiences of its Prime beneficiaries, potentially impacting the timeliness and quality of care they receive.

* DHA and military service officials who are responsible for developing standardized referral management guidance for the department--the Referral Management Working Group--said that they have not been able to obtain reports about referrals for the four MTFs that use MHS Genesis. The system would need to be configured to produce the types of referral reports needed, according to these officials, who told GAO they have been working with the DHA officials responsible for system implementation to develop such reports. Without reliable reports on referrals, DHA will continue to lack the information it needs about the coordination of care for its TRICARE Prime beneficiaries, impeding its ability to manage referrals, as well as ensuring these beneficiaries receive needed care."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Specialty care referrals are a key component of care coordination for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries. Each Prime beneficiary is assigned to a primary care manager either at an MTF or within the civilian provider network. Primary care managers are responsible for overseeing all aspects of their patients' care, which includes making referrals for specialty care when needed.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 included a provision for GAO to examine care coordination within and between the direct and purchased care systems. Among other objectives, this report examines the extent to which the referral management process facilitates the coordination of primary and specialty care for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries. GAO examined relevant policies; analyzed current referral data from five MTFs it visited, selected for variety in military service, geographic location, and numbers of referrals; and interviewed officials with DHA and the military services. GAO also discussed the implementation of MHS Genesis with officials at DOD and the four MTFs where it has been implemented."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense ensure that (1) MTF referral staff are trained to process and accurately document information in MHS Genesis about specially care referrals and (2) MHS Genesis is configured to produce reports with reliable data on the referral process. DOD concurred with both of these recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-488?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on KC-46 Tanker Modernization

WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the KC-46 programs progress toward meeting cost, schedule and performance goals. The report (GAO-19-480) is titled "KC-46 Tanker Modernization: Aircraft Delivery Has Begun, but Deficiencies Could Affect Operations and Will Take Time to Correct".

The report was sent to Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, chairman, and Rep. Robert J. Wittman, R-Virginia, ranking memberof the House Armed Services subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the KC-46 programs progress toward meeting cost, schedule and performance goals. The report (GAO-19-480) is titled "KC-46 Tanker Modernization: Aircraft Delivery Has Begun, but Deficiencies Could Affect Operations and Will Take Time to Correct". The report was sent to Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, chairman, and Rep. Robert J. Wittman, R-Virginia, ranking memberof the House Armed Services subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. WhatGAO Found: "Costs for the KC-46 program remain lower than expected, as shown below.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-480?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The Air Force accepted the first KC-46 in January 2019, but Boeing remains nearly 3 years behind schedule. As shown below, Boeing now plans to deliver the first 18 aircraft with all three aerial refueling subsystems by June 2020.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-480?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Program officials expect the KC-46 to meet key performance goals over the next few years as it accumulates 50,000 fleet hours. However, the Air Force is accepting aircraft that do not fully meet contract specifications and have critical deficiencies, including ones that affect (1) the operators' ability to guide the fuel delivery boom into position, and (2) the boom itself. The deficiencies could affect operations and cause damage to stealth aircraft being refueled, making them visible to radar. Program officials estimate it will take 3 to 4 years to develop fixes for the deficiencies and a few more years to retrofit up to 106 aircraft. The Air Force and Boeing will incur costs to fix the deficiencies, with the Air Force's portion estimated to be more than $300 million. The Air Force is withholding 20 percent payment on each aircraft until Boeing fixes the deficiencies and non-compliances. Meanwhile, the Air Force has limited some refueling operations.

GAO identified a number of insights that could benefit other programs, including the use of a fixed-price-type development contract and a correction of deficiencies clause in the contract that protected the government from some cost increases. The Department of Defense agreed to provide lessons learned about the KC-46 program for future acquisition programs based on a recommendation GAO made in March 2012, but does not plan to do so until development is complete in 2021. GAO believes other programs could benefit from insights identified in this report if they were disseminated sooner."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Aerial refueling--the transfer of fuel from airborne tankers to combat and airlift forces--is critical to the U.S. military's ability to effectively operate globally. The Air Force initiated the KC-46 program in 2011 to replace about a third of its aging KC-135 aerial refueling fleet. Boeing was awarded a fixed-price incentive contract to develop the first four aircraft, which are being used for testing. Boeing was also required to deliver the first 18 fully capable aircraft by August 2017. The program plans to eventually field 179 aircraft.

This report assesses the program's progress toward meeting cost, schedule, and performance goals. The report also assesses how the program's contracting and sustainment planning approach could inform other acquisition programs.

GAO analyzed cost, schedule, performance, test, manufacturing, contracting, and sustainment planning documents; and interviewed officials from the KC-46 program office, other defense offices, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency, the Federal Aviation Administration, and Boeing."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Department of Defense disseminate insights in this report about the KC-46's contracting and sustainment planning experiences for consideration by acquisition programs, particularly those that plan to use a fixed-price-type development contract or a commercial derivative aircraft. The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-480?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on VA Health Care

WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Veterans Affairs' use of community care and efforts to develop budget estimates for this care. The report (GAO-19-478) is titled "VA Health Care: Estimating Resources Needed to Provide Community Care".

The report was sent to Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, and Rep. David P. Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associated ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 13 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Veterans Affairs' use of community care and efforts to develop budget estimates for this care. The report (GAO-19-478) is titled "VA Health Care: Estimating Resources Needed to Provide Community Care". The report was sent to Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, and Rep. David P. Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, on June 12. Here are excerpts of summaries associatedwith the report.

What GAO Found: "To help ensure that veterans are provided timely and accessible health care services, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) may purchase care from non-VA providers, known as community care. VA obligated $14.9 billion for community care in fiscal year 2018, an increase of $6.7 billion (about 82 percent) since fiscal year 2014. The number of veterans authorized to use community care increased from 1.3 million to 1.8 million during this period. By fiscal year 2021, VA estimated obligations to increase to $17.8 billion, and officials estimate at least 1.8 million veterans will continue to use this care.

VA uses a projection model to estimate the majority of resources needed to provide health care services. Beginning with the President's fiscal year 2018 budget request, VA updated its model to estimate the resources needed to purchase over 40 community care services accounting for over 75 percent of VA's community care budget estimate. These services include outpatient and inpatient care, among others. For the remainder of its community care budget estimate, which includes nursing care in state-operated homes, VA uses other methods based on historical utilization. VA's budget estimate is successively reviewed at VA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to inform the President's budget request. VA identified several changes made during the review process to its budget estimate for fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to reflect more current information related to utilization and costs, among other factors.

VA's actual obligations for community care for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 were $1.2 billion and $2.2 billion higher, respectively, than originally estimated. According to VA officials, this occurred for several reasons, including policy changes and increased costs for the Veterans Choice Program. To support higher obligations, VA requested and received additional funding for the Veterans Choice Program outside the annual appropriations process and used other funding sources, such as unobligated amounts from prior fiscal years."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VA continues to focus on the use of community care to address challenges with veterans' access to health care services at VA medical facilities. In fiscal year 2019, VA plans to consolidate the Veterans Choice Program and several other community care programs under a single new Veterans Community Care Program. GAO and others have previously reported on past challenges VA has faced regarding the reliability, transparency, and consistency of its budget estimates for health care.

GAO was asked to review VA's use of community care and efforts to develop budget estimates for this care. This report describes (1) trends in obligations for and utilization of VA's community care programs since fiscal year 2014, (2) how VA develops its community care budget estimate and any subsequent changes made to this estimate, and (3) how VA's actual obligations for community care compared with estimated obligations for fiscal years 2017 and 2018.

GAO reviewed actual obligation and utilization data for fiscal years 2014 through 2018, as well as estimated obligations for fiscal years 2019 through 2021. GAO also reviewed available VA documentation on the methods and data used to develop VA's community care budget estimate that informed the President's budget request for fiscal years 2017 through 2019. GAO also interviewed VA officials and contractors responsible for developing these estimates, and OMB staff responsible for the federal budget.

VA and OMB reviewed a draft of this report. VA's technical comments were incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-478?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Agencies' Legacy Systems

WASHINGTON, June 12 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on federal agencies' legacy systems. The report (GAO-19-471) is titled "Information Technology: Agencies Need to Develop Modernization Plans for Critical Legacy Systems".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations, Rep. ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Child Care, Early Education

WASHINGTON, June 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on all state early care and education programs. The report (GAO-19-375) is titled "Child Care and Early Education: Most States Offer Preschool Programs and Rely on Multiple Funding Sources".

The report was sent to , Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, on May 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "GAO's national survey of state program officials identified 86 state early care and education (ECE) programs: 73 preschool ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on all state early care and education programs. The report (GAO-19-375) is titled "Child Care and Early Education: Most States Offer Preschool Programs and Rely on Multiple Funding Sources". The report was sent to , Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, on May 8. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "GAO's national survey of state program officials identified 86 state early care and education (ECE) programs: 73 preschoolprograms serving 3- to 5-year-olds and 13 child care programs serving 0- to 2-year-olds. According to GAO's survey, most programs focused on helping at-risk children become ready for school and improving the quality of their care. In 18 states, survey responses showed that at least two ECE programs shared characteristics, offering similar services (e.g., teacher training) or prioritizing enrolling similar groups of children (e.g., low-income children). Additionally, most state ECE programs offered at least one of the same services or prioritized at least one of the same groups as the federal Head Start program or programs funded by the Child Care and Development Fund. For example, program officials reported that some state ECE programs mirror Head Start so that they can enroll additional children or offer more hours of care per day.

Officials from most state ECE programs GAO surveyed reported using multiple sources to fund their programs. Of the 86 surveyed state ECE programs, 55 reported using at least one funding source in addition to state funds in 2018, and 31 reported using at least two additional sources beyond state funds. Integrating state funds with federal and local funds may broaden the effect and reach of services provided to children and families. Program officials reported a variety of benefits of using multiple funding sources, such as an increased ability to serve more families from targeted populations, as well as challenges such as reconciling different eligibility and reporting requirements."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Each year, millions of children age 5 and under receive publicly funded early care and education services. Federal appropriations for Head Start and the Child Care and Development Fund were $9.8 and $8.1 billion respectively in fiscal year 2018. However, comprehensive information on ECE programs created and funded by states is not available. GAO was asked to identify and describe all state ECE programs.

This report examines (1) the number and characteristics of state ECE programs and the extent to which they share characteristics or overlap with federal or other state programs; and (2) how states fund their ECE programs, including any related benefits and challenges reported by states. GAO sent two surveys to program officials in 50 states and the District of Columbia. The first survey identified state programs providing early learning or child care services to children from birth to age 5, and the second gathered more information about the programs identified, including their characteristics and funding sources. GAO analyzed the survey data to determine which characteristics state programs shared with Head Start, the Child Care and Development Fund, and other state programs, as well as the benefits and challenges of using multiple funding sources."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-375?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Elder Justice

WASHINGTON, June 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on elder justice efforts in the federal criminal justice system. The report (GAO-19-365) is titled "Elder Justice: Goals and Outcome Measures Would Provide DOJ with Clear Direction and a Means to Assess Its Efforts".

The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Susan ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on elder justice efforts in the federal criminal justice system. The report (GAO-19-365) is titled "Elder Justice: Goals and Outcome Measures Would Provide DOJ with Clear Direction and a Means to Assess Its Efforts". The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. SusanCollins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, chairman, and Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, on June 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Justice (DOJ) has established several efforts to address elder abuse, including neglect and exploitation, but its planning and assessment of its elder justice efforts are limited. For example, DOJ has established several working groups and in accordance with the Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act (EAPPA)--enacted in October 2017--designated an elder justice coordinator in each of its 94 U.S. Attorneys' Offices. In addition, DOJ provides training and educational materials on elder justice topics for its own staff, as well as state and local officials, and also offers grants to state and local entities that can be used to address elder abuse.

Despite these efforts, DOJ has not developed and documented goals (e.g., enhancing coordination with state and local officials) that articulate the common outcomes it seeks to achieve through its elder justice work. DOJ also has not developed outcome measures that track the agency's progress on its overall elder justice efforts, for example, a means to measure if its coordination practices have been useful and relevant over time to state and local officials. DOJ officials stated that they do have goals, and noted that one of them is to comply with EAPPA. However, implementing the requirements outlined in EAPPA is not a goal that articulates a common outcome that the agency is seeking to achieve through its efforts. Developing and documenting goals and outcome measures, which is consistent with both leading practices and internal control standards, would assist with DOJ's planning--providing direction for what it seeks to achieve--and its assessment of overall effectiveness.

The Department of State has a number of policies and procedures to assist all U.S. citizens arrested abroad, including older U.S. citizens, and the Department of Homeland Security conducts some arrest investigations abroad. For example, trained Department of State staff at overseas posts and in Washington, D.C. provide emergency and non-emergency services to U.S. citizens arrested abroad, such as visits to the place of detention and medical assistance. They also take actions to ensure that U.S. citizens arrested abroad are treated humanely and fairly. In December 2018, the Department of State revised its policies by adding "elderly prisoners" to the list of special arrest cases, or cases that may require additional attention. The Department of Homeland Security investigates arrests in foreign countries of U.S. citizens, including older U.S. citizens, who were tricked into smuggling drugs by international criminal enterprises."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Researchers estimate that as many as 1 in 10 older adults in the United States--age 60 or older--experience abuse each year. Elder abuse may involve physical, sexual, emotional, or financial abuse or neglect. It can occur by family, guardians, or caregivers as well as by strangers and international criminal enterprises, which operate schemes for monetary gain or to facilitate other criminal activities. According to media reports and congressional testimony, some older U.S. citizens who have traveled abroad have unwittingly participated in illicit activities, and in some cases, have been arrested in foreign countries.

EAPPA included a provision for GAO to review elder justice efforts in the federal criminal justice system. This report examines (1) the ways DOJ works to address crimes against older adults, and to what extent DOJ is planning for and assessing its efforts; and (2) how the Departments of State and Homeland Security address the arrest of older U.S. citizens abroad, including arrests involving international criminal enterprises. GAO reviewed agency policy documents, and interviewed agency officials, as well as a nongeneralizable sample of elder abuse stakeholders and state and local officials selected for their experience in this area."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO made two recommendations related to developing and documenting goals and outcome measures for DOJ's elder justice work. In its response, the agency outlined steps to address the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-365?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Insurance Markets

WASHINGTON, June 8 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on new uses of technologies and potential benefits and challenges for insurers and their customers. The report (GAO-19-423) is titled "Insurance Markets: Benefits and Challenges Presented by Innovative Uses of Technology".

The report was sent to Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Buddy Carter, R-Georgia, Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Texas, Rep. Scott R. Tipton, R-Colorado, Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Missouri, and Rep. Robert Woodall, R-Georgia, on June 7. Here ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Immigration Enforcement

WASHINGTON, June 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which Immigration and Customs Enforcement has developed and implemented policies for handling and tracking cases of potentially removable veterans. The report (GAO-19-416) is titled "Immigration Enforcement: Actions Needed to Better Handle, Identify, and Track Cases Involving Veterans".

The report was sent to Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Rep. Juan Vargas, D- California, on June 6. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which Immigration and Customs Enforcement has developed and implemented policies for handling and tracking cases of potentially removable veterans. The report (GAO-19-416) is titled "Immigration Enforcement: Actions Needed to Better Handle, Identify, and Track Cases Involving Veterans". The report was sent to Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Rep. Juan Vargas, D- California, on June 6. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. WhatGAO Found: "U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has developed policies for handling cases of noncitizen veterans who may be subject to removal from the United States, but does not consistently adhere to those policies, and does not consistently identify and track such veterans. When ICE agents and officers learn they have encountered a potentially removable veteran, ICE policies require them to take additional steps to proceed with the case. GAO found that ICE did not consistently follow its policies involving veterans who were placed in removal proceedings from fiscal years 2013 through 2018. Consistent implementation of its policies would help ICE better ensure that veterans receive appropriate levels of review before they are placed in removal proceedings. Additionally, ICE has not developed a policy to identify and document all military veterans it encounters during interviews, and in cases when agents and officers do learn they have encountered a veteran, ICE does not maintain complete electronic data. Therefore, ICE does not have reasonable assurance that it is consistently implementing its policies for handling veterans' cases.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Department of Defense (DOD) have policies facilitating the naturalization of noncitizen service members and veterans, and provide informational resources to noncitizen service members seeking naturalization. The number of military naturalization applications received by USCIS declined sharply from fiscal years 2017 to 2018, resulting in a decreased number of applications approved in fiscal year 2018. USCIS and DOD officials attributed this decline to several DOD policy changes that reduced the number of noncitizens joining the military.

Citizenship status, including removal history, does not affect a veteran's eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits and services. However, living abroad affects eligibility for certain VA benefits and services. Veterans living abroad may also experience challenges accessing certain benefits and services, such as slower disability claim processing."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Throughout U.S. history, noncitizens have served in the U.S. Armed Forces. Although the Immigration and Nationality Act allows noncitizen service members to acquire citizenship, some veterans may not apply or may not satisfy all eligibility criteria. If the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determines that a noncitizen veteran is potentially removable, the veteran may be subject to administrative immigration enforcement and removal. ICE, among other things, is responsible for identifying and removing aliens who violate U.S. immigration law.

GAO was asked to review issues related to the removal of noncitizen veterans. This report examines (1) the extent to which ICE has developed and implemented policies for handling and tracking cases of potentially removable veterans; (2) how federal agencies facilitate the naturalization of noncitizen service members and veterans, and what is known about the number who have applied for naturalization; and (3) how removal affects veterans' eligibility for and access to VA benefits and services. GAO reviewed documentation, met with agency officials, analyzed available data on veterans placed in removal proceedings, and conducted a review of removed veterans' alien files. GAO also analyzed data on military naturalization applications."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that ICE (1) ensure consistent implementation of its existing policies for handling veterans' cases; (2) develop a policy or revise its current policies to identify and document veterans; and (3) collect and maintain complete data on veterans in removal proceedings or who have been removed. DHS concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-416?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Missile Defense

WASHINGTON, June 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Missile Defense Agency made progress in developing and delivering integrated regional Ballistic Missile Defense System capabilities. The report (GAO-19-387) is titled "Missile Defense: Delivery Delays Provide Opportunity for Increased Testing to Better Understand Capability".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 7 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which the Missile Defense Agency made progress in developing and delivering integrated regional Ballistic Missile Defense System capabilities. The report (GAO-19-387) is titled "Missile Defense: Delivery Delays Provide Opportunity for Increased Testing to Better Understand Capability". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin,D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on June 6. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In fiscal year 2018, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) made progress toward achieving its delivery and testing goals for some of the individual systems--known as elements--that combine and integrate to create the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). MDA is also making progress testing for integrated capabilities, which are achieved by combining BMDS elements. However, MDA did not meet its planned goals. The figure below shows MDA's progress delivering assets and conducting tests against its fiscal year 2018 plans.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-387?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

* MDA delivered a significant integrated capability for defending the United States, meeting a goal set by the Secretary of Defense in March 2013 to increase the inventory of ground-based interceptors by December 2017.

* Other on-time deliveries included software upgrades and additional assets. However, developmental challenges and testing failures contributed to MDA being unable to deliver all assets as planned.

* MDA completed four of eight flight tests. MDA successfully conducted testing to support a production decision; however, it was unable to complete its annual test plan due to failures, cancellations, and delays.

MDA has delayed the delivery of the BMDS's European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) Phase 3--which is intended to protect allies from Iranian threats--until 2020. Construction contractor issues at the planned Aegis Ashore site in Poland drove the delay. At the same time, testing for EPAA Phase 3 against planned threats has been substantially reduced and other vital testing has been deferred until after delivery. MDA officials consider EPAA testing for Phase 3 delivery complete. However, DOD guidance and acquisition best practices stress the importance of testing to understand the extent of capabilities and how to deploy them. The 18-month delay to EPAA Phase 3 provides MDA an opportunity to conduct additional testing and collect more performance data. This testing could provide the warfighter with more information and confidence in the system's ability to protect our allies against expected ballistic missile threats."

Why GAO Did This Study: "For over half a century, the Department of Defense (DOD) has funded efforts to defend the United States from ballistic missile attacks. From 2002 to 2017, MDA has received about $142 billion and has requested 46.7 billion through fiscal year 2023 to develop the BMDS. The BMDS consists of diverse and highly complex land-, sea-, and space-based systems and assets located across the globe, including planned sites in Romania and Poland to protect United States forces and allies in Europe.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, as amended, included a provision that GAO annually assess and report on MDA's progress. Among other objectives, this report addresses for fiscal year 2018 (1) the progress MDA made in achieving delivery and testing goals and (2) the extent to which MDA made progress in developing and delivering integrated regional BMDS capabilities. GAO reviewed the planned fiscal year 2018 baselines and other program documentation and assessed them against program and baseline reviews and GAO's acquisition best practices guides, and interviewed officials from relevant agencies."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that MDA use the schedule margin afforded by the European Phased Adaptive Approach Phase 3 delay to conduct testing necessary to more thoroughly assess, prior to delivery, the capabilities and limitations of Phase 3 against the expected missile threat. DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. GAO continues to believe the recommendation is valid."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-387?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Aviation Security

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Transportation Security Administration's measures to prevent behavior detection activities from resulting in unlawful profiling. The report (GAO-19-268) is titled "Aviation Security: TSA Has Policies that Prohibit Unlawful Profiling But Should Improve Its Oversight of Behavior Detection Activities".

The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-New Jersey, on April 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Transportation Security Administration's measures to prevent behavior detection activities from resulting in unlawful profiling. The report (GAO-19-268) is titled "Aviation Security: TSA Has Policies that Prohibit Unlawful Profiling But Should Improve Its Oversight of Behavior Detection Activities". The report was sent to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-New Jersey, on April 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated withthe report.

What GAO Found: "Transportation Security Administration (TSA) policy requires managers to ensure behavior detection is conducted without regard to race or ethnicity, among other factors. TSA uses seven oversight checklists to assess whether behavior detection activities are conducted in accordance with TSA policy, such as monitoring whether screeners trained in behavior detection observe and engage passengers correctly. However, these checklists do not instruct supervisors to monitor for indications of profiling. TSA officials stated that the training screeners receive, adherence to operating procedures, and general supervisory oversight are sufficient to alert supervisors to situations when unlawful profiling may occur. However, developing a specific mechanism to monitor behavior detection activities for compliance with policies prohibiting unlawful profiling would provide TSA with greater assurance that screeners are adhering to such policies.

From October 2015 through February 2018, TSA received about 3,700 complaints alleging civil rights and civil liberties violations related to passenger screening. These complaints are not specific to behavior detection activities. The TSA Contact Center (TCC), the office that initially receives these complaints, reported that about half of the complaints did not have complete information from passengers necessary for further review, such as the airport and date of the incident. According to TCC officials, they attempt to obtain the additional information from passengers, but often the complaint does not include the correct contact information or the passenger does not respond to the TCC's request for additional information. The TCC complaint data show that the remaining 51 percent (about 1,900) of complaints were referred to the TSA Multicultural Branch, the office responsible for reviewing complaints alleging civil rights and civil liberties violations. The Multicultural Branch reported reviewing 2,059 complaints, including approximately 1,900 complaints from TCC, as well as complaints referred from other TSA offices. For about half of the complaints (1,066) the Multicultural Branch reviewed, it found indications of potential discrimination and unprofessional conduct that involved race or other factors and recommended a range of refresher training across airports or for screeners at individual airports identified in the complaints."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2016, TSA began using behavior detection in a more limited way to identify potentially high-risk passengers who exhibit certain behaviors it asserts are indicative of stress, fear, or deception, and refer them for additional screening or, when warranted, to law enforcement. TSA's policies and procedures prohibit unlawful profiling, i.e., screeners are prohibited from selecting passengers for additional screening based on race, ethnicity, or other factors. Allegations of racial profiling have raised questions about TSA's use of behavior detection.

GAO was asked to review TSA's measures to prevent behavior detection activities from resulting in unlawful profiling. This report examines, among other things, (1) TSA's oversight of behavior detection activities and (2) the number of complaints alleging violations of civil rights and civil liberties related to passenger screening and actions taken by TSA to address them.

GAO reviewed TSA policies and procedures; analyzed passenger complaint data received by TSA from October 2015 through February 2018 and actions taken to address them; and interviewed TSA officials. Complaint data we analyzed alleged conduct that occurred at the screening checkpoint and was not specific to behavior detection activities."

What GAO Recommends: "TSA should develop a specific oversight mechanism to monitor behavior detection activities for compliance with policies that prohibit unlawful profiling. DHS concurred with GAO's recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-268?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Real Property

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the General Services Administration's delegated leasing program. The report (GAO-19-405) is titled "Federal Real Property: GSA Needs to Strengthen Oversight of Its Delegated Leasing Program".

The report was sent to Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, on June 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The General Services Administration (GSA) has taken steps to reform its delegated ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the General Services Administration's delegated leasing program. The report (GAO-19-405) is titled "Federal Real Property: GSA Needs to Strengthen Oversight of Its Delegated Leasing Program". The report was sent to Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, on June 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The General Services Administration (GSA) has taken steps to reform its delegatedleasing program, but data reliability issues remain. For example, GSA created GSA's Real Estate Exchange (G-REX) to centralize delegated lease requests and approvals, but GAO found G-REX had incorrect information on lease rental values and rates--reporting rates 12 times higher than they actually were. Moreover, GAO found that GSA was not annually reconciling data between G-REX and the government-wide real property database, per GSA's own procedures. GSA officials said that their past efforts to fully reconcile the data were unsuccessful but acknowledged there may be ways to compare the data to improve the reliability of both datasets. Until GSA clarifies what it can do to partially reconcile the data sets, it is not obtaining the intended benefits of this data validation exercise.

GSA does not know if agencies have the ability to manage their delegated leasing activities because it does not regularly assess their policies and procedures, or their performance in meeting GSA's management goals, such as avoiding extensions. GSA procedures state that GSA will consider the agency's organizational structure and ability to meet certain GSA performance measures prior to granting requests for delegated leasing authority. Moreover, federal internal control standards call for agencies to design control activities to better manage the program. However, GSA officials said that GSA relies on the agencies to oversee their own delegated leases. Nevertheless, GAO found instances of inadequate policies and procedures at one agency in managing its delegated leasing activities. Further, all 4 agencies had delegated leases that were in holdover status (occupying a space beyond the expiration of the lease term), which violates program requirements. Because GSA does not regularly assess agencies' procedures or performance, it cannot ensure that agencies are effectively managing their delegated leasing activities.

GSA cannot ensure that the leases agencies execute under delegated authority meet program requirements and are within the authority granted because it lacks key procedures to do so. GAO found that GSA had only reviewed 1 percent of the post lease award documents agencies had submitted, and in some cases, agencies had not submitted required documentation. GSA officials said the agencies are responsible for ensuring that documents are submitted and requirements are met. However, a risk-based assessment of a selection of delegated leases' post award documents can provide assurances that agencies comply with existing regulations and prevent potential fraud, waste, and abuse. Because GSA did not have a process to systematically review these documents, GSA is unable to ensure that delegated leases meet requirements and that agencies are positioned to prevent fraud, waste, or abuse."

Why GAO Did This Study: "As the federal government's landlord, GSA is authorized to lease property to accommodate federal agencies. It can also delegate this authority to other agencies, though GSA is still responsible for overseeing the delegated leasing program. However, prior audits found problems with delegated leasing, including excessive rental rates and insufficient documentation to support that the government received a fair and reasonable price for the lease.

GAO was asked to review GSA's delegated leasing program. This report examines: 1) GSA's efforts to reform its delegated leasing program; 2) the extent to which GSA assesses agencies' policies, procedures, and performance in managing their delegated leasing activities; and 3) the extent to which GSA ensures delegated leases meet requirements. GAO reviewed federal statutes and regulations, and GSA's guidance and data on delegated leases. To illustrate how GSA approves and oversees delegated leases, GAO judgmentally reviewed 17 delegated leases selected to include lease contract value, type of lease, and agencies with high number of delegated leases. GAO interviewed officials from GSA and the four agencies associated with GAO's selected delegated leases."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that GSA (1) reconcile its databases; (2) regularly assess agency procedures for managing delegated leasing, (3) track agency performance, and (4) develop a review process for post lease award documents. GSA agreed with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-405?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Renewable Fuel Standard

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to the effects of the Renewable Fuel Standard. The report (GAO-19-47) is titled "Renewable Fuel Standard: Information on Likely Program Effects on Gasoline Prices and Greenhouse Gas Emissions".

The report was sent to Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, on May 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Effect on prices. Evidence from studies, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on School Meals Programs

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on improper payment error rates and potential fraud in the school meals programs. The report (GAO-19-389) is titled "School Meals Programs: USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper Payments but Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks".

The report was sent to Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman of the Senate ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on improper payment error rates and potential fraud in the school meals programs. The report (GAO-19-389) is titled "School Meals Programs: USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper Payments but Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks". The report was sent to Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, chairman of the SenateAgriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry subcommittee on Commodities, Risk Management, and Trade, and Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Nebraska, on May 21. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has reported various actions aimed at lowering estimated improper payment error rates in the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program (school meals programs). Examples include a new application prototype intended to reduce applicant errors and training for food service workers to reduce administrative errors. USDA uses a model based on a periodic study to estimate improper payments, and reported error rates will generally not reflect the effect of most actions until USDA's next study is released, likely in 2020. However, in fiscal year 2018, USDA redefined what it considers an improper payment. Specifically, meal claiming errors--for example, meals that are missing a required nutritional component but that are counted as reimbursable--are no longer considered improper payments, resulting in error rates for fiscal year 2018 that are not comparable to prior years.

USDA has not assessed fraud risks in the school meals programs, which hinders its ability to ensure that its key oversight practices--extensive processes designed for broad monitoring purposes--address areas at risk for fraud. The assess component of A Framework for Managing Fraud Risks in Federal Programs (Fraud Risk Framework) calls for managers to plan regular fraud risk assessments and to assess risks to determine a fraud risk profile. USDA officials stated that the agency considers fraud risks through efforts to assess overall program integrity risk in the programs, which include research projects and consideration of specific risks when allocating monitoring resources. However, GAO found that USDA's efforts to assess risk do not comprehensively consider fraud risks. As a result, these efforts are not aligned with the overarching concepts of planning and conducting fraud risk assessments in the Fraud Risk Framework. Establishing a process to plan and conduct regular fraud risk assessments that align with the leading practices in the Fraud Risk Framework--including those in the figure below--will help USDA design and implement an antifraud strategy, as well as evaluate and adapt its strategy to improve fraud risk management in the school meals programs."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-389?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2018, almost 30 million children participated in the National School Lunch Program and over 14 million participated in the School Breakfast Program, with cash payments totaling almost $17 billion. Historically, the school meals programs have reported high estimated improper payment error rates, which suggest that these programs may also be vulnerable to fraud.

GAO was asked to review improper payment error rates and potential fraud in the school meals programs. This report (1) describes steps USDA has reported taking since 2015 to lower improper payment error rates and (2) examines the extent to which USDA has assessed areas of risk for fraud in the school meals programs.

GAO reviewed the results of the most recent study USDA uses to estimate improper payments in the school meals programs, as well as the error rates and actions to reduce them reported in USDA's agency financial reports from fiscal years 2015 through 2018. Further, GAO analyzed guidance for key oversight practices and documentation regarding USDA's risk assessment processes. GAO examined these processes against the leading practices in the Fraud Risk Framework for assessing fraud risks. GAO also interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that USDA establish a process to plan and conduct regular fraud risk assessments for the school meals programs that align with the leading practices in the Fraud Risk Framework. USDA generally agreed with the recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-389?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on West Bank, Gaza

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to U.S. education assistance to the West Bank and Gaza. The report (GAO-19-448) is titled "West Bank and Gaza: State Has Taken Actions to Address Potentially Problematic Textbook Content but Should Improve Its Reporting to Congress".

The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on June 4. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. government funded an estimated $243 million for education assistance ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to U.S. education assistance to the West Bank and Gaza. The report (GAO-19-448) is titled "West Bank and Gaza: State Has Taken Actions to Address Potentially Problematic Textbook Content but Should Improve Its Reporting to Congress". The report was sent to Sen. James E. Risch, R-Idaho, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on June 4. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The U.S. government funded an estimated $243 million for education assistancein the West Bank and Gaza (WBG) for fiscal years 2015 through 2017, including an estimated $193 million from the Department of State (State) and about $50 million from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Of State's contribution of approximately $193 million, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) estimated that about $187 million was provided for its education assistance. State provided the remaining approximately $6 million for non-UNRWA education projects. UNRWA purchased English language textbooks used in UNRWA schools with funds that consist of contributions from donor countries, including the United States. The U.S. government and UNRWA did not fund textbooks published by the Palestinian Authority because the Palestinian Authority provided these textbooks free of charge, according to agency officials.

UNRWA and State have taken steps to identify and address potentially problematic content of textbooks used in UNRWA schools, such as maps that exclude Israel. UNRWA reviewed textbooks, including English language textbooks, and took actions to address content it deemed as not aligned with UN values. For example, UNRWA created complementary teaching materials, such as alternate photos, examples, and guidance for teachers to use with the textbooks in UNRWA schools. However, due to financial shortfalls and other constraints, UNRWA officials told GAO that UNRWA did not train teachers or distribute the complementary teaching materials to classrooms. As a result, these materials were not used in UNRWA classrooms. To address textbook content deemed problematic, State examined nongovernmental organizations' studies, encouraged Palestinian Authority officials to address the issue, and monitored UNRWA's efforts.

The annual appropriations acts for fiscal years 2015 through 2017 require State to report to Congress on several topics, including steps UNRWA has taken to ensure that the content of all educational materials taught in UNRWA schools is consistent with the values of human rights, dignity, and tolerance, and do not induce incitement. Although State submitted its required reports to Congress on time, State included inaccurate information in the 2017 report and omitted potentially useful information in all three reports. In its 2017 report, State noted incorrectly that UNRWA had completed training teachers and distributed complementary teaching materials to address textbook content that UNRWA deemed as not complying with UN values. In all three of the reports, State omitted information concerning whether UNRWA found that any educational materials used in its schools do not comply with two of four elements, dignity and not inducing incitement. Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government states that management should use quality information to achieve the entity's objectives and communicate it in a way that is useful to users. Without a fuller explanation, Congress may not have the information it needs to oversee efforts to identify and address potentially problematic textbook content."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The U.S. government has funded education assistance to Palestinians. The State Department oversees U.S. contributions to UNRWA, and USAID provides assistance to Palestinian Authority schools. UNRWA generally administers schools for Palestine refugees. The Palestinian Authority generally administers schools for non-refugee Palestinians who live in the WBG. During the 2016-2017 school year, it issued new pilot textbooks for grades 1 through 4 for use in both its and UNRWA's schools. GAO was asked to review issues related to U.S. education assistance to the WBG.

This report examines (1) the funding the U.S. government provided for education assistance to the WBG for fiscal years 2015 through 2017, (2) how UNRWA and State have identified and addressed potentially problematic content in textbooks, and (3) whether State has submitted required annual reports to Congress including information on educational materials used in UNRWA schools. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed documents and interviewed U.S. government, UNRWA, and Palestinian Authority officials. For this report, GAO refers to potentially problematic content as that which State defined as inappropriate and that UNRWA defined as not aligned with UN values."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO made four recommendations in our April 2018 report that State improve its reports to Congress, including to ensure the information presented is accurate and to provide additional information on the textbook content UNRWA identified as not aligned with UN values. State implemented all of GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-448?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Critical Infrastructure Protection

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation roles and responsibilities for pipeline security. The report (GAO-19-426) is titled "Critical Infrastructure Protection: Key Pipeline Security Documents Need to Reflect Current Operating Environment".

The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman, Rep. Mike Rogers, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation roles and responsibilities for pipeline security. The report (GAO-19-426) is titled "Critical Infrastructure Protection: Key Pipeline Security Documents Need to Reflect Current Operating Environment". The report was sent to Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman, Rep. Mike Rogers,R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, on June 5. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The memorandum of understanding (MOU) Annex signed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in 2006 delineates their mutually agreed-upon roles and responsibilities for pipeline security, but has not been reviewed to consider pipeline security developments since its inception. As a result, the annex may not fully reflect the agencies' pipeline security and safety-related activities. Efforts to update the annex were delayed by other priorities. As of June 2019, there are no timeframes for completion. By developing and implementing timeframes for reviewing the MOU Annex and updating it, as appropriate, TSA and PHMSA could better ensure any future changes to their respective roles and responsibilities are clearly delineated and updated on a regular basis.

TSA's Pipeline Security and Incident Recovery Protocol Plan, issued in March 2010, defines the roles and responsibilities of federal agencies and the private sector, among others, related to pipeline security incidents. For example, in response to a pipeline incident, TSA coordinates information sharing between federal and pipeline stakeholders and PHMSA coordinates federal activities with an affected pipeline operator to restore service. However, TSA has not revised the plan to reflect changes in at least three key areas: pipeline security threats, such as those related to cybersecurity, incident management policies, and DHS's terrorism alert system. By periodically reviewing and, as appropriate, updating its plan, TSA could better ensure it addresses changes in pipeline security threats and federal law and policy related to cybersecurity, incident management and DHS's terrorism alert system, among other things. TSA could also provide greater assurance that pipeline stakeholders understand federal roles and responsibilities related to pipeline incidents, including cyber incidents, and that response efforts to such incidents are well-coordinated."

Why GAO Did This Study: "More than 2.7 million miles of pipeline transport natural gas, oil, and other hazardous liquids needed to operate vehicles and heat homes, among other things, in the United States.

Responsibility for safeguarding these pipelines is shared by TSA, within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); PHMSA, within the Department of Transportation (DOT); and pipeline operators. TSA oversees the security of all transportation modes, including pipelines. PHMSA oversees pipeline safety. DHS and DOT signed a MOU on their roles across all transportation modes in 2004. In 2006, TSA and PHMSA signed an annex to the MOU (MOU Annex) to further delineate their pipeline security-related responsibilities.

The TSA Modernization Act includes a provision for GAO to review DHS and DOT roles and responsibilities for pipeline security. This report addresses, among other things: (1) the extent the MOU Annex delineates TSA's and PHMSA's pipeline security roles and responsibilities; and (2) the extent TSA has communicated federal incident response procedures for pipeline breaches to stakeholders. GAO reviewed the MOU annex and related documents and TSA's Pipeline Security and Incident Recovery Protocol Plan, and interviewed officials from PHMSA, TSA, and four pipeline associations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making five recommendations, including that: (1) TSA and PHMSA develop and implement a timeline for reviewing and, as appropriate, updating the 2006 MOU Annex; and (2) TSA periodically review, and as appropriate, update its 2010 pipeline incident recovery plan. DHS and DOT concurred with these recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-426?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Disaster Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on disaster assistance for individuals who are older or have disabilities. The report (GAO-19-318) is titled "Disaster Assistance: FEMA Action Needed to Better Support Individuals Who Are Older or Have Disabilities".

The report was sent to Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyoming, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, chairman of the Senate Small ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on disaster assistance for individuals who are older or have disabilities. The report (GAO-19-318) is titled "Disaster Assistance: FEMA Action Needed to Better Support Individuals Who Are Older or Have Disabilities". The report was sent to Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyoming, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, chairman of the Senate SmallBusiness and Entrepreneurship Committee, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on Federal Spending, Oversight and Emergency Management, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Nydia M. Velazquez, D-New York, chairwoman of the House Small Business Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, chairman of the House Financial Services subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Rep. Sean P. Duffy, R-Wisconsin, ranking member of the House Financial Services subcommittee Housing, Community Development and Insurance, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Missouri, Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Texas, Rep. Gary J. Palmer, R-Alabama, and Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Missouri, on May 14. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "A range of officials from entities that partner with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)--including states, territories, localities, and nonprofits)--reported challenges providing assistance to individuals who are older or have disabilities following the 2017 hurricanes. For example, officials said that many of these individuals required specialized assistance obtaining food, water, medicine, and oxygen, but aid was sometimes difficult to provide. Officials in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands cited particular difficulties providing this assistance due to damaged roads and communication systems, as well as a lack of documentation of nursing home locations.

Based on GAO's analysis of FEMA data and interviews with FEMA officials and stakeholders, aspects of the process to apply for assistance from FEMA after the 2017 hurricanes were challenging for older individuals and those with disabilities. According to stakeholders and FEMA officials, disability-related questions in the registration materials are confusing and easily misinterpreted. For example, FEMA's registration process does not include an initial question that directly asks individuals if they have a disability or if they would like to request an accommodation for completing the application process (see figure below). While FEMA has made efforts to help registrants interpret the questions, it has not yet changed the language of the questions to improve clarity. As a result, individuals with disabilities may not have requested accommodations or reported having disabilities, which may have hindered FEMA's ability to identify and assist them.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-318?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

FEMA did not establish objectives before implementing its new approach to disability integration, which includes adding new disability integration staff in the regions and decreasing the number of disability integration advisors deployed to disaster sites. Without documented objectives for the new approach, regional leadership across the nation may implement changes inconsistently. In addition, the new approach shifts the responsibility for directly assisting individuals with disabilities to all FEMA staff. FEMA has taken some initial steps to provide training on the changes; however, it has not established a plan for delivering comprehensive disability-related training to all staff who will be directly interacting with individuals with disabilities. Developing a plan to train all staff would better position FEMA to achieve its intended goals and better equip deployed staff to identify and assist these survivors."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Three sequential hurricanes--Harvey, Irma, and Maria--affected more than 28 million people in 2017, according to FEMA. Hurricane survivors aged 65 and older and those with disabilities faced particular challenges evacuating to safe shelter, accessing medicine, and obtaining recovery assistance. In June 2018, FEMA began implementing a new approach to assist individuals with disabilities.

GAO was asked to review disaster assistance for individuals who are older or have disabilities. This report addresses (1) challenges FEMA partners reported in providing assistance to such individuals, (2) challenges such individuals faced accessing assistance from FEMA and actions FEMA took to address these challenges, and (3) the extent to which FEMA has implemented its new approach to disability integration.

GAO analyzed FEMA data and reviewed relevant federal laws, agency policy, and federal frameworks. GAO also interviewed state, territorial, local, and nonprofit officials in Florida, Puerto Rico, Texas, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; FEMA officials at headquarters, in regional offices, and deployed to disaster sites; and officials at relevant nonprofit organizations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations to FEMA, including that it establish new registration questions, objectives for its new disability integration approach, and a training plan for FEMA staff. The agency concurred with all but one of the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-318?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DOD Acquisition Reform

WASHINGTON, June 5 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the progress the Department of Defense has made implementing selected oversight reforms related to major defense acquisition programs. The report (GAO-19-439) is titled "DOD Acquisition Reform: Leadership Attention Needed to Effectively Implement Changes to Acquisition Oversight".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on 2020 Census

WASHINGTON, June 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Census Bureau's management of risks to the 2020 census. The report (GAO-19-399) is titled "2020 Census: Additional Actions Needed to Manage Risk".

The report was sent to Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Census Bureau's management of risks to the 2020 census. The report (GAO-19-399) is titled "2020 Census: Additional Actions Needed to Manage Risk". The report was sent to Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking memberof the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations, on May 31. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "As of December 2018, the Census Bureau (Bureau) had identified 360 active risks to the 2020 Census. Of these, 242 required a mitigation plan and 232 had one; 146 required a contingency plan and 102 had one (see table). Mitigation plans detail how an agency will reduce the likelihood of a risk event and its impacts, if it occurs. Contingency plans identify how an agency will reduce or recover from the impact of a risk after it has been realized. Bureau guidance states that these plans should be developed as soon as possible after a risk is added to the risk register, but it does not establish clear time frames for doing so. Consequently, some risks may go without required plans for extended periods.

View table at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-399?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO reviewed the mitigation and contingency plans in detail for six risks which the Bureau identified as among the major concerns that could affect the 2020 Census. These included cybersecurity incidents and integration of the 52 systems and 35 operations supporting the census. GAO found that the plans did not consistently include key information needed to manage the risk. For example, three of the mitigation plans and five of the contingency plans did not include all key activities. Among these was the Bureau's cybersecurity mitigation plan. During an August 2018 public meeting, the Bureau's Chief Information Officer discussed key strategies for mitigating cybersecurity risks to the census--such as reliance on other federal agencies to help resolve threats--not all of which were included in the mitigation plan.

GAO found that gaps stemmed from either requirements missing from the Bureau's decennial risk management plan, or that risk owners were not fulfilling all of their risk management responsibilities. Bureau officials said that risk owners are aware of these responsibilities but do not always fulfill them given competing demands. Bureau officials also said that they are managing risks to the census, even if not always reflected in their mitigation and contingency plans. However, if such actions are reflected in disparate documents or are not documented at all, then decision makers are left without an integrated and comprehensive picture of how the Bureau is managing risks to the census.

The Bureau has designed an approach for managing fraud risk to the 2020 Census that generally aligns with leading practices in the commit, assess, and design and implement components of GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. However, the Bureau has not yet determined the program's fraud risk tolerance or outlined plans for referring potential fraud to the Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General (OIG) to investigate. Bureau officials described plans to take these actions later this year, but not for updating the antifraud strategy. Updating this strategy to include the Bureau's fraud risk tolerance and OIG referral plan will help ensure the strategy is current, complete, and conforms to leading practices."

Why GAO Did This Study: "With less than 1 year until Census Day, many risks remain. For example, the Bureau has had challenges developing critical information technology systems, and new innovations--such as the ability to respond via the internet--have raised questions about potential security and fraud risks. Fundamental to risk management is the development of risk mitigation and contingency plans to reduce the likelihood of risks and their impacts, should they occur.

GAO was asked to review the Bureau's management of risks to the 2020 Census. This report examines (1) what risks the Bureau has identified, (2) the risks for which the Bureau has mitigation and contingency plans, (3) the extent to which the plans included information needed to manage risk, and (4) the extent to which the Bureau's fraud risk approach aligns with leading practices in GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. GAO interviewed officials, assessed selected mitigation and contingency plans against key attributes, and assessed the Bureau's approach to managing fraud risk against GAO's Fraud Risk Framework."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making seven recommendations, including that the Bureau set clear time frames for developing mitigation and contingency plans, require that mitigation and contingency plans include all key attributes, hold risk owners accountable for carrying out their risk management responsibilities, and update its antifraud strategy to include a fraud risk tolerance and OIG referral plan. The Department of Commerce agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-399?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Retirement Security

WASHINGTON, June 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which parental or spousal caregiving affects retirement security. The report (GAO-19-382) is titled "Retirement Security: Some Parental and Spousal Caregivers Face Financial Risks".

The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, and Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr., D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, on May 1. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "An estimated one in 10 Americans per year cared for a parent or spouse ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which parental or spousal caregiving affects retirement security. The report (GAO-19-382) is titled "Retirement Security: Some Parental and Spousal Caregivers Face Financial Risks". The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, and Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr., D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, on May 1. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "An estimated one in 10 Americans per year cared for a parent or spousefor some period of time from 2011 through 2017, and women were more likely than men to provide care, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics survey data. Both parental and spousal caregivers were older than the general population, with spousal caregivers generally being the oldest. In addition, spousal caregivers were less likely to have completed college or to be employed, and they had lower earnings than parental caregivers and the general population. Most parental and spousal caregivers provided care for several years, and certain groups were more likely to provide daily care, including women and minorities.

Some caregivers experienced adverse effects on their jobs and had less in retirement assets and income.

* According to data from a 2015 caregiving-specific study, an estimated 68 percent of working parental and spousal caregivers experienced job impacts, such as going to work late, leaving early, or taking time off during the day to provide care. Spousal caregivers were more likely to experience job impacts than parental caregivers (81 percent compared to 65 percent, respectively).

* According to 2002 to 2014 data from the Health and Retirement Study, spousal caregivers ages 59 to 66 had lower levels of retirement assets and less income than married non-caregivers of the same ages. Specifically, spousal caregivers had an estimated 50 percent less in individual retirement account (IRA) assets, 39 percent less in non-IRA assets, and 11 percent less in Social Security income. However, caregiving may not be the cause of these results as there are challenges to isolating the effect of caregiving from other factors that could affect retirement assets and income.

Expert interviews and a review of relevant literature identified a number of actions that could improve caregivers' retirement security, which GAO grouped into four policy categories. Experts identified various benefits to caregivers and others from the policy categories--as well as pointing out possible significant costs, such as fiscal concerns and employer challenges--and in general said that taking actions across categories would help address caregivers' needs over both the short-term and long-term (see figure). Several experts also said public awareness initiatives are critical to helping people understand the implications of caregiving on their retirement security. For example, they pointed to the need for education about how decisions to provide care, leave the workforce, or reduce hours could affect long-term financial security."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-382?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of people in the United States over age 65 is expected to almost double by 2050. As Americans age, family caregivers, such as adult children and spouses, play a critical role in supporting the needs of this population. However, those who provide eldercare may risk their own long-term financial security if they reduce their workforce participation or pay for caregiving expenses. GAO was asked to provide information about parental and spousal caregivers and how caregiving might affect their retirement security.

This report (1) examines what is known about the size and characteristics of the parental and spousal caregiving population, including differences among women and men; (2) examines the extent to which parental or spousal caregiving affects retirement security; and (3) identifies and discusses policy options and initiatives that could improve caregivers' retirement security.

GAO analyzed data from three nationally representative surveys; conducted an extensive literature review; and interviewed experts who are knowledgeable about caregiving or retirement security, engaged in research or advocacy around caregiving, or represent groups that might be affected by the identified policy approaches."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-382?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Hardrock Mining

WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on trends in U.S. net import reliance percentages for 15 hardrock minerals from 1990 through 2017. The report (GAO-19-434R) is titled "Hardrock Mining: Trends in U.S. Reliance on Imports for Selected Minerals".

The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, on April 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "From 1990 through 2017, the U.S. reliance on imports of 15 hardrock ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on trends in U.S. net import reliance percentages for 15 hardrock minerals from 1990 through 2017. The report (GAO-19-434R) is titled "Hardrock Mining: Trends in U.S. Reliance on Imports for Selected Minerals". The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, on April 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "From 1990 through 2017, the U.S. reliance on imports of 15 hardrockminerals--as measured by the net import reliance percentage--has varied. Net import reliance percentage is one factor in determining whether a mineral is considered to be critical, as that percentage can help identify the potential for supply disruption of a particular mineral. Based on data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), an agency within the Department of the Interior (Interior), these percentages generally increased for six of the 15 hardrock minerals (copper, magnesium compounds, magnesium metal, perlite, silver, and zinc); generally decreased for four minerals (gypsum, palladium, platinum, and tungsten); remained generally constant for two minerals (fluorspar and gold); or fluctuated with no long-term discernable trend for the remaining three minerals (barite, lead, and nickel).

GAO analysis of USGS data over this time period shows that the net import reliance percentages have averaged over 50 percent from 1990 through 2017 for eight of the 15 minerals GAO examined (barite, fluorspar, nickel, palladium, platinum, silver, tungsten, and zinc). A net import reliance percentage of 60 for a particular mineral indicates that 60 percent of apparent U.S. consumption is met through net imports--that is, imports minus exports, accounting for adjustments in domestic stocks. The remaining 40 percent of apparent U.S. consumption is met by U.S. domestic production. Although a net import reliance percentage greater than 50 percent is considered to be high, it should not always be construed to pose a potential supply risk, according to USGS officials. Specifically, if the import source for a particular mineral is a nation with whom the United States has reliable trade relations, the risk of a supply disruption is lessened.

Six of the 15 hardrock minerals included in GAO's review are on Interior's list of critical minerals to the United States: barite, fluorspar, magnesium metal, palladium, platinum, and tungsten. Of these, four (barite, fluorspar, palladium, and platinum) have average net import reliance percentages of over 50 percent for at least the last 10 years covered in GAO's review--2008 through 2017. For example, barite, which has consistently had a net import reliance percentage greater than 70 since 2000, is used in oil and gas drilling and radiation shielding, among other applications. China is the top producer and supplier of barite to the United States, according to a USGS report. In addition, the United States has relied entirely on imports of fluorspar to meet apparent consumption since 1997. Fluorspar is used to make chemicals for aluminum production, semiconductor manufacturing, and uranium processing, among other things. Mexico is the primary supplier to the United States for this mineral, although China is the leading producer of it worldwide."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Hardrock minerals play an important role in the U.S. economy, contributing to multiple industries, including transportation, defense, aerospace, electronics, energy, agriculture, construction, and health care. Over the past six decades, many of these minerals have been sourced increasingly from outside the United States, according to USGS.

USGS reports annually the United States' dependence on imports of minerals to meet domestic consumption by calculating the net import reliance as a percentage of apparent U.S. consumption, also known as the net import reliance percentage. A mineral's net import reliance percentage equals the amount of imports minus the amount of exports of that mineral, expressed as a percentage of domestic consumption of the mineral.

This report describes trends in U.S. net import reliance percentages for 15 hardrock minerals from 1990 through 2017--the most recently available data at the time of GAO's review. To conduct this work, GAO analyzed USGS's net import reliance percentage data for the following 15 hardrock minerals from 1990 through 2017: barite, copper, fluorspar, gold, gypsum, lead, magnesium compounds, magnesium metal, nickel, palladium, perlite, platinum, silver, tungsten, and zinc. To examine trends, GAO analyzed USGS data to determine which hardrock minerals had net import reliance percentages that generally increased, generally decreased, remained generally constant, or fluctuated with no long-term discernable trend. GAO also interviewed USGS officials about their perspectives on the context for and implications of trends."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is not making recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-434R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Military Justice

WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on racial and gender disparities in the military justice system. The report (GAO-19-344) is titled "Military Justice: DOD and the Coast Guard Need to Improve Their Capabilities to Assess Racial and Gender Disparities".

The report was sent to Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The military services collect gender information, but they do ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on racial and gender disparities in the military justice system. The report (GAO-19-344) is titled "Military Justice: DOD and the Coast Guard Need to Improve Their Capabilities to Assess Racial and Gender Disparities". The report was sent to Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The military services collect gender information, but they donot collect and maintain consistent information about race and ethnicity in their investigations, military justice, and personnel databases. This limits their ability to collectively or comparatively assess these data to identify any disparities (i.e., instances in which a racial, ethnic, or gender group was overrepresented) in the military justice system within and across the services. For example, the number of potential responses for race and ethnicity across the military services' databases ranges from five to 32 options for race and two to 25 options for ethnicity, which can complicate cross-service assessments. The services also are not required to and, thus, do not report demographic information in their annual military justice reports--information that would provide greater visibility into potential disparities.

GAO's analysis of available data found that Black, Hispanic, and male servicemembers were more likely than White or female members to be the subjects of investigations recorded in databases used by the military criminal investigative organizations, and to be tried in general and special courts-martial in all of the military services when controlling for attributes such as rank and education. GAO also found that race and gender were not statistically significant factors in the likelihood of conviction in general and special courts-martial for most services, and minority servicemembers were either less likely to receive a more severe punishment than White servicemembers or there was no difference among racial groups; thus, disparities may be limited to particular stages of the process. The Department of Defense (DOD) has taken some steps to study disparities, but has not comprehensively evaluated the causes of racial or gender disparities in the military justice system. Doing so would better position DOD to identify actions to address disparities and help ensure the military justice system is fair and just.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-344?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Note: These analyses, taken alone, should not be used to make conclusions about the presence or absence of unlawful discrimination. These multivariate regression analysis results estimate whether a racial or gender group is more likely or less likely to be the subject of an investigation or a trial in general or special courts-martial after controlling for race, gender, rank, and education, and in the Air Force, years of service. GAO made all racial comparisons to White servicemembers and all gender comparisons to females. GAO grouped individuals of Hispanic ethnicity together, regardless of race."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) was established to provide a statutory framework that promotes fair administration of military justice. Every active-duty servicemember is subject to the UCMJ, with more than 258,000 individuals disciplined from fiscal years 2013-2017, out of more than 2.3 million unique active-duty servicemembers. A key principle of the UCMJ is that a fair and just system of military law can foster a highly disciplined force.

House Report 115-200, accompanying a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, included a provision for GAO to assess the extent that disparities may exist in the military justice system. This report assesses the extent to which (1) the military services collect and maintain consistent race, ethnicity, and gender information for servicemembers investigated and disciplined for UCMJ violations that can be used to assess disparities, and (2) there are racial and gender disparities in the military justice system, and whether disparities have been studied by DOD. GAO analyzed data from the investigations, military justice, and personnel databases from the military services, including the Coast Guard, from fiscal years 2013-2017 and interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making 11 recommendations, including that the services develop the capability to present consistent race and ethnicity data, and DOD include demographic information in military justice annual reports and evaluates the causes of disparities in the military justice system. DOD and the Coast Guard generally concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-344?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on NASA Assessments of Major Projects

WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on selected large-scale NASA programs, projects and activities. The report (GAO-19-262SP) is titled "NASA: Assessments of Major Projects".

The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, chairman, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Arizona, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation subcommittee on Aviation and Space, Rep. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 31 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on selected large-scale NASA programs, projects and activities. The report (GAO-19-262SP) is titled "NASA: Assessments of Major Projects". The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, chairman, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Arizona, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation subcommittee on Aviation and Space, Rep.Jose Serrano, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Kendra Horn, D-Oklahoma, chairwoman, and Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Science, Space, and Technology subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, on May 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The cost and schedule performance of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) portfolio of major projects continues to deteriorate. For this review, cost growth was 27.6 percent over the baselines and the average launch delay was approximately 13 months, the largest schedule delay since GAO began annual reporting on NASA's major projects in 2009. See figure.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-262SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

This deterioration in cost and schedule performance is largely due to integration and test challenges on the James Webb Space Telescope (see GAO-19-189 for more information). The Space Launch System program also experienced significant cost growth due to continued production challenges. Further, additional delays are likely for the Space Launch System and its associated ground systems. Senior NASA officials stated that it is unlikely these programs will meet the launch date of June 2020, which already reflects 19 months of delays. These officials told GAO that there are 6 to 12 months of risk associated with that launch date.

GAO found some subjectivity in the processes NASA uses to identify and assess critical technologies--those that are required for the project to successfully meet customer requirements--which could understate the development risk that its major projects face. The average number of critical technologies NASA reported increased slightly in 2019, but remains low compared to historical data. However, GAO found inconsistencies in how projects identify critical technologies. For example, the Lucy project determined that operating its solar array in a previously unexplored environment did not warrant identifying it as a critical technology, while the Ionospheric Connection Explorer (ICON) project did identify a technology as critical because of its use in a new environment. NASA is planning to clarify its guidance on technology readiness, among other measures. GAO will continue to monitor NASA's efforts in this area."

Why GAO Did This Study: "This report provides GAO's annual snapshot of how well NASA is planning and executing its major acquisition projects. GAO previously found that, as of February 2018, the cost and schedule performance of major projects was deteriorating, with 9 of 17 projects in development reporting cost or schedule growth. GAO also found that NASA was likely to continue to see cost and schedule growth, as new, large projects were entering the portfolio while others were taking longer to launch than planned.

The explanatory statement of the House Committee on Appropriations accompanying the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 included a provision for GAO to prepare status reports on selected large-scale NASA programs, projects, and activities. This is GAO's 11th annual assessment. This report assesses (1) the cost and schedule performance of NASA's major projects and (2) the maturity of critical technologies, among other issues. This report also includes assessments of 21 of NASA's 24 major projects, each with a life-cycle cost of over $250 million using 2018 data. This report does not assess what effect, if any, the government shutdown that ended in January 2019 had on performance. To conduct its review, GAO analyzed cost, schedule, technology maturity, and other data; reviewed project status reports; and interviewed NASA officials."

What GAO Recommends: "In prior reports, GAO has made related recommendations that NASA generally agreed with; 14 of these are not yet fully addressed. NASA generally agreed with the findings in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-262SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Child Care

WASHINGTON, May 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Child Care and Development Fund. The report (GAO-19-261) is titled "Child Care: States Report Child Care and Development Funds Benefit All Children in Care".

The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, and Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Illinois, chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Worker and Family Support, on April 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "A majority of states used funding from ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 29 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Child Care and Development Fund. The report (GAO-19-261) is titled "Child Care: States Report Child Care and Development Funds Benefit All Children in Care". The report was sent to Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, and Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Illinois, chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Worker and Family Support, on April 25. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "A majority of states used funding fromthe Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) in fiscal year 2017 to entirely or mostly support 7 of 10 major state child care activities GAO identified in its survey of 51 state CCDF programs. These activities, components of which are also required by CCDF, represent diverse aspects of state child care systems and are a key means through which states may choose to improve the quality of their child care. States reported that they relied primarily on CCDF funding for child care resource and referral systems, consumer education, and health and safety standards establishment and training more frequently than for other activities.

States reported in GAO's survey that a range of CCDF quality activities affect the care of children not receiving CCDF subsidies (nonsubsidized children), including three activities cited by all states--consumer education, child care licensing, and professional development of the child care workforce. CCDF administrators in most of the 15 states GAO interviewed said they have elected to apply certain requirements for caregivers subsidized under CCDF to all state licensed child care providers. For example, child care providers may be subject to monitoring and professional development requirements, whether or not they care for children receiving subsidies. CCDF administrators also stated that, as a result, all children in the care of licensed providers in these states--including nonsubsidized children--benefit from the enhanced requirements.

States most often reported in GAO's survey that they plan to spend new CCDF funds provided in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, on quality activities that benefit all children in child care including licensing, consumer education, and professional development. For example, officials GAO interviewed in several states described plans to enhance public state child care websites to make them more user-friendly for all families or available in other languages, such as Spanish. However, more than a third of the interviewed states said their spending plans were still in flux, and more than half said they faced challenges making spending decisions because it was unclear whether the new funds would be provided in the future."

Why GAO Did This Study: "CCDF is the primary source of federal funding for child care subsidies. States administering CCDF are subject to requirements that improve the quality of child care for all children, nonsubsidized as well as subsidized. In March 2018, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 was enacted, which provided $5.2 billion in additional CCDF discretionary funding for fiscal year 2018, approximately twice the amount provided in fiscal year 2017. GAO was asked to review state use of CCDF funds and their potential impact on nonsubsidized children.

GAO examined (1) the extent to which states use CCDF funds to support their child care system, (2) the kinds of CCDF-related activities states engage in that affect children who are not receiving CCDF subsidies, and (3) how states plan to use the increase in CCDF funding from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. GAO collected information from state CCDF administrators through a survey to the 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.) and interviews with officials in 15 states, including D.C., selected to reflect diverse characteristics and locations. GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance, and interviewed Department of Health and Human Services officials.

GAO makes no recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-261?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Advanced Manufacturing

WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Manufacturing USA program. The report (GAO-19-409) is titled "Advanced Manufacturing: Innovation Institutes Have Demonstrated Initial Accomplishments, but Challenges Remain in Measuring Performance and Ensuring Sustainability".

The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Manufacturing USA program. The report (GAO-19-409) is titled "Advanced Manufacturing: Innovation Institutes Have Demonstrated Initial Accomplishments, but Challenges Remain in Measuring Performance and Ensuring Sustainability". The report was sent to Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, rankingmember of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Sen. Roger F. Wicker, R-Mississippi, chairman, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, chairmanwoman, Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, chairman, and Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Oklahoma, ranking member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, on May 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Since December 2016, the Manufacturing USA network has grown from 11 to 14 manufacturing innovation institutes that are implementing a wide array of activities aimed at developing manufacturing capabilities in promising new advanced technologies, as shown in the figure. As of March 2019, most institutes were operating under an initial 5- to 7-year period of federal financial assistance.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-409?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

The Department of Commerce, through a national program office, along with the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Energy (DOE) have developed long-term goals for the Manufacturing USA program, such as increasing the competitiveness of U.S manufacturing, but have not developed measurable near-term goals with associated targets and time frames to assess progress over time. Prior GAO work has shown that systems of performance measures benefit from certain key practices, such as creating a hierarchy that breaks down broad, long-term goals and objectives into more specific, near-term performance goals with measurable targets and time frames. Commerce officials said that they are not in a position to set targets for the network-wide performance measures because they do not manage or fund individual institute activities. However, by developing and implementing network-wide performance goals with targets and time frames, Commerce would have better assurance that it could observe and report on progress toward Manufacturing USA long-term goals and objectives.

Commerce, DOD, and DOE have taken steps to support their institutes' sustainability planning for the years after the initial 5- to 7-year period of federal financial assistance. All 14 institutes have conducted various levels of sustainability planning and foresee generally negative impacts if baseline federal financial assistance ends, such as the need to focus more on short-term projects for industry use rather than projects that advance the manufacturing innovation ecosystem as a whole. However, as of February 2019, while the agencies had taken steps to support institute sustainability planning, they had not developed criteria to evaluate whether the institutes will be able to sustain their operations. Developing criteria for evaluating institutes' progress toward sustainability would provide Commerce, DOD, and DOE greater assurance that decisions about providing additional federal financial assistance for the institutes will be based on an analysis of the risks the institutes face in successfully carrying out the statutory purposes for the Manufacturing USA program."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Manufacturing USA is a national network of manufacturing innovation institutes. Commerce, DOD, and DOE have together provided $1 billion to establish the network's institutes and to promote research, development, and commercialization of advanced manufacturing technologies.

The Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014 includes a provision for GAO to assess the Manufacturing USA program. This is GAO's second report in response to the provision. Among other objectives, this report (1) describes the status of the Manufacturing USA network; (2) evaluates actions taken by Commerce, DOD, and DOE to assess progress of the Manufacturing USA program; and (3) examines planning for institute sustainability beyond the initial 5 to 7 years of federal financial assistance.

GAO reviewed documentation and interviewed agency and Manufacturing USA institute officials, as well as a nongeneralizable sample of seven institute members from different-sized companies and academia."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making five recommendations, including that Commerce work with DOD and DOE to develop performance goals with measurable targets and time frames, and the three agencies develop criteria to evaluate their institutes' sustainability. Commerce requested changes to the performance goals recommendations that would have altered their scope and intent. GAO maintains the recommendations are valid as stated. The three agencies generally agreed with the criteria development recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-409?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Commercial Space Transportation

WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Federal Aviation Administration's actions to integrate commercial space launches into the national airspace. The report (GAO-19-437) is titled "Commercial Space Transportation: Improvements to FAA's Workforce Planning Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated Growth".

The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Washington, chairman of the House Transportation ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Federal Aviation Administration's actions to integrate commercial space launches into the national airspace. The report (GAO-19-437) is titled "Commercial Space Transportation: Improvements to FAA's Workforce Planning Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated Growth". The report was sent to Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, chairman, Rep. Sam Graves, R-Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Washington, chairman of the House Transportationand Infrastructure subcommittee on Aviation, on May 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in collaboration with other FAA offices, is taking a range of actions, such as testing new technologies, to improve how efficiently FAA integrates space vehicle launch operations into the national airspace. According to FAA officials, the amount of airspace that FAA closes to other airspace users is larger and remains closed longer than may be needed to ensure public safety. To help remedy this situation, FAA is piloting prototype technologies that would collect launch vehicles' location data in real-time and transmit them to air traffic controllers. Officials said the earliest these technologies could be implemented would be 2022. In March 2019, FAA published an announcement seeking interest from industry on partnering with FAA to further develop the technologies. Meanwhile, FAA is assessing how existing air traffic control technologies could be used to help reduce the effects of launches on other airspace users.

Since 2016, AST has taken steps to improve how it determines its current workforce needs to carry out its mission including licensing commercial launch vehicle operations. These steps include more comprehensively monitoring staff time spent on specific activities and measuring the volume of the staff's work. While AST officials told us that AST is planning to continue to improve its workforce-planning efforts, GAO found that some aspects of AST's efforts fall short of key principles of strategic workforce planning. Such principles underscore the importance of determining both current and future workforce needs and identifying potential gaps in employee skills. For example:

AST does not project its workload beyond a 2-year budget cycle, limiting its ability to effectively and strategically plan for its longer-term workforce needs. According to officials, it can take a few years for engineers with certain skills to be trained and have sufficient experience to lead projects. Further, AST officials told GAO that hiring technically qualified personnel, including positions that require considerable training and experience to be a fully functioning employee, is challenging. AST officials said that they are considering projecting their workload estimates further into the future, but they have neither formally committed to doing so nor established a timeline with milestones.

AST officials acknowledged that the information AST currently collects on the skills of its staff is not sufficient to allow them to identify gaps between the skills and competencies needed and those that its workforce currently possesses or may need in the future, such as expertise in flight safety analysis. AST officials told GAO that they plan to develop a tool that could collect information annually from staff and managers about the specific skills and competencies that individual staff currently possess. As of May 2019, however, AST had neither developed a draft of the tool nor established a timeline for finalizing it. Without this information, AST lacks reasonable assurance that its current workforce possesses the requisite skills and competencies, and AST may not be best positioned to proactively determine how to align its staff to carry out its mission."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The commercial space transportation industry provides launch services that enable national-security and commercial satellites, among other things, to be sent into orbit for government and private customers. Continued growth and evolution in the industry is expected as reliance on space-based applications increases. AST is charged with overseeing the industry, including licensing and monitoring launch vehicle operations.

GAO was asked to review developments in this industry. This report (1) describes FAA's actions to integrate commercial space launches into the national airspace and (2) examines how well-positioned AST is to determine its current and future workforce needs, among other objectives. GAO reviewed relevant statutes, regulations, and FAA guidance; compared FAA's workforce management efforts to key principles for effective workforce planning; and interviewed FAA officials and U.S. commercial launch providers that had conducted an FAA-licensed launch as of January 2018, among other industry stakeholders."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making four recommendations on workforce planning to AST, including that AST establish a timeline for finalizing longer-term workload projections and that AST ensure that it collects information from staff on skills and competencies in those areas that are currently needed and may be needed in the future. AST concurred with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-437?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Ex-Im Bank

WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Export-Import Bank's antifraud controls. The report (GAO-19-337) is titled "Export-Import Bank: EXIM Should Explore Using Available Data to Identify Applicants with Delinquent Federal Debt".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Export-Import Bank's antifraud controls. The report (GAO-19-337) is titled "Export-Import Bank: EXIM Should Explore Using Available Data to Identify Applicants with Delinquent Federal Debt". The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, ForeignOperations, and Related Programs, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, D-New York, chairwoman, and Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, on May 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) reported having antifraud controls in place for mitigating the fraud risks that GAO identified and communicated to EXIM officials. GAO reviewed 44 EXIM-associated court cases involving fraud and identified fraud risks involving the four fraud risk factors illustrated in the figure below. GAO communicated these fraud risks to EXIM officials, and they provided examples of antifraud controls they use to help mitigate these fraud risks for their major financing products. In February 2019, EXIM also provided documentation reflecting its efforts to conduct a fraud risk assessment that considered various fraud risks affecting its major financing product lines, including fraud risks GAO identified during this review.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-337?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

EXIM has procedures to identify applicants and participants with delinquent federal debt, such as obtaining applicants' credit reports that may indicate these debts when they apply to EXIM's financing programs. However, EXIM is missing additional opportunities to use readily available data containing delinquent federal debt indicators from the General Services Administration's (GSA) System for Award Management (SAM) to detect applicants and participants that may have delinquent federal debt. Federal law states that applicants who are delinquent on federal nontax debts may not receive federal direct loans, loan guarantees, or loan insurance until the delinquent debt is satisfactorily resolved. Using data from SAM, GAO found that, from calendar years 2014 through 2016, EXIM authorized transactions that had an aggregate authorization value of about $1.7 billion and were associated with 32 U.S.-based companies that had a delinquent federal debt indicator in SAM in the same month EXIM authorized these transactions . While these results alone do not mean EXIM should have suspended these transactions, they do indicate that there is a practical opportunity to use SAM data to help determine applicants' eligibility. Without assessing the practicality of pursuing such readily available data, EXIM is potentially forgoing opportunities to perform additional due diligence that would help inform its decisions about applicants' and participants' program eligibility and fraud risks."

Why GAO Did This Study: "As the export credit agency of the United States, EXIM's mission is to help support U.S. jobs by facilitating the export of U.S. goods and services through direct loans, loan guarantees, working capital guarantees, and credit insurance. In September 2018, the total outstanding and undisbursed amount of these products and unrecovered default claims was about $60.5 billion, according to EXIM.

The Export-Import Bank Reform Reauthorization Act of 2015 included a provision for GAO to review EXIM's antifraud controls. This report (1) describes key antifraud controls EXIM says it has for mitigating fraud risks identified by GAO, and describes EXIM's efforts to perform a fraud risk assessment that considers these fraud risks; and (2) identifies EXIM's procedures to detect delinquent federal debt owed by applicants and participants, and assesses additional opportunities to use readily available data to do so. GAO analyzed 44 EXIM-associated court cases of fraud adjudicated from calendar years 2012 through 2017, examined EXIM transaction data, and interviewed EXIM and GSA officials. GAO also analyzed data identifying delinquent federal debt as well as EXIM's procedures for doing so."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is recommending that EXIM assess the practicality of using available SAM data and data-analytical approaches to detect applicants and participants with potential delinquent federal debt. EXIM concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-337?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Private Student Loans

WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the implementation and effects of private student loan rehabilitation programs. The report (GAO-19-430) is titled "Private Student Loans: Clarification from CFPB Could Help Ensure More Consistent Opportunities and Treatment for Borrowers".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the implementation and effects of private student loan rehabilitation programs. The report (GAO-19-430) is titled "Private Student Loans: Clarification from CFPB Could Help Ensure More Consistent Opportunities and Treatment for Borrowers". The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, chairman, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, ranking member of the Senate Health,Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, and Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, on May 24. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The five largest banks that provide private student loans--student loans that are not guaranteed by the federal government--told GAO that they do not offer private student loan rehabilitation programs because few private student loan borrowers are in default, and because they already offer existing repayment programs to assist distressed borrowers. (Loan rehabilitation programs described in the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (the Act) enable financial institutions to remove reported defaults from credit reports after borrowers make a number of consecutive, on-time payments.) Some nonbank private student loan lenders offer rehabilitation programs, but others do not, because they believe the Act does not authorize them to do so. Clarification of this matter by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)--which oversees credit reporting and nonbank lenders--could enable more borrowers to participate in these programs or ensure that only eligible entities offer them.

Private student loan rehabilitation programs are expected to pose minimal additional risks to financial institutions. Private student loans compose a small portion of most banks' portfolios and have consistently low default rates. Banks mitigate credit risks by requiring cosigners for almost all private student loans. Rehabilitation programs are also unlikely to affect financial institutions' ability to make sound lending decisions, in part because the programs leave some derogatory credit information--such as delinquencies leading to the default--in the credit reports.

Borrowers completing private student loan rehabilitation programs would likely experience minimal improvement in their access to credit. Removing a student loan default from a credit profile would increase the borrower's credit score by only about 8 points, on average, according to a simulation that a credit scoring firm conducted for GAO. The effect of removing the default was greater for borrowers with lower credit scores and smaller for borrowers with higher credit scores (see figure). Reasons that removing a student loan default could have little effect on a credit score include that the delinquencies leading to that default--which also negatively affect credit scores--remain in the credit report and borrowers in default may already have poor credit."

View table at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-430?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act enabled lenders to offer a rehabilitation program to private student loan borrowers who have a reported default on their credit report. The lender may remove the reported default from credit reports if the borrower meets certain conditions. Congress included a provision in statute for GAO to review the implementation and effects of these programs.

This report examines (1) the factors affecting financial institutions' participation in private student loan rehabilitation programs, (2) the risks the programs may pose to financial institutions, and (3) the effects the programs may have on student loan borrowers' access to credit. GAO reviewed applicable statutes and agency guidance. GAO also asked a credit scoring firm to simulate the effect on borrowers' credit scores of removing student loan defaults. GAO also interviewed representatives of regulators, some of the largest private student loan lenders, other credit providers, credit bureaus, credit scoring firms, and industry and consumer advocacy organizations."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making two recommendations, including that CFPB provide written clarification to nonbank private student loan lenders on their authority to offer private student loan rehabilitation programs. CFPB does not plan to take action on this recommendation and stated that it was premature to take action on the second recommendation. GAO maintains that both recommendations are valid, as discussed in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-430?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Children Affected by Trauma

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on selected states' efforts to support children affected by trauma. The report (GAO-19-388) is titled "Children Affected by Trauma: Selected States Report Various Approaches and Challenges to Supporting Children".

The report was sent to Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Illinois, chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Worker and Family Support, and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, on April 24. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Health and Human Services ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Congressional Award Foundation

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Congressional Award Foundation's fiscal 2018 financial statement audit. The report (GAO-19-472R) is titled "Congressional Award Foundation: Review of the Audit of the Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2018".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education and ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Congressional Award Foundation's fiscal 2018 financial statement audit. The report (GAO-19-472R) is titled "Congressional Award Foundation: Review of the Audit of the Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2018". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Education andLabor Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on May 21. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Based on the limited procedures GAO performed in reviewing the independent public accountant's (IPA) audit of the Congressional Award Foundation's (Foundation) fiscal year 2018 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 the Foundation's fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financial statements. Specifically, the IPA found that the Foundation's financial statements were presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Further, for fiscal year 2018, the IPA did not identify any (1) deficiencies in the Foundation's internal control over financial reporting that the IPA considered to be material weaknesses or (2) instances of reportable noncompliance or other matters as a result of its tests of the Foundation's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. The Foundation concurred with the IPA's conclusions.

GAO provided a draft of its report to the Foundation and the IPA for review and comment. The Foundation's National Director and the Congressional Award Board's Audit Committee Chair stated in an email that the Foundation was pleased that GAO found no significant issues related to the IPA's audit of the Foundation's fiscal year 2018 financial statements. In addition, the IPA's Audit Manager stated in an email 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 the Foundation's fiscal year 2018 financial statement audit. The Congressional Award Act (Act) established the Congressional Award Board to carry out a program to promote excellence among the nation's youth in the areas of public service, personal development, physical fitness, and expedition or exploration. The Congressional Award Board created the Foundation as a nonprofit corporation to assist in carrying out this program. The Act, as amended by the Government Reports Elimination Act of 2014, requires the Foundation to obtain an annual financial statement audit from an IPA. The Act also requires the Comptroller General of the United States to annually review the audit and report the results to the Congress. GAO's objective was to review the audit of the Foundation's fiscal year 2018 financial statements. To satisfy this objective, GAO performed the following procedures: (1) read and considered various documents with respect to the IPA's independence, objectivity, and qualifications; (2) analyzed key IPA audit documentation; (3) read the Foundation's fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financial statements, the IPA's audit report on the Foundation's financial statements, and the IPA's report on internal control over financial reporting and on compliance and other matters based on its audit; and (4) met with IPA representatives and Foundation management officials."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-472R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Global Positioning System

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the next generation Global Positioning System acquisition programs. The report (GAO-19-250) is titled "Global Positioning System: Updated Schedule Assessment Could Help Decision Makers Address Likely Delays Related to New Ground Control System".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the next generation Global Positioning System acquisition programs. The report (GAO-19-250) is titled "Global Positioning System: Updated Schedule Assessment Could Help Decision Makers Address Likely Delays Related to New Ground Control System". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriationssubcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on May 21. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Global Positioning System's (GPS) next generation operational control system's (OCX) program schedule continues to be optimistic and, with significant development remaining, more delays are likely for delivery, acceptance, and operation. See the figure below for previous delays, cost growth, and the current baseline.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-250?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Completing the full OCX program schedule requires (1) timely delivery by the contractor and acceptance by the Air Force and (2) an efficient completion of a planned 7-month government-run post-acceptance developmental testing. GAO found that there is potential for significant delays on both fronts. While there has been some improvement to the pace of software development, the rollout of the new development methodology has been delayed to a point where most of the contractor's schedule reserve has been used. Assumed improvements in how long it takes to repair software defects has not occurred as planned, placing additional pressure on the contractor's delivery date. Additionally, Air Force officials have acknowledged that the government developmental test period after acceptance could double in duration and delay operations further because of concurrency, test plan uncertainty, and risks of late discovery of problems.

With approximately 2 years of work remaining before delivery, there is no plan to have the full schedule independently assessed. For complex programs, such as OCX, best practices state an independent view is necessary and that a periodic schedule assessment should be performed as progress is made and risks change. Such an assessment would help inform congressional and DOD decision makers as they consider what steps may be taken to address delays to the start of OCX operations and ensure the investments in needed new receivers are properly aligned."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The U.S. military and the public depend daily on GPS data. OCX, the ground system that will command and control next generation GPS satellites, is one of several interdependent systems the Air Force is developing to modernize GPS. OCX has been hampered by delays and $2.5 billion in cost growth since the program started in 2012. The Air Force set a new baseline for cost and schedule in 2018 after OCX breached its cost threshold in 2016.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 contained a provision that the Air Force provide quarterly reports to GAO on the next generation GPS acquisition programs, and a provision that GAO brief the defense committees as needed. GAO provided numerous briefings from 2016 through 2018 and issued reports in 2016 and 2017. Continuing this body of work, this report focuses on the extent to which schedule risks may affect OCX delivery, acceptance, and approval for operation.

GAO reviewed the Air Force's baseline review results, schedule risks, and progress, and applied selected best practices for cost and schedule management. GAO also reviewed OCX monthly management briefings and quarterly assessments, and interviewed officials from the OCX program office and Raytheon (the prime contractor), among others."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that DOD conduct an independent schedule assessment of the full program schedule at the end of 2019. DOD did not concur with the recommendation. GAO believes the recommendation remains valid."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-250?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Prescription Opioids

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Medicare's drug management programs. The report (GAO-19-446) is titled "Prescription Opioids: Voluntary Medicare Drug Management Programs to Control Misuse".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on Medicare's drug management programs. The report (GAO-19-446) is titled "Prescription Opioids: Voluntary Medicare Drug Management Programs to Control Misuse". The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking memberof the House Ways and Means Committee, on May 20. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Medicare's drug management programs (DMP) identify beneficiaries at risk of opioid misuse or abuse, and attempt to mitigate that risk through the use of case management and coverage limitations. DMPs are overseen by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and voluntarily implemented by Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors (private health plans). CMS established a two-step framework for identifying at-risk beneficiaries under DMPs. First, CMS identifies potentially at-risk beneficiaries based on key factors, such as beneficiaries' daily dosage of opioids and the number of prescribers and pharmacies from which they receive opioids, with higher numbers possibly putting the beneficiary at more risk. Second, Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors' clinicians coordinate the provision of care among prescribers and pharmacists (referred to as case management) to determine if those potentially at-risk beneficiaries are actually at risk. If a patient is deemed to be at risk, coverage limitation tools--such as limiting a beneficiary to a selected prescriber or pharmacy, and implementing point-of-sale restrictions on certain drugs or amounts--can be used to limit the at-risk beneficiary's access to opioids. Beneficiaries have an opportunity to appeal an at-risk designation. None of the five plan sponsors GAO interviewed expressed concerns about beneficiaries not receiving clinically appropriate doses of opioids under the Medicare DMPs.

Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors and other stakeholders GAO interviewed reported several factors beyond the case management process that could contribute to the success of DMPs. These factors included communication among sponsors, opioid prescribers, and pharmacies dispensing opioids to reduce potential resistance to participating in DMPs by opioid prescribers or beneficiaries.

* According to plan sponsors and stakeholders, plan sponsors could communicate with stakeholders to ensure that DMPs are not viewed as a punitive tool by beneficiaries, but rather as tools for keeping them safe.

* Plan sponsors and stakeholders noted that it is important for plan sponsors to have flexibility in varying coverage limitation features to fit regional and other differences in population groups. They noted that CMS should periodically reassess and adjust the elements of the DMP program where appropriate, to incorporate evidence from the outcomes of the DMP--such as how at-risk beneficiaries are identified, or which drugs are selected as frequently abused drugs.

Finally, CMS officials told GAO that they are taking steps to assess the DMPs and gather the information required to make periodic changes to the DMP program. For example, CMS officials plan to analyze data for at-risk beneficiaries that DMPs are required to report to CMS, update their Medicare Part D audit protocol, and obtain feedback from plan sponsors about how the DMPs are working.

The Department of Health and Human Services provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Misuse and abuse of prescription opioids can lead to overdose and death. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 47,600 overdose deaths in the United States in 2017 involved an opioid. GAO and other federal entities have raised concerns about opioid misuse and abuse in Medicare. The Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016 (CARA) authorized CMS and Medicare plan sponsors to establish voluntary DMPs that may limit access to frequently abused prescription drugs, such as opioids, for Medicare beneficiaries who are identified as being at risk for prescription drug abuse. DMPs will become mandatory in Medicare starting in January 2022.

CARA included a provision for GAO to review DMPs under Medicare. This report: 1) describes how Medicare identifies beneficiaries at risk of opioid misuse and abuse and how it attempts to mitigate that risk; and 2) identifies the factors likely to affect the success of Medicare DMPs.

GAO reviewed CDC's Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain , CMS regulations, and other relevant CMS guidance. GAO also interviewed officials from CMS, the five largest Medicare Part D prescription drug plan sponsors, and officials from six other stakeholder organizations representing Medicare plan sponsors, physicians (including pain specialists), pharmacy benefit managers, state Medicaid programs, and patients."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-446?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Secret Service

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the progress made by the Secret Service in implementing the Protective Mission Panel's recommendations. The report (GAO-19-415) is titled "U.S. Secret Service: Further Actions Needed to Fully Address Protective Mission Panel Recommendations".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, ranking ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the progress made by the Secret Service in implementing the Protective Mission Panel's recommendations. The report (GAO-19-415) is titled "U.S. Secret Service: Further Actions Needed to Fully Address Protective Mission Panel Recommendations". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, rankingmember of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, chairman, Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on May 22. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. Secret Service (Secret Service) has made progress implementing the 19 recommendations related to training and personnel; technology, perimeter security, and operations; and leadership made by the U.S. Secret Service Protective Mission Panel (Panel). The Secret Service fully implemented 11 of the recommendations. For example, the agency increased the number of agents and officers in the divisions that protect the President and White House and secured approval to build a new fence around the White House complex.

The Secret Service is in the process of implementing the remaining eight recommendations. The Panel found that the security incident of September 19, 2014, when an intruder jumped the north fence and entered the White House, arose from a "catastrophic failure of training." The Panel recommended, and the Secret Service agreed, that the Presidential and Vice Presidential Protective Divisions train for 25 percent of their work time. However, the Secret Service has not met this target and lacks a plan for achieving it. In fiscal year 2018, special agents assigned to these divisions trained for about 6 percent and 3 percent, respectively, of their regular work hours (see figure). In commenting on a draft of this report in May 2019, the Secret Service stated that it no longer agrees with the training target and plans to reevaluate it. Developing and implementing a plan for ensuring that the established training target is met given current and planned staffing levels would better ensure that agents assigned to the Presidential and Vice Presidential Protective Divisions are prepared to carry out Secret Service's protection priority.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-415?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

In addition, the Secret Service does not have a policy with a documented process for collecting complete and appropriate (i.e., protection-related) training hour data for Uniformed Division officers. Implementing such a policy will better position the Secret Service to assess the training data and make informed decisions about whether and how training needs are being met."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Secret Service, a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is responsible for protecting the President, the Vice President, and their families, as well as the White House complex. In October 2014, following several security lapses, the Secretary of Homeland Security established the Panel, an independent panel of experts, to review White House security and other aspects of Secret Service operations.

The Secret Service Recruitment and Retention Act of 2018 contains a provision for GAO to report on the progress made by the Secret Service in implementing the Panel's recommendations. This report addresses the extent to which the Secret Service has implemented the recommendations in the Panel's 2014 report. GAO reviewed Secret Service documents, analyzed agency training and labor-distribution data from fiscal years 2014 through 2018, and interviewed agency officials and Panel members."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making recommendations to the Secret Service: (1) develop and implement a plan to ensure that special agents assigned to the Presidential and Vice Presidential Protective Divisions reach annual training targets, and (2) develop and implement a policy that documents the process for collecting complete and appropriate data on Uniformed Division officer training. DHS concurred with the two recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-415?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Tribal Energy

WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which General Services Administration, the Departments of Defense and the Energy Department have used the tribal energy preference. The report (GAO-19-359) is titled "Tribal Energy: Opportunities Exist to Increase Federal Agencies' Use of the Tribal Preference Authority".

The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, vice chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "None of the three primary federal ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 23 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the extent to which General Services Administration, the Departments of Defense and the Energy Department have used the tribal energy preference. The report (GAO-19-359) is titled "Tribal Energy: Opportunities Exist to Increase Federal Agencies' Use of the Tribal Preference Authority". The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, vice chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "None of the three primary federalagencies with authority to enter into energy contracts--the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Energy (DOE)--have used the tribal energy preference since it was established in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT05). The section of the act that includes the preference provides federal agencies with mechanisms that can support development and use of tribal energy resources. The mechanisms include grants to assist tribes in developing their energy resources and authorization for agencies to give preference to majority tribally owned sources in federal energy purchases, so long as they pay no more than prevailing market prices and obtain no less than prevailing market rate terms and conditions. According to DOE, tribal lands account for 2 percent of U.S. land but contain about 6.5 percent of all utility-scale U.S. renewable energy potential.

GSA, DOD, and DOE officials identified five instances in the past when a tribe bid for a federal energy contract, and the agencies did not use the preference in any of those instances. GSA awarded a contract to tribes in two of the instances. In the first instance, the tribe submitted the best bid. In the second, GSA officials attempted to use the preference by limiting the energy contract solicitation solely to tribal sources, according to a stakeholder that worked on the project, but the GSA Administrator expressed concern about limiting competition in that manner. GSA instead used the small business preference authority, through which the tribe ultimately won the contract. DOD and DOE received the other three bids, which did not lead to contracts because either the cost was too high or the bid was not needed by the agency, according to agency officials. Federal officials noted that use of the preference is discretionary. EPACT05, which says agencies "may give preference," does not require use of the preference, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation does not specifically address the preference.

In November 2016, GAO reported that one reason federal agency officials cited for not using the preference was uncertainty about how to do so. GAO recommended that GSA develop guidance to clarify use of the preference across the federal government. GSA agreed that such guidance would be beneficial but stated that the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council is the regulatory body empowered to address this issue. In April 2017, GSA presented the council with a business case on the issue. However, GSA officials told GAO that the council determined that the preference has limited application government-wide because it mainly affects GSA, DOD, and DOE, and that, accordingly, the council declined to issue regulations and recommended GSA consider nonregulatory paths. GSA then added the preference language to the form it will use if it delegates purchasing authority in the future.

In 2018, federal agency officials told GAO they were uncertain how to use the preference. According to GSA and DOD officials, other statutes that authorize agencies to apply preferences for acquisition of goods and services from specific sources include more specific requirements in their statutory language, making them easier to apply. GSA officials noted that the Small Business Act, as amended, contains specific requirements and measurable goals that increase contracts awarded to small businesses. DOD officials stated that the agency might use the tribal energy preference if EPACT05 had similar requirements."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Tribal lands hold considerable energy resources--oil, gas, coal, wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass. Tribal energy projects can help tribes fund programs and services that improve tribal members' quality of life. Federal agencies are large consumers of energy in the United States, spending about $6 billion in 2017 on energy for their facilities. Congress has provided a mechanism for agencies to support development and use of tribal energy by authorizing agencies to give preference to majority tribally owned suppliers when purchasing energy. GAO was asked to review federal efforts to use the preference.

This report examines, among other objectives, the extent to which GSA, DOD, and DOE have used the tribal energy preference. GAO reviewed available agency information on use of the preference and interviewed federal agency officials to understand how agencies would use the preference when entering into contracts with tribal suppliers."

What GAO Recommends: "To the extent that Congress wants to further encourage use of tribally owned energy sources, it should consider amending EPACT05 to provide more specific direction to federal agencies for implementing the tribal energy preference, to include consideration of additional incentives or requirements."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-359?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Defense Management

WASHINGTON, May 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on aspects of the Department of Defense Corrosion Office. The report (GAO-19-513) is titled "Defense Management: Observations on Changes to the Reporting Structure for DOD's Corrosion Office and Its Implementation of GAO Recommendations".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Medicaid Demonstrations

WASHINGTON, May 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services's transparency policies and procedures for new demonstrations and extensions. The report (GAO-19-315) is titled "Medicaid Demonstrations: Approvals of Major Changes Need Increased Transparency".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on April 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 18 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services's transparency policies and procedures for new demonstrations and extensions. The report (GAO-19-315) is titled "Medicaid Demonstrations: Approvals of Major Changes Need Increased Transparency". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-New Jersey, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on April 17. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found:"Medicaid demonstrations allow states flexibility to test new approaches for providing coverage and delivering Medicaid services. Since 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), which oversees demonstrations, has developed procedures to improve the transparency of the approval process. For example, CMS reviews demonstration applications (including for new demonstrations, extensions, and amendments to existing demonstrations) for their compliance with applicable transparency requirements, including that states seek public input on their applications.

However, GAO found weaknesses in CMS's policies for ensuring transparency.

* Changes to pending applications for new demonstrations or extensions. CMS lacks policies for ensuring transparency when states submit major changes to pending applications. For two of the four approvals of new demonstrations or extensions GAO reviewed in-depth, states submitted changes to their applications that could have significant effects on beneficiaries (such as disenrollment or other penalties) without first obtaining public comment on these changes at the state level.

* Amendments to existing demonstrations. CMS's transparency requirements for amendments are limited. For example, CMS does not require amendment applications to include how the changes may affect beneficiary enrollment or report on concerns raised in state public comments. However, states have proposed major changes--such as work and community engagement requirements--through amendments, raising concerns that major changes to states' demonstrations are being approved without a complete understanding of their impact."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Section 1115 demonstrations are a significant component of Medicaid spending and affect the care of millions of beneficiaries. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish procedures to ensure transparency in approvals of new demonstrations and extensions to existing demonstrations. The act did not address amendments, which are subject to long-standing guidance on public input.

GAO was asked to examine the transparency of demonstration approvals. Among other things, this report examines CMS's transparency policies and procedures for new demonstrations and extensions, and amendments to existing demonstrations. To review a variety of approval types across a large number of states, GAO examined all approvals of new demonstrations and extensions of and amendments to existing demonstrations granted from January 2017 through May 2018. GAO also conducted in-depth reviews of one approval in each of seven states, selected to include at least two approvals of each type. GAO reviewed demonstration documentation for these states, and interviewed state and federal Medicaid officials. GAO also assessed CMS's procedures against federal internal control standards."

What GAO Recommends: "CMS should develop policies for ensuring transparency when states (1) submit major changes to pending demonstration applications and (2) propose amendments to existing demonstrations. HHS concurred with these recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-315?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Hardrock Mining

WASHINGTON, May 17 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on hardrock mining data related to mining on federal lands. The report (GAO-19-435R) is titled "Hardrock Mining: Availability of Selected Data Related to Mining on Federal Lands".

The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, on May 16. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Of the six agencies in GAO's review--Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 17 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on hardrock mining data related to mining on federal lands. The report (GAO-19-435R) is titled "Hardrock Mining: Availability of Selected Data Related to Mining on Federal Lands". The report was sent to Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, on May 16. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Of the six agencies in GAO's review--Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS), National Park Service (NPS), Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in the Department of the Interior (Interior), and Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture--BLM and Forest Service reported collecting data on some of the 16 selected hardrock mining data elements. Specifically, BLM and Forest Service both collect data on the value of bonds held to ensure reclamation of hardrock mining operations, but differ in the other data elements they collect. For example, BLM collects data on revenues generated from hardrock mining in the form of various fees paid by operators. In addition, BLM reported collecting data on the percentages of total acres of federal lands that have a surface disturbance related to an approved mining plan, as well as where the surface disturbance has been reclaimed. In contrast, Forest Service collects data on the percentage of federal land that has been withdrawn from mineral entry by various land management statutes, according to agency officials.

BLM and Forest Service officials reported that they collect certain data elements consistent with their missions related to managing hardrock mining. The remaining four agencies reported that they do not collect these 16 data elements because they are generally not involved in hardrock mining activities on their lands."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The federal government manages about 650 million acres, or 29 percent, of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Five land management agencies--BLM, FWS, NPS, Reclamation, and Forest Service--manage about 96 percent of the federal land. These agencies manage the lands under their jurisdictions for a variety of uses. For example, BLM and the Forest Service manage their lands for multiple uses, such as mining, timber, wildlife conservation, grazing, and recreation. In addition to the land management agencies, USGS provides science about mineral resources, natural hazards, and the effects of climate and land-use change, among other things.

This report examines the extent to which the six agencies collect selected hardrock mining data, and the agencies' reasons for not collecting or maintaining certain data, where applicable. To conduct this work, GAO reviewed its 2011 report on the availability and potential reliability of selected data elements at five agencies that encompassed over 100 data elements and identified 16 specific data elements related to hardrock mining. GAO then obtained information from the six agencies using a data collection instrument (DCI). Specifically, the DCI collected information on (1) whether agencies collect data on each of the 16 hardrock mining data elements; (2) where and in what format they maintain these data, if collected; and (3) reasons for not collecting or maintaining these data, if they did not do so. GAO did not determine which of these selected data elements, if any, the agencies are required to collect."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is not making recommendations in this report."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-435R?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Contracting

WASHINGTON, May 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to federal contractors and tax debt. The report (GAO-19-243) is titled "Federal Contracting: Opportunities to Improve Compliance with Regulations and Enhance Tax Collections".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on April 15. Here are excerpts of ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to federal contractors and tax debt. The report (GAO-19-243) is titled "Federal Contracting: Opportunities to Improve Compliance with Regulations and Enhance Tax Collections". The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, chairman, and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on April 15. Here are excerpts ofsummaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The five selected agencies GAO reviewed have control activities--such as policies and procedures--to help ensure they consider qualifying federal tax debts as defined by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) * 52.209-11 and * 52.209-5 before awarding contracts. However, these controls were potentially ineffective in ensuring compliance with relevant laws and regulations. According to GAO's analysis, in 2015 and 2016 the Departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, and Veterans Affairs, and the Army and Navy, awarded 1,849 contracts to contractors that reported qualifying federal tax debts, such as delinquent debts over $3,500 (see table). When a contractor reports qualifying tax debts under these regulations, the contracting officer must take several actions, including notifying the agency suspension and debarment official (SDO). However, SDOs at all five agencies told GAO they did not receive any notifications of contractors reporting tax debt in this period. As a result, these contracts may have been awarded without potential required actions, indicating potential violations of federal regulations and, in some cases, appropriations law.

View table at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-243?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO's nongeneralizable review of seven contracts illustrate two cases where contractors were collectively awarded more than $510,000 in contract obligations while having more than $250,000 in tax debt, including tax penalties for willful noncompliance with tax laws. Officials from the selected agencies were unable to explain why their control activities were potentially ineffective without reviewing each contract to determine whether FAR requirements were applicable and whether control activities were applied. Understanding why existing control activities did not operate effectively will help these agencies enhance controls to avoid future misuses of appropriated funds. GAO plans to provide information on the instances of potential noncompliance GAO identified to the selected agencies.

Of the over 2,700 executive-branch contractors GAO found to have likely qualifying federal tax debt as of December 2016, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had identified over 2,000 for levy through its automated Federal Payment Levy Program (FPLP). However, the FPLP cannot levy all contractors because not all payments are processed by the system the FPLP uses. The data the IRS receives from agencies does not allow it to readily identify payments made using other systems--information the IRS needs for agency outreach about inclusion in the FPLP and to more quickly initiate a manual levy. With this information, the IRS may be able to improve its levy capacity and enhance tax collections."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The federal government obligated approximately $507 billion on contracts in fiscal year 2017. Businesses, including federal contractors, pay billions of dollars in taxes each year. Some businesses, however, do not pay owed taxes, contributing to what is known as the tax gap. Federal contractors owe some of the taxes that contribute to the tax gap, and, since 2015, federal law prohibits agencies, under certain circumstances, from using appropriated funds to contract with those who have qualifying tax debt. The IRS also has authority to levy certain payments of contractors with qualifying federal tax debt.

GAO was asked to review issues related to federal contractors and tax debt. Among other things, GAO examined whether, in calendar years 2015 and 2016, (1) selected federal agencies had control activities that ensured contractors' reported federal tax debts were considered before contract award and (2) the IRS levied selected federal contractors' payments. GAO analyzed contract and IRS data from 2015 and 2016 (the most-recent data available), reviewed five agencies that represent 51 percent of contract obligations, and reviewed seven awards to contractors reporting tax debt."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making 12 recommendations, including that selected agencies enhance controls for considering contactors' qualifying federal tax debt before awarding contracts and that the IRS evaluate options to obtain comprehensive contract-payment information. All the agencies generally agreed with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-243?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Financial Audit of Fiscal Service's FY 2018 Schedules of General Fund

WASHINGTON, May 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on financial audit of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service's fiscal 2018 Schedules of the General Fund. The report (GAO-19-185) is titled "Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Year 2018 Schedules of the General Fund".

The report was sent to David Lebryk, fiscal assistant secretary of the Treasury Department, on May 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Certain significant deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting and other limitations on the scope ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 16 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on financial audit of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service's fiscal 2018 Schedules of the General Fund. The report (GAO-19-185) is titled "Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal Year 2018 Schedules of the General Fund". The report was sent to David Lebryk, fiscal assistant secretary of the Treasury Department, on May 15. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "Certain significant deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting and other limitations on the scopeof GAO's work resulted in conditions that prevented GAO from expressing an opinion on the Schedules of the General Fund as of and for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2018. Such scope limitations also prevented GAO from obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an opinion on the effectiveness of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service's (Fiscal Service) internal control over financial reporting relevant to the Schedules of the General Fund as of September 30, 2018. In addition, such scope limitations limited tests of compliance with selected provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements for fiscal year 2018.

Fiscal Service was unable to timely provide sufficient appropriate evidence to support certain information reported in the accompanying Schedules of the General Fund. The underlying scope limitations are the basis for GAO's disclaimer of opinion on the Schedules of the General Fund. These limitations primarily related to (1) the inability to readily identify and trace General Fund transactions to determine whether they were complete and properly recorded in the correct general ledger accounts and line items within the Schedules of the General Fund, (2) inadequate Fiscal Service procedures to determine the effect of differences between General Fund's records and the amounts reported by certain federal agencies on the Schedules of the General Fund, and (3) Fiscal Service's inability to timely provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence to support the beginning balance of the Liability for Fund Balance with Treasury. GAO also identified two significant deficiencies contributing to the first two scope limitations discussed above. As a result of these limitations, readers are cautioned that amounts reported in the Schedules of the General Fund and related notes may not be reliable.

Further, GAO identified two additional significant deficiencies in Fiscal Service's internal control over financial reporting relevant to the Schedules of the General Fund related to deficiencies in (1) information systems controls and (2) Fiscal Service's risk assessment and monitoring controls. In addition, GAO identified three other control deficiencies, which it does not consider to be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies.

GAO recognizes that the fiscal year 2018 Schedules of the General Fund reflect the significant efforts of Fiscal Service over the past several years to develop the infrastructure to support the Schedules of the General Fund. Fiscal Service's actions have substantially improved its ability to report on the General Fund, including the government-wide cash inflows and outflows."

Why GAO Did This Study: "GAO audits the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government. Because of the significance of the General Fund of the United States (General Fund) to the government-wide financial statements, GAO audited the fiscal year 2018 Schedules of the General Fund, which are managed by Fiscal Service, to determine whether, in all material respects, (1) the schedules are fairly presented and (2) Fiscal Service management maintained effective internal control over financial reporting relevant to the Schedules of the General Fund. Further, GAO tested compliance with selected provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements related to the Schedules of the General Fund.

The General Fund is the reporting entity responsible for accounting for the cash activity of the U.S. government. In fiscal year 2018, the General Fund reported $14.2 trillion of cash inflows, including debt issuances and taxes collected, and $14.0 trillion of cash outflows, including debt repayments and Social Security and health care benefit payments. It also reported $21.6 trillion of federal debt securities held and managed by the Department of the Treasury as of September 30, 2018."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making 12 recommendations to improve Fiscal Service's internal control over financial reporting relevant to the Schedules of the General Fund.

In commenting on a draft of this report, Fiscal Service concurred with the results of GAO's audit."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-185?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Bank Supervision

WASHINGTON, May 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how consistent regulators' revised policies and procedures are with leading risk-management practices. The report (GAO-19-352) is titled "Bank Supervision: Regulators Improved Supervision of Management Activities but Additional Steps Needed".

The report was sent to Jerome H. Powell, chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Jelena McWilliams, chairman of the Board of Directors Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Comptroller of the Currency Joseph M. Otting, on May 14. Here are excerpts ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on how consistent regulators' revised policies and procedures are with leading risk-management practices. The report (GAO-19-352) is titled "Bank Supervision: Regulators Improved Supervision of Management Activities but Additional Steps Needed". The report was sent to Jerome H. Powell, chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Jelena McWilliams, chairman of the Board of Directors Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Comptroller of the Currency Joseph M. Otting, on May 14. Here are excerptsof summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Since 2009, federal banking regulators have revised policies and procedures for use by examiners in supervising depository institutions' management activities (such as those related to corporate governance and internal controls) and for identifying and communicating supervisory concerns. For example, regulators differentiated levels of severity for supervisory concerns and specified when to communicate them to boards of directors at the depository institutions. GAO found that the updated policies and procedures generally were consistent with leading risk-management practices, including federal internal control standards.

Examination documents that GAO reviewed showed that examiners generally applied the regulators' updated policies and procedures to assess management oversight at large depository institutions. In particular, for the institutions GAO reviewed, the regulators communicated deficiencies before an institution's financial condition was affected, and followed up on supervisory concerns to determine progress in correcting weaknesses. However, practices for communicating supervisory concerns to institutions varied among regulators and some communications do not provide complete information that could help boards of directors monitor whether deficiencies are fully addressed by management. Written communications of supervisory concerns from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve) that GAO reviewed often lacked complete information about the cause of the concern and, for the Federal Reserve, also lacked information on the potential consequences of the concern, which in one instance led to an incomplete response by an institution. Communicating more complete information to boards of directors of institutions, such as the reason for a deficient activity or practice and its potential effect on the safety and soundness of operations, could help ensure more timely corrective actions.

While supervisory concern data indicated continuing management weaknesses, regulators vary in how they track and use the data. Data on supervisory concerns, and regulators' internal reports based on the data, indicated that regulators frequently cited concerns about the ability of depository institution management to control and mitigate risk. However, FDIC examiners only record summary information about certain supervisory concerns and not detailed characteristics of concerns that would allow for more complete information. With more detailed information, FDIC management could better monitor whether emerging risks are resolved in a timely manner. In addition, the regulators vary in the nature and extent of data they collect on the escalation of supervisory concerns to enforcement actions. FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) have relatively detailed policies and procedures for escalation of supervisory concerns to enforcement actions, but the Federal Reserve does not. According to Federal Reserve staff, in practice they consider factors such as the institution's response to prior safety and soundness actions. But the Federal Reserve lacks specific and measurable guidelines for escalation of supervisory concerns, relying solely on the judgment or experience of examiners, their management, and Federal Reserve staff, which can result in inconsistent escalation practices."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Weaknesses identified after the 2007-2009 financial crisis included management weaknesses at large depository institutions and the need for federal regulators (FDIC, Federal Reserve, and OCC) to address the deficiencies in a timely manner. Concerns remain that positive economic results of recent years could mask underlying risk-management deficiencies.

This report examined (1) how consistent regulators' revised policies and procedures are with leading risk-management practices, (2) how they applied examination policies and procedures, and (3) trends in supervisory concern data since 2012 and how regulators tracked such data. GAO compared regulators' policies and procedures for oversight against leading practices; compared documents from selected bank examinations for 2014-2016 against regulator's risk-management examination procedures; reviewed aggregate supervisory concern data for 2012-2016; and interviewed regulators and industry representatives."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that FDIC and the Federal Reserve improve information in written communication of supervisory concerns; FDIC improve recording of supervisory concern data; and the Federal Reserve update guidelines for escalating supervisory concerns. FDIC disagreed with the first recommendation, stating its policies address the issue, but GAO found clarification is needed. FDIC agreed with the second recommendation. The Federal Reserve neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-352?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Ex-Im Bank

WASHINGTON, May 15 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Export-Import Bank's underwriting process. The report (GAO-19-43) is titled "Export-Import Bank: Enhancements Needed in Credit Program Underwriting Policies and Procedures".

The report was sent to Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, chairman, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, chairwoman, and Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, on May 14. Here are excerpts ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Combating Nuclear Terrorism

WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Securing the Cities program. The report (GAO-19-327) is titled "Combating Nuclear Terrorism: DHS Should Address Limitations to Its Program to Secure Key Cities".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Rep. Peter T. King, R-New York, ranking member of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, on May 13. Here are excerpts ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Securing the Cities program. The report (GAO-19-327) is titled "Combating Nuclear Terrorism: DHS Should Address Limitations to Its Program to Secure Key Cities". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Rep. Peter T. King, R-New York, ranking member of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, on May 13. Here are excerptsof summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not collect information to fully track cities' use of Securing the Cities (STC) program funds for approved purposes and to assess their performance in the program. To reduce the risk of successful deployment of nuclear or radiological weapons in U.S. cities, the program establishes local threat detection and deterrence capabilities. DHS tracks cities' spending of program funds and some performance data through cities' quarterly reports but does not collect other data on itemized expenditures and to assess how effectively cities achieved performance metrics and program milestones or how they performed in drills that simulate a threat. For example, DHS does not compare information on expenditures to the purchase plans it approved for cities. As a result, DHS does not know the dollar amounts cities actually spent on program purchases. Expenditure data GAO requested show that cities spent most funds on detection equipment--that is, $94.5 million of the $144.8 million cities spent through June 30, 2018. By regularly collecting expenditure information from cities and comparing it to approved purchase plans, DHS could better ensure these funds were spent consistent with program goals.

DHS does not have assurance that cities can sustain threat detection and deterrence capabilities gained through the STC program. DHS has not enforced planning requirements for sustaining those capabilities and has taken limited action to help cities do so, although encouraging sustainment is one of its primary program goals. Officials from the five cities in the program told GAO that they anticipate funding challenges that will adversely impact their ability to sustain capabilities over time. For example, several city officials said they cannot rely on other DHS or federal grant programs or local sources of funding once STC funding ends. Unless DHS analyzes risks related to sustainment, works with cities to address these risks, and enforces sustainment-planning requirements for cities in the program in the future, program participants could see their radiological detection programs and related capabilities deteriorate.

DHS has not (1) fully developed potential changes or documented a plan for making changes to the STC program; (2) identified the basis for such changes; and (3) consistently communicated with cities, raising concerns about how the changes will impact them. DHS officials told GAO that the agency is considering several potential changes to the STC program that would broaden its geographic reach and scope and centralize acquisition of detection equipment, among other things, but it has not fully developed or documented these changes and does not have a strategy or plan for implementing them. A law enacted in December 2018 requires DHS to develop an implementation plan for the STC program. The law's requirements would provide DHS an opportunity to identify the basis for potential changes, and assessing such changes would provide more reasonable assurance that they would strengthen the program. Further, most city officials GAO interviewed said that in an August 2018 meeting, DHS provided a high-level overview of potential changes and little detail on how such changes would be implemented or affect city operations. If DHS does not clearly communicate to cities how the program will operate under potential changes, these cities could face difficulties planning for the future and achieving the program's detection and deterrence objectives."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Countering the threat that a terrorist could smuggle nuclear or radiological materials into the United States is a top national security priority. In fiscal year 2007, DHS initiated the STC program to reduce the risk of the deployment of a nuclear or radiological weapon by establishing capability in state and local agencies to detect and deter such threats. Since the program began, five participating cities have spent almost $145 million in program funds.

GAO was asked to review the STC program. This report examines (1) the extent to which DHS tracks cities' use of program funds and assesses their performance; (2) what assurance DHS has that cities can sustain capabilities gained through the STC program and the challenges, if any, that cities face in sustaining such capabilities; and (3) potential changes to the STC program and how DHS plans to implement them, the basis for these changes, and the extent to which DHS has communicated with cities about the impact of making changes. GAO reviewed DHS documents, conducted site visits to all cities in the program, and interviewed DHS and city officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making four recommendations including that DHS regularly collect detailed information from cities on program expenditures; analyze risks related to sustainment, work with cities to address these risks, and enforce sustainment-planning requirements for cities in the program; and clearly communicate to cities how the existing program will operate until a new program is in effect. DHS concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-327?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Emergency Assistance for Zika

WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of U.S. Agency for International Development and the Department of State funding for U.S. Zika response overseas. The report (GAO-19-356) is titled "Emergency Assistance for Zika: USAID Supported Activities Overseas but Could Improve Funds Tracking and Response Planning".

The report was sent to Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Rep. Nita M. Lowey, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the status of U.S. Agency for International Development and the Department of State funding for U.S. Zika response overseas. The report (GAO-19-356) is titled "Emergency Assistance for Zika: USAID Supported Activities Overseas but Could Improve Funds Tracking and Response Planning". The report was sent to Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Rep. Nita M. Lowey,D-New York, chairwoman, Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, on May 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department of State (State) obligated $385 million of the total $390 million available for international Zika response and disbursed $264 million as of September 2018. USAID obligated 95 percent of the total funding. USAID and State provided some country information to Congress but did not provide, or take steps to track, funding on a country basis. According to USAID officials, tracking funding information by country would be helpful in the future. The ability to compile funding by country when responding to future infectious disease outbreaks would enable USAID to provide additional information to key decision makers to better support spending oversight and inform budgetary and planning decisions.

In response to the Zika outbreak, USAID and State supported a broad range of activities overseas, including mosquito control, research efforts, and medical evacuations. In one activity, USAID implementing partners monitored mosquito populations; in another, they researched methods to reduce Zika virus transmission rates. USAID implementing partners reported various outputs from selected activities. For example, an implementing partner reported that its awareness campaign on Zika prevention reached more than 5 million people.

USAID faced sustainability and timeliness challenges in implementing its Zika response. According to agency and other officials, one-time funding and a short time frame posed a challenge related to sustainability of Zika response activities. In response, USAID worked to align activities with those of host governments and other organizations so they could continue in the long term. However, USAID's emergency response planning did not fully address the challenge of timely implementation of response activities in countries without bilateral USAID health programs. Twenty-two of 26 countries with Zika response activities did not have bilateral USAID health programs when the Zika outbreak began. As a result, response activities took additional time to deploy in some countries where USAID first had to establish relationships with key host country officials. Although USAID developed an infectious disease response plan in 2018, the plan does not provide guidance on how to address the timely implementation challenge in countries without bilateral health programs. By improving its planning, such as by adding such guidance in its 2018 plan, USAID would be better positioned to respond quickly to future disease outbreaks."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Zika virus a public health emergency of international concern in February 2016. According to WHO, as of March 2017, 79 countries and territories--including 48 in the Western Hemisphere--reported evidence of ongoing Zika transmission. In April 2016, USAID and State repurposed $215 million for Zika from funds appropriated for Ebola. Subsequently, the Zika Response and Preparedness Appropriations Act, 2016, provided over $175 million in supplemental funding to USAID and State to support Zika response efforts overseas. The act also included a provision for GAO to review the status of USAID and State actions to respond to Zika. In March 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention downgraded its international travel warning for Zika.

This report examines (1) the status of USAID and State funding for U.S. Zika response overseas, (2) activities supported by these funds, and (3) implementation challenges, if any, and responses to any challenges. GAO reviewed information from U.S. agencies and met with U.S. and host country officials in Washington, D.C. GAO also conducted fieldwork in a nongeneralizable sample of countries in Latin America and the Caribbean where agencies implemented key response activities."

What GAO Recommends: "USAID should (1) take steps to ensure it is able to compile funding information by country for future infectious disease emergency responses and (2) take steps to improve its infectious disease response planning. USAID concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-356?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Special Operations Forces

WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict's oversight of special operations forces. The report (GAO-19-386) is titled "Special Operations Forces: Additional Actions Are Needed to Effectively Expand Management Oversight".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking member ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 14 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict's oversight of special operations forces. The report (GAO-19-386) is titled "Special Operations Forces: Additional Actions Are Needed to Effectively Expand Management Oversight". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ranking memberof the House Armed Services Committee, on May 13. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: Since 2017 the Department of Defense (DOD) has made recommendations, developed actions, and taken steps to address requirements in section 922 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017 to expand the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict's (ASD-SO/LIC) roles and responsibilities. DOD officials noted that they have taken an incremental implementation approach to addressing section 922. In 2018, DOD identified 166 recommendations to change the ASD-SO/LIC's oversight of special operations forces (SOF). These recommendations were used to develop 87 actions that were necessary to implement section 922. Since February 2019, DOD has implemented 56 of these actions. For example, the Deputy Secretary of Defense approved a new Special Operations Policy and Oversight Council directive that identified the ASD-SO/LIC as the lead for that council. The Deputy Secretary of Defense also delegated the ASD-SO/LIC with authority to approve waivers to hire civilian personnel during a civilian hiring freeze.

Although the office of the ASD-SO/LIC has taken many actions to implement section 922, DOD faces two key challenges in completing its implementation of the ASD-SO/LIC's new roles and responsibilities:

* Lack of time frames. As of February 2019, 28 out of 31 unimplemented actions associated with section 922 did not have clear time frames for implementation. According to ASD-SO/LIC and U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) officials, they did not prioritize establishing time frames because they took an incremental approach to implementing actions and addressed them on a case-by-case basis. Without clear time frames for implementation, ASD-SO/LIC and SOCOM may be less effective in implementing section 922.

* Unclear guidance. Current guidance about ASD-SO/LIC responsibilities is outdated: for example, it states that the ASD-SO/LIC shall report directly to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. However, section 922 states that special operation forces-related administrative matters are managed directly by the Secretary of Defense to the ASD-SO/LIC. The special operations force enterprise is a complex system, and unless roles and responsibilities are clarified in guidance, other DOD stakeholders, such as the military services, may not know the extent of the ASD-SO/LIC's and SOCOM's authorities and responsibilities. DOD officials expressed some concerns that until these matters are clarified in guidance, it will remain unclear whether the ASD-SO/LIC and SOCOM should work together--for example, on personnel issues--and how their relationships with stakeholders with oversight authority will be managed. DOD partially concurred, and based on its comments, GAO modified one recommendation.

The office of the ASD-SO/LIC has made efforts to develop a workforce plan, including commissioning a manpower study and taking steps to develop a hiring plan; however, these efforts do not fully incorporate some leading principles for a strategic workforce plan. For example, ASD-SO/LIC did not share the hiring plan with its staff, including key officials from the office of the ASD-SO/LIC and SOCOM. Without completing a comprehensive strategic workforce plan that includes key principles, the office of the ASD-SO/LIC may not know what gaps exist in skills and competencies in order to develop effective workforce strategies to fill those gaps. These issues could put the office of the ASD-SO/LIC at risk of hiring personnel who may not adequately meet its needs as defined by section 922."

Why GAO Did This Study: "As DOD increased its reliance on special operations forces, SOCOM's budget has increased from $5.2 billion in 2005 to $12.3 billion in 2018. Section 922 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 included provisions to enhance the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict's responsibilities to be similar to those of a military department secretary regarding the organization, training, and equipping of special operations forces.

The Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the fiscal year 2018 NDAA included a provision for GAO to assess DOD's actions in response to section 922. This report assesses (1) the extent to which DOD has identified and taken actions to implement section 922; (2) what, if any, challenges it faces in completing implementation; and (3) the extent to which its hiring approach for the office of the ASD-SO/LIC has incorporated strategic workforce planning principles. GAO reviewed relevant documents and interviewed DOD officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making three recommendations to DOD to establish time frames for section 922 actions; update applicable guidance to clarify roles and responsibilities for the ASD-SO/LIC and SOCOM; and develop a strategic workforce plan that incorporates key principles. DOD partially concurred with the recommendations and GAO continues to believe the recommendations are valid, as discussed in the report. GAO also modified one recommendation to address DOD concerns regarding its applicability."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-386?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Cloud Computing

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on agencies' reported use of cloud services. The report (GAO-19-58) is titled "Cloud Computing: Agencies Have Increased Usage and Realized Benefits, but Cost and Savings Data Need to Be Better Tracked".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on agencies' reported use of cloud services. The report (GAO-19-58) is titled "Cloud Computing: Agencies Have Increased Usage and Realized Benefits, but Cost and Savings Data Need to Be Better Tracked". The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommitteeon Government Operations, Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, and Rep. Robin L. Kelly, D-Illinois, on April 4. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The 16 agencies GAO reviewed made progress in implementing cloud computing services (cloud services)--namely, they established assessment guidance, performed assessments, and implemented these services--but the extent of their progress varied. To encourage cloud service acquisition, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) began requiring agencies to assess all information technology (IT) investments for cloud services. However, only 10 of the 16 agencies reviewed had established assessment guidance. In addition, while the agencies assessed the majority of their planned fiscal year 2019 IT investments for cloud services, 12 agencies had not completed an assessment of 10 or more investments. Nevertheless, 10 of the agencies reported increasing their use of cloud services between fiscal years 2016 through 2019 (see figure). Six agencies noted that inconsistent reporting of cloud investments and investment consolidation impacted their reported percentage.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-58?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Further, the 16 agencies reported that they had increased their cloud service spending since 2015 and 13 of the 16 agencies had saved $291 million to date from these services. However, these agencies identified issues in tracking and reporting cloud spending and savings data, including not having consistent processes in place to do so. Agencies also noted that OMB guidance did not require them to explicitly report savings from cloud implementations and, therefore, they had to specifically collect this data to meet GAO's request. As a result of these identified issues, it is likely that agency-reported cloud spending and savings figures were underreported.

Officials from 15 of the 16 agencies reported that they had identified significant benefits from acquiring cloud services, including improved customer service and the acquisition of more cost-effective options for managing IT services. In addition, these agencies identified nine cloud investments that, among other things, enhanced the availability of weather-related information, facilitated collaboration and information sharing among federal, state, and local agencies related to homeland security, and provided benefits information to veterans, as examples of systems that realized these benefits. One agency reported that it had not realized benefits because it did not have any completed migration efforts."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Cloud computing enables on-demand access to shared computing resources providing services more quickly and at a lower cost than having agencies maintain these resources themselves. In 2012, OMB began requiring agencies to assess all IT investments for cloud services.

GAO was asked to review agencies' reported use of cloud services. This report discusses selected agencies' progress in implementing cloud services, the extent to which those agencies increased cloud service spending and achieved savings or cost avoidances, and examples of agency-reported cloud investments with notable benefits. GAO selected 16 agencies to review based on their fiscal year 2017 IT budgets and analyzed their use of cloud services, associated spending and savings data, and guidance for assessing investments for these services. GAO interviewed agency officials in charge of cloud services and reviewed pertinent documents to identify acquisitions with notable benefits. GAO also interviewed OMB staff about their agency's role in federal cloud computing and related OMB guidance."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making one recommendation to OMB on cloud savings reporting, and 34 recommendations to the 16 agencies on cloud assessments and savings. Fourteen agencies agreed with all recommendations, OMB and one agency neither agreed nor disagreed, and one (Defense) agreed with one recommendation but not the other. GAO continues to believe its recommendation to the department is appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-58?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Indian Issues

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the ability of Farm Credit System to meet the agricultural credit needs of Indian tribes and their members on tribal land. The report (GAO-19-464) is titled "Indian Issues: Agricultural Credit Needs and Barriers to Lending on Tribal Lands".

The report was sent to Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Rep. Collin C. Peterson, D-Minnesota, chairman, Rep. K. Michael Conaway, R-Texas, ranking member of the House ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on IRS Financial Statements

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Internal Revenue Service's fiscal 2018 and 2017 financial statements. The report (GAO-19-412R) is titled "Management Report: Improvements Are Needed to Enhance the Internal Revenue Service's Internal Control over Financial Reporting".

The report was sent to Charles P. Rettig, commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, on May 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "During its audit of the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) fiscal years 2018 and 2017 financial statements, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Priority Open Recommendations for Transportation Department

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Transportation Department. The report (GAO-19-550SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: U.S. Department of Transportation".

The report was sent to Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 13 priority recommendations for the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Since then, DOT has implemented 3 of those recommendations by, among other things, addressing ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Transportation Department. The report (GAO-19-550SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: U.S. Department of Transportation". The report was sent to Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 13 priority recommendations for the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Since then, DOT has implemented 3 of those recommendations by, among other things, addressingconcerns related to vehicle cybersecurity by defining DOT's role in responding to vehicle cyberattacks, and addressing safety risks to oil and gas pipelines by updating emergency response regulations.

In April 2019, GAO identified 6 additional priority recommendations for OPM, bringing the total number to 16. These recommendations involve the following areas:

- funding surface transportation.

- addressing safety risks.

- cybersecurity risks.

- improving management of information technology (IT) workforce planning.

- improving federal grant management.

- Improving transportation readiness.

DOT's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015 GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-550SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Taxpayer Information

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Internal Revenue Service's efforts to track, monitor and deter theft of taxpayer information from third parties. The report (GAO-19-340) is titled "Taxpayer Information: IRS Needs to Improve Oversight of Third-Party Cybersecurity Practices".

The report was sent to Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, on May 9. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Federal law and guidance require that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) protect the ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Whistleblowers

WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on best practices for working with whistleblowers. The report (GAO-19-432) is titled "Whistleblowers: Key Practices for Congress to Consider When Receiving and Referring Information".

The report was sent to Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, chairman, and Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Washington, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on the Legislative Branch, on May 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The Congress receives whistleblower information in multiple ways. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 9 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on best practices for working with whistleblowers. The report (GAO-19-432) is titled "Whistleblowers: Key Practices for Congress to Consider When Receiving and Referring Information". The report was sent to Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, chairman, and Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Washington, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on the Legislative Branch, on May 7. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The Congress receives whistleblower information in multiple ways.Congressional staff and advocacy groups said whistleblowers who contact the Congress typically reach out to oversight committees, the offices of their own representatives or senators, or authorizing committees. Congressional staff said some whistleblowers contact and work with multiple congressional offices simultaneously. Congressional office websites GAO reviewed included contact information to provide whistleblowers with multiple options for reporting suspected wrongdoing, including email links, hotlines, and web-based forms.

Congressional staff can access resources for guidance on working with whistleblowers including congressional advice and internal training on oversight, committee-specific training related to handling whistleblower cases, and training from external advocacy groups on techniques for working with whistleblowers. Staff from several committees said direct experience is important for building skills to effectively work with whistleblowers.

GAO identified key practices the Congress could consider when receiving and referring whistleblower information to other committees and federal agencies. These practices can serve as a resource for congressional offices and staff to intake, prioritize, refer, and follow-up with whistleblowers who contact their office or committee. For each step, GAO identified practices to help offices develop guidelines and procedures as well as for communication, including key questions staff can ask the whistleblower."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal whistleblowers--employees who report violations of law, agency mismanagement or ethical violations--help to safeguard the federal government against waste, fraud, and abuse. Whistleblowers can report to various entities, including the Congress. While these reports are a key source of information for federal oversight, whistleblowers can risk reprisal. Therefore, it is important to appropriately handle whistleblowers' information and identity.

The House Committee on Appropriations Report 115-696 included a provision for GAO to identify congressional avenues, resources, and best practices for working with whistleblowers. This report describes (1) how the Congress receives whistleblower information, (2) the policies and training currently available to congressional staff, and (3) key practices that the Congress could consider for receiving and referring information from whistleblowers. GAO interviewed congressional staff, officials from the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), and selected advocacy groups that have experience working with whistleblowers. GAO analyzed congressional websites and queried congressional staff regarding policies and training on whistleblowers for congressional staff. To develop key practices, GAO reviewed literature, existing procedures, and standards.

GAO is not making recommendations, but is available to assist the Congress with practices for working with whistleblowers. OSC and CIGIE provided technical comments that were incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-432?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Ginnie Mae

WASHINGTON, May 4 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Government National Mortgage Association. The report (GAO-19-191) is titled "Ginnie Mae: Risk Management and Staffing-Related Challenges Need to Be Addressed".

The report was sent to Rep. Sean P. Duffy, R-Wisconsin, ranking member of the House Financial Services subcommittee Housing, Community Development and Insurance, on April 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The amount of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 4 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Government National Mortgage Association. The report (GAO-19-191) is titled "Ginnie Mae: Risk Management and Staffing-Related Challenges Need to Be Addressed". The report was sent to Rep. Sean P. Duffy, R-Wisconsin, ranking member of the House Financial Services subcommittee Housing, Community Development and Insurance, on April 3. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The amount of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that the Government National Mortgage Association (GinnieMae) guaranteed rose from $500 billion to $2 trillion in fiscal years 2007-2018--exposing it to a greater risk of loss. From 2011 to 2018, the majority of institutions issuing Ginnie Mae-guaranteed MBS (issuers) shifted from banks to nonbanks, such as mortgage lenders. Unlike banks, nonbank issuers generally are not consistently subject to comprehensive federal safety and soundness standards.

Since GAO's 2011 report, Ginnie Mae increased minimum financial requirements for MBS issuers and developed new tools to monitor them. However, it has limited flexibility under law to raise the fee charged to guarantee single-family MBS in response to changes in risks. Ginnie Mae also has not assessed if the current fee would provide it with sufficient capital reserves to withstand losses under various scenarios, which would be consistent with federal internal control and risk-management standards. Such an analysis would provide Ginnie Mae with information necessary to help ensure the fee is set appropriately and inform Congress whether Ginnie Mae needs greater flexibility to adjust the fee.

As GAO reported in 2011, Ginnie Mae still faces contracting and staffing challenges. It continues to rely heavily on contractors (because it has authority to use certain fee revenue to fund contractors but not its own in-house staff). However, it has not routinely analyzed if using its own in-house staff instead of contractors for certain functions would be more efficient. Such analyses could help inform Ginnie Mae and Congress about the optimal mix of contractors and staff and potential need for greater budget flexibility. Ginnie Mae also still faces challenges recruiting and retaining staff, in part due to its lower pay scale relative to some of its competitors. But it has not exhausted all options under its current authority to revise its pay scale to mitigate these challenges or evaluated the costs and benefits of other options. Such actions could help inform Ginnie Mae about how it could use current authorities to address these challenges and provide Congress with the information needed to consider providing Ginnie Mae with additional pay flexibility.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) oversees and sets general policies that govern Ginnie Mae's operations. However, GAO previously reported that HUD's management challenges limit the effectiveness of its oversight of Ginne Mae and its other programs. In light of these challenges and Ginnie Mae's increasing risks, GAO reviewed the oversight structures of three similar financial entities and found that certain alternative structures used by these entities, such as boards of directors, offer potential oversight benefits that could be considered as part of any future reform proposals for Ginnie Mae. As GAO previously reported, if Congress considers legislation to reform the federal role in housing finance, such reforms would need to be comprehensive and consider all relevant federal entities, including Ginnie Mae. As part of such reforms, it also would be important to ensure that Ginnie Mae is adequately overseen and its risks effectively managed."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Ginnie Mae, a government corporation within HUD, plays a significant role in the secondary mortgage market. Institutions issue MBS (backed by federally insured or guaranteed mortgages). Ginnie Mae guarantees MBS investors timely payments of principal and interest on the MBS if issuers cannot make such payments. In 2011, GAO identified challenges related to Ginnie Mae's issuer oversight, staffing, and contracting.

GAO was asked to re-examine these issues. This report reviews Ginnie Mae's (1) MBS volume, issuers, and risks; (2) oversight of issuers and related risks; (3) staff levels and contractor use; and (4) oversight structure compared to selected entities to identify areas for potential reforms. GAO analyzed data on MBS volume, reviewed Ginnie Mae policies and procedures, reviewed oversight structures of three similar financial entities, and interviewed agency officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO makes four recommendations to Ginnie Mae, including that it evaluate its issuer guaranty fee, contractor use, and alternative compensation structures. GAO also makes recommendations to Congress to consider requiring Ginnie Mae to report on its evaluations of (1) the adequacy of its issuer guaranty fee, (2) its reliance on contractors and use of certain fee revenue to hire in-house staff, and (3) use of greater flexibility to set staff compensation; and (4) to consider possible reforms to Ginnie Mae's oversight structure. Ginnie Mae concurred with GAO's recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-191?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Infrastructure Risk Management

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the uses, costs and benefits of natural coastal infrastructure for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' coastal storm and flood risk management projects. The report (GAO-19-319) is titled "Army Corps of Engineers: Consideration of Project Costs and Benefits in Using Natural Coastal Infrastructure and Associated Challenges".

The report was sent to Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, on March 28. Here are excerpts ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the uses, costs and benefits of natural coastal infrastructure for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' coastal storm and flood risk management projects. The report (GAO-19-319) is titled "Army Corps of Engineers: Consideration of Project Costs and Benefits in Using Natural Coastal Infrastructure and Associated Challenges". The report was sent to Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, on March 28. Here are excerptsof summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) typically identified project costs and damage reduction benefits for the eight projects using natural infrastructure that GAO reviewed. In selecting projects, the Corps is to conduct economic analyses of project alternatives, which may include hard structures, natural infrastructure, or a combination, to compare their costs and benefits. Corps guidance states that for coastal storm and flood risk management projects it is to select the alternative determined to have the maximum net benefits (benefits minus project costs). The Corps calculated project costs for the eight projects, such as planning, design, construction, and maintenance costs. It calculated damage reduction benefits for seven projects by estimating reduced damages to existing structures in the project area, including to homes and commercial buildings. Corps guidance allows the economic analysis to also include incidental benefits of a project, and four projects incorporated recreational benefits of alternatives, such as increases in recreational visits because beaches would be larger. The Corps did not include other types of incidental benefits, such as environmental or other social benefits, for the eight projects. Corps documentation for one project identified environmental benefits of constructing wetlands as part of the project, such as improving ecosystems and filtering water. However, Corps officials said they did not incorporate these benefits into the economic analysis because the benefits could not be monetized.

The Corps faces challenges in developing cost and benefit information for some types of natural infrastructure and has initiated steps to address this. For example, a 2015 Corps report identified knowledge gaps in understanding how natural coastal infrastructure, such as wetlands, may perform during coastal storms. These knowledge gaps make it challenging for the Corps to develop cost and benefit information for some natural infrastructure alternatives and compare them to other alternatives, such as those that use hard infrastructure. The Corps recognizes the need to obtain additional data to better develop cost and benefit information and has begun taking steps to do so. For example, in 2018, the Corps initiated a project to help identify natural infrastructure knowledge gaps and prioritize key areas for research. The Corps plans to incorporate information gathered from this project into a strategic plan that is intended to help inform research funding decisions for fiscal year 2020, according to a Corps official."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The Corps constructs water resources projects to reduce risks to coastal communities from storm damage, among other things. These projects can involve building hard structures, such as seawalls, to protect against flooding and wave damage. The Corps and some state and local agencies are increasingly considering using natural infrastructure, such as wetlands, to reduce risks from coastal storms and flooding.

GAO was asked to review the uses, costs, and benefits of natural coastal infrastructure for the Corps' coastal storm and flood risk management projects. This report describes (1) how the Corps considered costs and benefits for selected projects that used natural infrastructure and (2) challenges the Corps faces in developing cost and benefit information for using natural infrastructure and steps taken to address them.

GAO reviewed Corps guidance; obtained information on projects that used natural infrastructure and received funding from fiscal years 2012 through 2017; randomly selected eight coastal storm and flood risk reduction projects from the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts; and reviewed each project's planning documentation and economic analyses. Findings from these projects are not generalizable to all Corps' projects. GAO also reviewed economic literature, reviewed Corps documents related to the use of natural infrastructure, and interviewed Corps officials and stakeholders with experience in using natural infrastructure."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-319?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on FITARA Implementation

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on implementation of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act provisions. The report (GAO-19-131) is titled "Information Technology: Effective Practices Have Improved Agencies' FITARA Implementation".

The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on implementation of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act provisions. The report (GAO-19-131) is titled "Information Technology: Effective Practices Have Improved Agencies' FITARA Implementation". The report was sent to Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and GovernmentReform subcommittee on Government Operations, Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, and Rep. Robin L. Kelly, D-Illinois, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Nine selected agencies (the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, and Veterans Affairs; the Agency for International Development; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and the General Services Administration) identified 12 practices that helped them to effectively implement one or more Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act provisions (commonly referred to as FITARA). The following figure identifies the 12 practices, including the four overarching ones, considered vital to implementing all provisions.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-131?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

By applying the overarching practices, covered agencies were better positioned to implement FITARA. In addition, by implementing the practices relative to the five FITARA provisions GAO selected, covered agencies realized information technology (IT) management improvements, such as decommissioning old systems and cost savings."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Congress has long recognized that IT has the potential to enable federal agencies to accomplish their missions more quickly, effectively, and economically. However, fully exploiting this potential has presented challenges to covered agencies, and the federal government's management of IT has produced mixed results.

As part of its effort to reform the government-wide management of IT, in December 2014 Congress enacted FITARA. The law included specific requirements related to enhancing Chief Information Officers' (CIO) authorities, improving the risk management of IT investments, reviewing agencies' portfolio of IT investments, consolidating federal data centers, and purchasing software licenses. GAO has reported numerous times on agencies' effectiveness in implementing the provisions of the law and highlighted agencies that have had success in implementing selected provisions.

In this report, GAO identifies practices that agencies have used to effectively implement FITARA. GAO selected five provisions of FITARA to review: (1) CIO authority enhancements; (2) enhanced transparency and improved risk management; (3) portfolio review; (4) data center consolidation; and (5) software purchasing. GAO then selected nine agencies that had success in implementing at least one of the five provisions. GAO compiled practices where at least one agency was better positioned to implement a provision or realized an IT management improvement or cost savings."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-131?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Federal Workforce Talent Management Strategies

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on issues related to the future of federal work and the workforce. The report (GAO-19-181) is titled "Federal Workforce: Key Talent Management Strategies for Agencies to Better Meet Their Missions".

The report was sent to Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, on March 28. Here are excerpts of ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the F-35 acquisition program. The report (GAO-19-341) is titled "F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Action Needed to Improve Reliability and Prepare for Modernization Efforts".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the F-35 acquisition program. The report (GAO-19-341) is titled "F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Action Needed to Improve Reliability and Prepare for Modernization Efforts". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, chairman, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry,R-Texas, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Indiana, chairman, and Rep. Ken Calvert, R-California, ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Defense, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The F-35 program has made slow, sustained progress in improving the aircraft's reliability and maintainability (R&M). The F-35 aircraft (see figure) are assessed against eight R&M metrics, which indicate how much time the aircraft will be in maintenance rather than operations. Half of these metrics are not meeting targets. While the Department of Defense (DOD) has a plan for improving R&M, its guidance is not in line with GAO's acquisition best practices or federal internal control standards as it does not include specific, measurable objectives, align improvement projects to meet those objectives, and prioritize funding. If the R&M requirements are not met, the warfighter may have to settle for a less reliable and more costly aircraft than originally envisioned.

In 2019, the F-35 program will start modernization efforts--estimated to cost $10.5 billion--for new capabilities to address evolving threats, without a complete business case, or a baseline cost and schedule estimate. Key documents for establishing the business case, such as an independent cost estimate and an independent technology assessment, will not be complete until after the program plans to award development contracts (see figure).

View figures at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-341?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Without a business case--consistent with acquisition best practices--program officials will not have a high level of confidence that the risk of committing to development has been reduced adequately prior to contract awards. Moving ahead without a business case puts F-35 modernization at risk of experiencing cost and schedule overruns similar to those experienced by the original F-35 program during its development."

Why GAO Did This Study: "In 2018, DOD sent an F-35 aircraft to its first combat mission and started initial operational testing. DOD now plans to spend over $270 billion to buy more than 2,000 F-35 aircraft over the next 26 years. Since 2011, GAO has found the need for more attention to the F-35's R&M performance to achieve an operationally suitable system.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 included a provision for GAO to review the F-35 acquisition program until it reaches full-rate production. This is GAO's fourth report under this provision. This report assesses, among other objectives, (1) the program's progress in meeting R&M requirements (such as mission reliability) and (2) its plans for spending on new capabilities. GAO reviewed and analyzed management reports and historical test data; discussed key aspects of F-35 development with program management and contractor officials; and compared acquisition plans to DOD policies and GAO acquisition best practices."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making five recommendations to DOD, including that it identify specific and measurable R&M improvement objectives, align improvement projects, and prioritize resources to meet them. In addition, DOD should complete its business case for modernization before beginning additional development efforts. DOD did not concur with this recommendation, but did concur with the R&M recommendations and plans to take action to address them."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-341?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on DATA Act

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. The report (GAO-19-299) is titled "DATA Act: Pilot Effectively Tested Approaches for Reducing Reporting Burden for Grants but Not for Contracts".

The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act. The report (GAO-19-299) is titled "DATA Act: Pilot Effectively Tested Approaches for Reducing Reporting Burden for Grants but Not for Contracts". The report was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep.Gerald "Gerry" Connolly, D-Virginia, chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations, Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Delaware, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, on April 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In response to requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) led implementation of a pilot program, known as the Section 5 Pilot, aimed at developing recommendations for reducing recipient reporting burden for federal grantees and contractors.

The pilot program met many, but not all, of its statutory requirements. For example, the act required OMB to issue guidance to agencies for reducing reporting burden for federal award recipients (including both grantees and contractors) based on the pilot's findings. OMB partially met this requirement because the guidance it issued only applied to grants.

The pilot program consisted of two parts, which differed considerably in both design and results: The grants portion, administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), examined six approaches for reducing grantee reporting burden and found positive results related to reductions in reporting time as well as reduced duplication. HHS incorporated ongoing stakeholder input during the pilot, and its findings contributed to government-wide initiatives related to federal reporting and reducing grantee-reporting burden.

The procurement (contracts) portion of the pilot, led by OMB with assistance from the General Services Administration (GSA), did not collect sufficient evidence to determine whether centralizing procurement reporting through a single web-based portal would reduce contractor reporting burden--a key objective of the pilot. The pilot planned to test the portal by collecting weekly Davis-Bacon wage data from a minimum of 180 contractors, potentially resulting in thousands of submissions over a year. However, in the end, the pilot did not result in any Davis-Bacon data due to lack of contractor participation and the absence of iterative and ongoing stakeholder engagement. Subsequently, OMB expanded the pilot to include hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) reporting but received only 11 HFC submissions. (See figure.) In addition, HFC reporting was not suited for assessing changes in reporting burden because it was a new requirement and thus no comparative data existed. OMB plans to expand its use of the portal for additional procurement reporting requirements but still does not have information from stakeholders that could help inform the expansion."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-299?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "The DATA Act required OMB or a designated federal agency to establish a pilot program to develop recommendations for reducing recipient reporting burden for federal grantees and contractors. The grants portion of the pilot tested six ways to reduce recipient reporting burden while the procurement portion focused on testing a centralized reporting portal for submitting reporting requirements. This report follows a 2016 GAO review on the design of the pilot.

This report assesses the extent to which (1) the pilot met the statutory requirements set out in the DATA Act, (2) the grants portion of the pilot demonstrated changes in reporting burden, and (3) the procurement portion demonstrated changes in reporting burden. GAO reviewed statutory requirements, pilot plans, agency data and reports and interviewed OMB staff and officials from HHS and GSA."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Director of OMB ensure that information is collected regarding how centralized reporting of procurement requirements might reduce recipient reporting burden--including input from stakeholders such as contractors through an iterative and ongoing process--to inform OMB's planned expansion of the Central Reporting Portal. OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation but provided technical comments, which GAO incorporated as appropriate."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-299?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Military Depots

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the condition of facilities at the Department of Defense's depots. The report (GAO-19-242) is titled "Military Depots: Actions Needed to Improve Poor Conditions of Facilities and Equipment That Affect Maintenance Timeliness and Efficiency".

The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, and Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "The condition of facilities at ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the condition of facilities at the Department of Defense's depots. The report (GAO-19-242) is titled "Military Depots: Actions Needed to Improve Poor Conditions of Facilities and Equipment That Affect Maintenance Timeliness and Efficiency". The report was sent to Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, chairman, and Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on April 29. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "The condition of facilities ata majority of the Department of Defense's (DOD) depots is poor and the age of equipment is generally past its useful life, but the services do not consistently track the effect that these conditions have on depot performance. Twelve of the 21 depots GAO reviewed--more than half--had "poor" average facility condition ratings (see figure). Some facilities also serve functions for which they were not designed, reducing their efficiency. In addition, the average age of depot equipment exceeded its expected useful life at 15 of the 21 depots. These factors contributed, in part, to a decline in performance over the same period. From 2007 to 2017, performance at the depots generally declined, reducing the availability of the weapon systems repaired for training and operations. Optimizing facilities and equipment at the depots can improve their maintenance efficiency. For example, the Navy estimates that its shipyard optimization effort will save over 325,000 labor days per year, which would allow an additional submarine overhaul annually. However, the services lack data on the effect that facilities and equipment conditions have on maintenance delays, hindering DOD's ability to effectively target investments to the highest priorities.

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-242?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

DOD and the services' approach for managing investments to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its depots lacks elements important to addressing key challenges. The services have efforts underway to complete their plans by February 2019 to address their depots' facility and equipment needs. However, GAO found that these plans are preliminary and will not include key elements, such as analytically-based goals; results-oriented metrics; a full accounting of the resources, risks, and stakeholders; and a process for reporting on progress. Addressing the poor conditions at DOD's 21 depots will cost billions and require sustained management attention over many years. However, the DOD office responsible for depot policy does not monitor or regularly report on depot improvement efforts to DOD decision makers and Congress. Until DOD and the services incorporate these key elements into the management approach for their depot investments, they risk continued deterioration of the depots, hindering their ability to meet the Secretary of Defense's goals for improving readiness and reducing operating and support costs."

Why GAO Did This Study: "The military services' 21 depots maintain the readiness of critical weapon systems such as ships, aircraft, and tanks needed for military operations. The condition of depot facilities and equipment directly affects the timeliness of maintenance and the readiness of the weapon systems they repair. The services have invested over $13 billion in the depots from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2017.

Senate Report 115-125 included a provision for GAO to examine the services' investment in and performance of their depots. GAO evaluated (1) the condition of depot facilities and equipment, their relationship to depot performance, and the services' tracking of the relationship to depot performance and (2) the extent to which DOD and the services have developed an approach for guiding depot investments to address key challenges. GAO also provides an overview summary for each depot. GAO reviewed data from fiscal years 2007 through 2017 on depot investment, performance, and the age and condition of facilities and equipment; reviewed agency guidance; and interviewed DOD, service, and depot officials."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO is making 13 recommendations to improve data collection on the effect of facilities and equipment condition on depot performance, and develop plans that incorporate key elements to guide depot investments. DOD concurred with 12 recommendations, but did not agree to monitor and report on depot investments. We continue to believe monitoring and reporting will enhance DOD's efforts to improve its depots."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-242?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Priority Open Recommendations for Commerce Department

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Commerce Department. The report (GAO-19-381SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Department of Commerce".

The report was sent to Secretary of Commerce Wilbur L. Ross Jr., on April 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 26 priority recommendations for the Department of Commerce (Commerce). Since then, Commerce has implemented 10 of those recommendations by, among other things, taking actions to improve its ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Commerce Department. The report (GAO-19-381SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Department of Commerce". The report was sent to Secretary of Commerce Wilbur L. Ross Jr., on April 23. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 26 priority recommendations for the Department of Commerce (Commerce). Since then, Commerce has implemented 10 of those recommendations by, among other things, taking actions to improve itsmanagement of the 2020 Decennial Census by better positioning itself to make informed decisions about trade-offs among methods and anticipating and mitigating challenges it may face during implementation of the census.

In April 2019, GAO identified 5 additional priority recommendations for Commerce, bringing the total number to 21. These recommendations involve the following areas:

- improving management of the 2020 Decennial Census.

- improving IT workforce planning.

- evaluating programs that support entrepreneurs.

- developing performance metrics for trade adjustment assistance programs.

- improving the effectiveness of the conflict minerals disclosure rule.

- improving the physical security of National Institute of Standards and Technology campuses.

Commerce's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Priority recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional decision making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015 GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing priority recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-381SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Veterans Health Administration Performance Recommendations

WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's management of medical center performance. The report (GAO-19-350) is titled "Veterans Health Administration: Past Performance System Recommendations Have Not Been Implemented".

The report was sent to Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Rep. Derek Kilmer, D-Washington, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Veterans Health Administration's management of medical center performance. The report (GAO-19-350) is titled "Veterans Health Administration: Past Performance System Recommendations Have Not Been Implemented". The report was sent to Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Georgia, chairman, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Mark Takano, D-California, chairman, Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Rep. Derek Kilmer, D-Washington,on April 30. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) officials told GAO they primarily use the Strategic Analytics for Improvement and Learning (SAIL) system to assess VA medical center performance. SAIL includes 27 quality measures in areas such as acute care mortality and access to care. VHA officials use SAIL to calculate and assign each medical center an annual star rating of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) stars as an assessment of overall quality. For the 146 medical centers that received star ratings in fiscal year 2018, the distribution of star ratings was as follows: 6 percent, 1 star; 24 percent, 2 stars; 38 percent, 3 stars; 19 percent, 4 stars; and 12 percent, 5 stars. Although the specific medical centers within each star-rating category could change from year to year, GAO found that the fiscal year 2018 star ratings for 110 of the 127 medical centers (87 percent) that received star ratings in fiscal year 2013 did not differ by more than 1 star from their fiscal year 2013 rating.

Changes in VHA Strategic Analytics for Improvement and Learning Star Ratings, Fiscal Year 2013 Compared to Fiscal Year 2018

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-350?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO found that VHA's appraisal process for assessing medical center director performance relies heavily on medical center performance information, including SAIL. For example, the most heavily weighted appraisal element (40 percent of the overall rating) is made up entirely of medical center performance information.

SAIL was evaluated in 2014 and 2015, but VHA has not assessed the recommendations from those evaluations, or taken action on them. The evaluations, which found issues related to the validity and reliability of SAIL and its star ratings for measuring performance and fostering accountability, together included more than 40 recommendations for improving SAIL. The findings are similar to concerns expressed by officials GAO interviewed from VHA, networks, and medical centers about SAIL's effectiveness and how it is currently being used to assess medical center performance. VHA officials told GAO the findings and recommendations of the previous SAIL evaluations were not assessed because the evaluation reports were not widely distributed within VHA due to leadership turnover, as well as attention that was diverted to other concerns such as extensive wait times for medical appointments. Without ensuring that the recommendations resulting from these previous evaluations are assessed and implemented as appropriate, the identified deficiencies may not be adequately resolved, and VHA's ability to hold officials accountable for taking the necessary actions may be diminished."

Why GAO Did This Study: "VHA anticipates that it will provide care to more than 7 million veterans in fiscal year 2019. The majority of veterans using VHA health care services receive care in one or more of the 172 medical centers or at associated outpatient facilities. VHA collects an extensive amount of data that can be used to assess and manage the performance of medical centers. Many measures are publicly reported on VA web pages, allowing veterans the ability to compare medical centers' quality of care.

GAO was asked to assess VHA's management of medical center performance. This report examines (1) the tools VHA uses to assess medical center performance; (2) VHA's use of medical center performance information to assess medical center directors; and (3) the extent to which VHA has evaluated the effectiveness of the SAIL system.

GAO reviewed VHA policies, guidance, and performance information for medical centers and their associated directors. GAO also interviewed officials from VHA as well as from four VA medical centers, selected for variation in performance and geographic location."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that the Under Secretary for Health: (1) assess recommendations from previous evaluations of SAIL for implementation; and (2) implement, as appropriate, recommendations resulting from the assessment. VA concurred with GAO's recommendations and identified actions it is taking to implement them."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-350?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Tax Debt Collection Contracts

WASHINGTON, April 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the Internal Revenue Service's private debt collection program. The report (GAO-19-193) is titled "Tax Debt Collection Contracts: IRS Analysis Could Help Improve Program Results and Better Protect Taxpayers".

The report was sent to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia, chairman, ... Show Full Article

GAO Issues Report on Retirement Savings

WASHINGTON, April 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on early withdrawals from retirement savings. The report (GAO-19-179) is titled "Retirement Savings: Additional Data and Analysis Could Provide Insight into Early Withdrawals".

The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, and Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, on March 28. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: In 2013 individuals in their prime working years (ages 25 to 55) removed at least $69 billion (+/- ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, April 30 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on early withdrawals from retirement savings. The report (GAO-19-179) is titled "Retirement Savings: Additional Data and Analysis Could Provide Insight into Early Withdrawals". The report was sent to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairman, and Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, on March 28. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: In 2013 individuals in their prime working years (ages 25 to 55) removed at least $69 billion (+/-$3.5 billion) of their retirement savings early, according to GAO's analysis of 2013 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Department of Labor (DOL) data. Withdrawals from individual retirement accounts (IRA)--$39.5 billion (+/- $2.1 billion)--accounted for much of the money removed early, were equivalent to 3 percent (+/- 0.15 percent) of the age group's total IRA assets, and exceeded their IRA contributions in 2013. Participants in employer-sponsored plans, like 401(k) plans, withdrew at least $29.2 billion (+/- $2.8 billion) early as hardship withdrawals, lump sum payments made at job separation (known as cashouts), and loan balances that borrowers did not repay. Hardship withdrawals in 2013 were equivalent to about 0.5 percent (+/-0.06 percent) of the age group's total plan assets and about 8 percent (+/- 0.9 percent) of their contributions. However, the incidence and amount of certain unrepaid plan loans cannot be determined because the Form 5500--the federal government's primary source of information on employee benefit plans--does not capture these data.

Stakeholders GAO interviewed identified flexibilities in plan rules and individuals' pressing financial needs, such as out-of-pocket medical costs, as factors affecting early withdrawals of retirement savings. Stakeholders said that certain plan rules, such as setting high minimum loan thresholds, may cause individuals to take out more of their savings than they need. Stakeholders also identified several elements of the job separation process affecting early withdrawals, such as difficulties transferring account balances to a new plan and plans requiring the immediate repayment of outstanding loans, as relevant factors.

Stakeholders GAO interviewed suggested strategies they believed could balance early access to accounts with the need to build long-term retirement savings. For example, plan sponsors said allowing individuals to continue to repay plan loans after job separation, restricting participant access to plan sponsor contributions, allowing partial distributions at job separation, and building emergency savings features into plan designs, could help preserve retirement savings (see figure). However, they noted, each strategy involves tradeoffs, and the strategies' broader implications require further study."

View figure at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-179?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Why GAO Did This Study: "Federal law encourages individuals to save for retirement through tax incentives for 401(k) plans and IRAs--the predominant forms of retirement savings in the United States. In 2017, U.S. plans and IRAs reportedly held investments worth nearly $17 trillion dollars. Federal law also allows individuals to withdraw assets from these accounts under certain circumstances. DOL and IRS oversee 401(k) plans, and collect annual plan data--including financial information--on the Form 5500. For both IRAs and 401(k) plans, GAO was asked to examine: (1) the incidence and amount of early withdrawals; (2) factors that might lead individuals to access retirement savings early; and (3) policies and strategies that might reduce the incidence and amounts of early withdrawals.

To answer these questions, GAO analyzed data from IRS, the Census Bureau, and DOL from 2013 (the most recent complete data available); and interviewed a diverse range of stakeholders identified in the literature, including representatives of companies sponsoring 401(k) plans, plan administrators, subject matter experts, industry representatives, and participant advocates."

What GAO Recommends: "GAO recommends that, as part of revising the Form 5500, DOL and IRS require plan sponsors to report the incidence and amount of all 401(k) plan loans that are not repaid. DOL and IRS neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-179?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Priority Open Recommendations for EPA

WASHINGTON, April 27 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Environmental Protection Agency. The report (GAO-19-308SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Environmental Protection Agency".

The report was sent to Andrew Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In March 2018, GAO identified 19 priority recommendations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since then, EPA has implemented five of those recommendations ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, April 27 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Environmental Protection Agency. The report (GAO-19-308SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Environmental Protection Agency". The report was sent to Andrew Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "In March 2018, GAO identified 19 priority recommendations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since then, EPA has implemented five of those recommendationsby, among other things, taking actions to improve the risk evaluation of chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act and help oversee State Revolving Fund programs for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure.

In April 2019, GAO identified three additional priority recommendations for EPA, bringing the total number to 17. These 17 recommendations involve the following areas:

- assessing and controlling toxic chemicals,

- addressing data, funding, and cybersecurity issues for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure, and

- reducing pollution in the nation's waters.

EPA's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015 GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-308SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on Priority Open Recommendations for Homeland Security Department

WASHINGTON, April 27 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Department of Homeland Security. The report (GAO-19-360SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Department of Homeland Security".

The report was sent to Kevin K. McAleenan, acting secretary of Homeland Security, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report.

What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 19 priority recommendations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Since then, DHS has implemented 4 of those recommendations by, among other ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, April 27 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on priority recommendations for the Department of Homeland Security. The report (GAO-19-360SP) is titled "Priority Open Recommendations: Department of Homeland Security". The report was sent to Kevin K. McAleenan, acting secretary of Homeland Security, on April 19. Here are excerpts of summaries associated with the report. What GAO Found: "In April 2018, GAO identified 19 priority recommendations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Since then, DHS has implemented 4 of those recommendations by, among otherthings, taking actions to improve the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' ability to detect fraud patterns across asylum applications and the U.S. Border Patrol's efforts to address tactical infrastructure requirements. The Transportation Security Administration has also limited funding for its Behavior Detection Program, consistent with our recommendation that it does so until it provides valid evidence demonstrating that behavioral indicators can be used to identify passengers who may pose a threat to aviation security. DHS also designated its headquarters consolidation program as a major acquisition, which resulted in greater departmental oversight.

In April 2019, GAO identified 11 additional priority recommendations for DHS, bringing the total number to 26. These recommendations involve the following areas:

- improving FEMA's management of the National Flood Insurance Program.

- analyzing the costs associated with future southwest border barrier segments.

- pursuing the acquisition of a new Coast Guard electronic health records system.

- establishing a plan for closing Coast Guard boat stations determined to be duplicative.

- facilitating adoption of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity.

- directing the Assistant Secretary for DHS's Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office to develop a strategy and implementation plan for countering chemical weapons of mass destruction.

- improving the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's monitoring of radiological shipments.

DHS's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations."

Why GAO Did This Study: "Priority recommendations are open GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015, GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations."

The text of the GAO report is available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-360SP?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_content=daybook&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

GAO Issues Report on 2017 Disaster Contracting

WASHINGTON, April 25 -- The Government Accountability Office has issued a report on the federal government's response to three major hurricanes in 2017, as well as the 2017 California wildfires. The report (GAO-19-281) is titled "2017 Disaster Contracting: Actions Needed to Improve the Use of Post-Disaster Contracts to Support Response and Recovery".

The report was sent to Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyoming, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, chairman, Sen. Gary C. Peters, D-Michigan, ranking member of the Senate Homelan

Existing Customer Login