GAO - OIG

Air Quality Sensors: Policy Options to Help Address Implementation Challenges

What GAO Found Lower-cost air quality sensors (sensors) are portable devices that can measure local air quality in real time. Although these sensors are generally less accurate than more expensive instruments, they can be deployed in large number to supplement information provided by the national air quality monitoring system. Among their many uses are identifying pollution hot spots, monitoring industrial sites and nearby neighborhoods, and conducting scientific research. Sensors can be more accurate for some pollutants, such as fine particulate matter, than others. They are as of yet unavailable for certain air toxics such as benzene and metals. Air Quality Sensors GAO identified several challenges users face in implementing sensor technologies. For example, some users have struggled to: Access expertise and resources. Some users may lack the knowledge or funding to select the right sensors or deploy them in a way that best fits their goals. Potential sources of expertise—such as universities or state and local agencies responsible for air quality management—may lack incentives or resources to partner with those users. Understand sensor capabilities. Some vendors are not transparent about sensor performance. For example, some stakeholders told GAO that some vendors claim capabilities that are questionable. In the absence of reliable information on performance, users may struggle to choose appropriate sensors. Compile and compare sensor data. Sensors produce data in many formats, and there are currently no widely accepted standards for reporting data from these different formats. In addition, some users do not report metadata that describe information such as environmental conditions or correction factors. Both issues can make it difficult for users to compile or compare data. Spur action. Some users collect sensor data to spur action. But users and decision-makers may have different expectations about the level of quality assurance required. For example, some users seek evidence of pollutants that could trigger regulators to investigate a pollution source. However, these users may not realize that their data are not of sufficient quality for that purpose due to unclear guidance on the level of quality assurance needed. GAO identified seven policy options that could help address challenges to developing and using air sensors. The options identify possible actions by policymakers, including legislative bodies, government entities, academia, industry, and other groups. See tables 5–11 in the report for a full list of the policy options, potential implementation approaches, and opportunities and considerations. Policy Options to Address Challenges to Developing and Using Air Sensors Policy Option Opportunities Considerations Maintain status quo  (report p. 31) Current efforts may address some challenges without additional resources. Resources that would be allocated to additional interventions could be used for other opportunities. Current efforts are not likely to address all challenges described in this report. Enhance sensor performance transparency (report p. 32)For example, government entities or standards-setting organizations could establish additional standardized performance testing protocols and targets. Standardized testing could increase transparency and build trust among users. Performance targets could help ensure sensors work adequately for specific uses. Reaching consensus on standards can take considerable time. Standardized testing could increase costs. Industry could choose not to adopt voluntary performance testing protocols and targets. Support innovation in sensor technologies (report p. 33)For example, the sensor industry could choose to invest in additional research and development to improve existing sensors or develop new sensor technologies. Could enable detection of additional pollutants or existing pollutants at lower levels. Time frames for research and development are unclear. Could require substantial funding and other resources. Facilitate access to expertise  (report p. 34)For example, universities could collaborate with others to establish technical assistance mechanisms that connect users with experts. Could help users identify and collaborate with experts to ensure optimal use of sensors. Could alleviate the burden on government entities or provide additional resources to carry out this work. Some government entities and other experts may require additional resources to fully collaborate with communities. Participating experts may be overwhelmed by inquiries or requests for help. Improve access to guidance  (report p. 35)For example, nonprofit organizations and other policymakers could collaborate with others to maintain a website with links to or copies of existing guidance. Could help users locate guidance more easily, helping them improve sensor use. Could enable users to compare guidance more easily, allowing them to select guidance that best aligns with their needs. Could be time and resource intensive and may need frequent updates. Users may not know such a resource exists or trust it without endorsement and advertisement by a trusted entity. Storing guidance in a repository may require consent from authors and owners. Improve data management and sharing (report p. 36)For example, standards-setting organizations could collaborate with others to develop data and metadata standards.  Data standards could help facilitate data aggregation, comparison, and sharing.  Metadata standards could help users ascertain whether data are comparable.  Standards require consensus, which takes time and resources to build. Organizations may not adopt voluntary data standards, especially if they were created without their input. May be time and resource intensive. Clarify level of quality assurance needed to spur action  (report p.37)For example, government entities could collaborate with others to develop guidance on the level of quality assurance required for various applications.   Clarity on the level of quality assurance required could help users collect data that are appropriate for their specific purposes.  Given the number of current and potential sensor applications, it may be difficult to clarify the level of quality assurance for each one. Source: GAO.  |  GAO-24-106393 Why GAO Did This Study U.S. ambient air quality is monitored by federal, state, and local agencies through the national ambient air quality monitoring system. However, that system is unable to provide some of the information that users may need to better manage health risks from air pollution. Lower-cost air quality sensors have the potential to help meet some of the monitoring information needs that require pollution measurements in additional locations or more real-time data. This report describes (1) sensor technologies for monitoring air quality, (2) their benefits and uses, (3) how well they perform and factors that affect their performance, (4) challenges to their use, and (5) options policymakers could consider to help address these challenges. GAO reviewed key reports and scientific literature; interviewed federal and state agency officials and other stakeholders from academia, industry, and nongovernmental organizations; attended a workshop on issues related to lower-cost air quality sensors; and convened a 2-day meeting of 12 experts. These experts included those who conduct research on sensor technologies and their uses, develop or manufacture sensor technologies, or use or consider using sensor technologies and data. GAO is identifying policy options in this report. For more information, contact Karen L. Howard at (202) 512-6888 or howardk@gao.gov or J. Alfredo Gómez at (202) 512-3841, GomezJ@gao.gov.

Information Technology: IRS Needs to Complete Planning and Improve Reporting for Its Modernization Programs

What GAO Found In April 2023, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued its agency-wide strategic operating plan outlining its vision to use billions of dollars contained in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 appropriation to transform the administration of the tax system and services provided to taxpayers. The plan identified five objectives, including a technology objective underpinning the other four. Figure: Inflation Reduction Act Strategic Operating Plan Transformation Objectives The IRS plan, among other things, states that it will use the technology objective to retire and replace legacy systems and update programming languages, give taxpayers tools to access their data and use online services, and ensure continued security and privacy of taxpayer data. IRS identified eight initiatives and 38 key projects for the technology objective but noted the list of projects was not comprehensive. This is consistent with the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 2023 report stating that the technology objective had a total of 142 projects. These 142 represent about 30 percent of the 475 projects for all five objectives. Projects under the technology objective include ongoing modernization programs that have been modified to account for the new appropriations. However, plans showing changes to the scope of future work, milestones, and efforts to retire legacy systems have not yet been updated. IRS officials stated that updating these plans is contingent on completing a roadmap to implement the strategic plan. These officials added that the first version of the roadmap was completed in December 2023. However, this roadmap did not include the technology objective. They said that this objective would be included in version two of the roadmap which they expected would be completed very soon. Completing the roadmap and then updating ongoing IT modernization plans to reflect revisions driven by the strategic plan are essential to the transformation's success. Regarding cost and schedule performance of IT modernization programs, IRS reported meeting most of its quarterly targets for fiscal years 2022 and 2023. These reports, however, could be improved by including programs' historical cost and schedule goals and how quarterly performance compares to overall program goals. For example, GAO previously reported that a key IT investment was within schedule estimates for 2019 and 2020 but that IRS had changed its overall program plans several times. These changes led to a 9-year milestone delay--from 2014 to 2023. However, the quarterly reports did not show this lengthy delay because they do not include programs' historical cost and schedule goals. Why GAO Did This Study IRS relies extensively on IT to annually collect trillions of dollars in taxes, distribute hundreds of billions of dollars in refunds, and carry out its mission of providing service to America's taxpayers in meeting their tax obligations. In August 2022, Congress appropriated tens of billions to IRS through fiscal year 2031 to bolster taxpayer services and enforcement of the tax code, and modernize IT, among other things. The Joint Explanatory Statements accompanying the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Bills for 2022 and 2023 include provisions for GAO to review the status of IRS's IT investments. This report, among other things, summarizes the technology objective of IRS's strategic plan, determines the extent to which the agency has updated plans for its IT modernization programs, and assesses IRS progress made on its modernization programs in fiscal years 2022 and 2023. GAO reviewed IRS's strategic operating plan and associated program documentation. In addition, GAO assessed IRS's progress on its reported modernization program cost and schedule performance for fiscal years 2022 and 2023. GAO also interviewed cognizant IRS officials.

Port Infrastructure: U.S. Ports Have Adopted Some Automation Technologies and Report Varied Effects

What GAO Found Automation technology at ports reduces human involvement in processing and handling cargo. All of the 10 largest U.S. container ports have adopted automation technology to varying degrees. At least one terminal at each of these ports uses process automation technology to optimize, track, or communicate container movements (e.g., automated gate systems). Four also use automated cargo handling equipment to load, unload, and move containers. Selected foreign ports generally adopted more automation technologies than U.S. ports due to factors such as larger container volumes and variations in labor availability. Automated Cargo Handling Equipment at TraPac Los Angeles Terminal U.S. and international port stakeholders agreed that automation technologies can improve worker safety by separating humans from machines and can reduce emissions by improving efficiency. However, they reported mixed effects on the workforce, security, and performance. For example, a few terminal operators said automated equipment could stack containers more densely than conventional equipment, increasing capacity; others said this equipment moved containers more slowly than conventional equipment, reducing performance. Similarly, a few stakeholders said automation can reduce jobs; others said automation can create more comfortable work environments and new, higher-skilled positions. Officials from U.S. ports and terminal operators said operators consider factors such as labor, costs, priorities, and operations when deciding whether to automate. The relative importance of these factors varies based on the unique circumstances of each port and terminal. The Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Federal Maritime Commission conduct some activities that are related to port automation, though few of these activities are explicitly focused on port automation. For instance, GAO identified eight discretionary grant programs which do not explicitly support port automation, but which ports could use to acquire certain automation technologies. Why GAO Did This Study U.S. ports' ability to efficiently move containers into and out of terminals is crucial for the U.S. economy. In 2020, coastal ports handled cargo that accounted for nearly half of U.S. trade. Faced with increased container volumes and supply chain challenges, some ports in the U.S. and abroad have adopted automation technologies to improve performance and increase capacity. The Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 included a provision for GAO to describe the adoption of technologies at U.S. ports as compared to foreign ports. This report describes: (1) the adoption of automation technologies by selected U.S. container ports and similarities to technologies adopted by selected foreign container ports; (2) the reported effects of port automation technologies; (3) how U.S. terminal operators consider these effects and other factors when deciding whether to adopt automation technologies; and (4) federal activities related to the development or adoption of port automation technologies. GAO analyzed information from equipment manufacturers, ports, and terminal operators. These ports included the 10 largest U.S. container ports by volume and 10 foreign ports selected for factors such as volume and location. GAO visited U.S. and foreign ports and interviewed port and terminal operator officials at these ports, as well as nine other industry stakeholders, including two labor unions. GAO also reviewed federal documents and interviewed officials from six federal entities. For more information, contact Andrew Von Ah at (202) 512-2834 or VonAha@gao.gov.

Spectrum IT Modernization: Incorporating Leading Practices Could Improve Planning Effort

What GAO Found The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) manages federal use of spectrum, a scarce natural resource. NTIA and selected federal agencies and agency components have planning underway to modernize the outdated IT systems used to manage spectrum. NTIA has issued an initial high-level modernization plan, identified the IT systems to modernize, and placed a contract order for acquisition planning support. Before proceeding to the next phase on design, NTIA has to complete a number of activities including finalizing a concept of operations, assessing alternatives, and developing project management plans. Four other agencies and components are in the planning or pre-planning phases of modernizing their own spectrum-related IT. For example: Department of Defense officials told us they awarded a contract to analyze the department's spectrum IT and identify ways to improve it. National Science Foundation officials said they have funded a project to streamline the processing of spectrum use requests. The Federal Aviation Administration and National Aeronautics and Space Administration do not plan to begin modernization planning until more details become available from NTIA. GAO's analysis of NTIA's modernization planning found that its efforts aligned with several leading practices but did not align for practices on developing cost estimates, developing a project schedule, communicating with stakeholders, and establishing performance measures. Extent to Which NTIA Spectrum-Related IT Modernization Project Planning Efforts Aligned with Selected Leading Practices NTIA officials acknowledged that additional work was needed to implement the practices and complete other required planning steps. Effectively doing so would position the agency to implement a successful modernization. Why GAO Did This Study Use of the radio-frequency spectrum is vital to a wide variety of commercial and government activities. To manage use for the federal government, NTIA relies on multiple, spectrum-related IT systems, that, according to agency officials, are out-of-date and ineffective. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21 NDAA) required NTIA to submit to Congress a plan to modernize its spectrum-related IT. Other agencies with their own required spectrum-related IT modernization plans are expected to coordinate with NTIA to help ensure interoperability among systems. The FY21 NDAA also includes a provision for GAO to biennially review NTIA's and other agencies' efforts to modernize their spectrum-related IT. This report examines (1) the status of NTIA's and selected agencies' efforts to modernize their spectrum-related IT and (2) the extent to which NTIA's IT modernization project planning aligns with selected leading practices. GAO reviewed IT modernization plans and other agency documentation; and assessed NTIA's project planning efforts against selected leading practices.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL FOR GAO-24-106446: Strengthening Coordination and Monitoring of Autism Activities in the Federal Government

This supplement is a companion to GAO's report entitled Autism Research and Support Services: Federal Interagency Coordination and Monitoring Efforts Could Be Further Strengthened, GAO-24-106446. The purpose of this supplement is to provide an "Easy Read" version of the report. Easy Read is a way some groups make their written information easier to understand. For example, Easy Read documents use short sentences and plain language. In its report, GAO found that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) works with 18 federal agencies that have activities to help people with autism. NIH has followed several key actions to coordinate these activities, through the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee and the National Autism Coordinator. But more action could be taken. For example, NIH could find other ways to track progress on the Committee's autism goals and to identify problems reaching goals. This would help make sure agencies and other entities with autism activities understand the types of steps being taken on Committee goals. This would also help show where there may be gaps. Also, NIH could write down the steps that its Office of National Autism Coordination uses to check for possible duplication among autism activities. GAO made two recommendations in its report: The Department of Health and Human Services should (1) develop a process to clearly track and report progress toward the Committee's goals; and (2) ensure that NIH writes down the steps its Office of National Autism Coordination uses to make sure federal autism activities are not unnecessarily duplicative. The Department of Health and Human Services concurred with the recommendations. For more information, contact John E. Dicken at (202) 512-7114 or dickenj@gao.gov.

Commercial Aviation: Key Lessons from COVID-19 Preparedness and Emergency Financial Assistance to the Industry

What GAO Found A key lesson from GAO's prior work is that greater federal leadership could benefit both aviation pandemic preparedness and disease mitigation research . The Department of Transportation (DOT) has not developed a national aviation preparedness plan for communicable disease outbreaks as GAO recommended in 2015. Such a plan is needed to avoid the piecemeal response seen early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholders GAO spoke to in 2020 and 2021 said confidence in air travel could have been restored more quickly with greater federal coordination. At GAO's urging, Congress passed legislation in December 2022 requiring DOT to develop the plan. In July 2022, GAO reported that federal leadership was needed to advance research on disease transmission in air travel, including real-world situations and the effectiveness of mitigation efforts. GAO recommended Congress direct the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop a research strategy, which Congress had not done as of March 2024. DOT and FAA officials stated in 2023 and 2024 that they have actions underway to develop the preparedness plan and identify needed research. By implementing GAO's recommendations, DOT and other aviation stakeholders would be better positioned to address a communicable disease threat while minimizing unnecessary aviation disruptions which were significant in the case of COVID-19. Key lessons from GAO's work on four COVID-19 aviation financial assistance programs— the Department of the Treasury's Payroll Support Program (PSP) and CARES Act loan program and DOT's Airport Grants and Aviation Manufacturing Jobs Protection Program—include the following. Financial and other safeguards, when developed before distributing assistance, can help agencies minimize risks associated with emergency funding. DOT and Treasury quickly awarded funds but did not always have safeguards in place in a timely manner. For instance, Treasury did not quickly implement a monitoring plan for PSP. Multiple programs or paths within a program may better accommodate businesses of varying types and sizes. Businesses eligible for the PSP and loan programs ranged from large airlines to ticket agents with a handful of employees. Large airlines viewed the programs favorably, but small businesses reported challenges accessing funds. Clear communication with eligible entities is important for new or expanded funding programs. Some program applicants reported confusion—e.g., small businesses new to applying for federal funding—regarding issues such as eligibility requirements and expected funding time frames. Workforce retention requirements were a part of all four programs, but airlines still struggled with sufficient staffing to handle air traffic when it recovered. The aviation industry credited the funding programs, especially the PSP, in providing critical support. But factors such as early retirements and pauses on employee training also affected airline workforce levels. Why GAO Did This Study The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in catastrophic loss of life and profoundly affected the aviation industry. In April 2020, U.S. commercial airline traffic fell to 3 million passengers, a 96 percent decrease from April 2019. The federal government responded in many ways, including by providing $132 billion in financial assistance to airlines, aviation and other businesses, and airports. GAO was asked to identify lessons from COVID-19. This report examines key lessons GAO identified from the federal government's (1) preparedness and response to disease transmission in air travel and (2) financial assistance to the aviation industry. GAO reviewed its body of work on aviation and the pandemic, which includes over 20 reports, to identify relevant lessons. GAO also reviewed documents from offices of inspector general and aviation stakeholders as well as interviewed officials from DOT and Treasury.

Medicaid Managed Care: Additional Federal Action Needed to Fully Leverage New Appeals and Grievances Data

What GAO Found Managed care plans have some flexibility in determining when to authorize services for enrollees. Managed care enrollees may appeal denials of requested services and file grievances about any dissatisfaction not covered by an appeal. Data on appeals and grievances are an important tool for oversight of managed care, as they can help reveal quality and access issues. The first year of data from state annual managed care reports indicated that rates of appeals and grievances per 1,000 enrollees varied widely across states in 2022. Among other things, this could signal problems with access to needed services. Medicaid Managed Care Plan Appeal Rates Across States with Reliable Appeals Data, Contract Year 2022 The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has begun taking steps to address limitations in the new appeals and grievances data. For example, as of December 2023, CMS had conducted technical assistance with seven states to address data gaps and inconsistencies. CMS has also outlined its intentions to use these data for oversight and to enhance transparency. However, GAO found: No data on outcomes or number of denials. CMS does not require states to report on the outcomes of enrollee appeals (e.g., whether a plan overturns its initial denial upon review) or the number of denials. These data elements are key to identifying potential problems with enrollee access to services. Delayed progress on planned actions to use the data. As of December 2023, CMS had made limited progress on its plans to analyze the data and make data available to the public. Taking these steps would help to inform CMS's data quality efforts and provide incentives for states to focus on quality. By requiring states to report additional data and implementing planned steps to use the data, CMS would be better positioned to meet its goal to use the data to target program improvement, including around enrollee access to care. Why GAO Did This Study Over 70 percent of Medicaid enrollees receive services through managed care. Because there can be financial incentives for managed care plans to deny or limit services, appeal and grievance systems serve as a safeguard to protect enrollees. States are required to use appeals and grievances data to monitor managed care plans' performance. Beginning in 2022, states were also required to report certain managed care plan appeals and grievance data and other information to CMS annually. GAO was asked to examine the new appeals and grievances data. This report (1) describes what the first-year data indicate about appeals and grievances, and (2) examines CMS's efforts to address any limitations in the data and its efforts to use the data for oversight. GAO analyzed appeals and grievances data for state contract year 2022 across 35 states, and interviewed officials from five of these states, selected on the basis of geography and other factors. GAO also reviewed CMS documents, interviewed CMS officials, and assessed CMS's efforts against agency guidance.

Wildfire Disasters: Opportunities to Improve Federal Response, Recovery, and Mitigation Efforts

What GAO Found GAO's ongoing and prior work identified challenges that federal agencies face: Wildfire response and recovery. GAO has previously reported that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) faces challenges in assisting state, local, and tribal governments after wildfire events. For example, securing temporary housing for survivors is difficult because disasters exacerbate pre-disaster shortages of affordable housing. Further, wildfires generally destroy entire structures and leave contaminated debris and soil that require lengthy clean-up before property is safe for habitation. FEMA is taking steps to address these post-disaster housing challenges and GAO will continue to assess these efforts in its ongoing work. Residential Wildfire Debris, Lahaina, Hawaii, September 2023 Recruitment and retention of wildland firefighters. GAO's prior work identified barriers to the recruitment and retention of federal wildland firefighters, including low pay and opportunities for career advancement. Congress has authorized pay increases through fiscal year 2026, but longer-term solutions are needed, according to agency officials. Interagency coordination. GAO's prior work identified opportunities for improved interagency coordination in managing risks from wildfire smoke and in federal disaster recovery efforts. In March 2023, GAO made recommendations to help strengthen federal coordination between the Environmental Protection Agency and land management agencies in reducing risks to air quality and public health from wildfire smoke. As of March 2024, four of the six recommendations were partially addressed. Additionally, in November 2022, GAO reported that the federal approach to disaster recovery is fragmented across more than 30 federal agencies and departments and at least 32 congressional committees. GAO recommended that agencies identify and take steps to better manage this fragmentation and that Congress consider establishing an independent commission to recommend reforms to the federal government's approach to disaster recovery. As of March 2024, a commission has not been established. Why GAO Did This Study In recent decades, the nation has witnessed an increase in the size and severity of wildfires as well as longer wildfire seasons. Demand for federal resources to prepare for, respond to, or recover from these wildfires is expected to increase. This testimony discusses GAO's ongoing and prior work and recommendations on challenges related to (1) wildfire response and recovery, (2) recruitment and retention of wildland firefighters, and (3) interagency coordination. This statement is based on GAO's ongoing work on FEMA's wildfire prevention and recovery efforts and prior reports, published from November 2022 through March 2023. For its ongoing work, GAO reviewed relevant FEMA policies, procedures, and guidance related to wildfires; conducted a site visit to Hawaii to observe response and recovery efforts; and interviewed relevant FEMA officials. Details about the scope and methodology for published GAO reports are included in those products.

Defense Contracts: Better Monitoring Could Improve DOD's Management of Award Lead Times

What GAO Found The length of time between when an agency solicits offers from potential contractors and the date it awards a contract is known as the procurement administrative lead time (PALT). GAO found that median award lead times, or PALT, generally decreased from fiscal year 2019 through fiscal year 2022 for Department of Defense (DOD) contracts and orders valued above $250,000. This suggests that DOD has realized some contracting efficiencies since 2018 when it began collecting data to measure PALT. However, PALT varied by characteristics such as total contract value, contracting approach, contract type, extent of competition, and the type of product or service procured. For example, median PALT values increased by 70 days over the four-year period GAO reviewed for DOD contracts and orders valued over $50 million. Change in DOD-wide Median Procurement Administrative Lead Time for All DOD Contracts and Orders Above and Below $50 Million in Value, Fiscal Years 2019–2022 After its adoption of the current PALT definition, DOD updated guidance to encourage the use of practices intended to reduce award lead times. For example, DOD reissued its Source Selection Procedures memorandum in August 2022, adding streamlining techniques for procurement officials to consider. These techniques generally reflect practices to reduce PALT that were suggested in a January 2021 Office of Management and Budget memorandum. While updating guidance is a positive step, DOD does not have insight into PALT at the department-wide level, in part for the following reasons: DOD officials do not regularly monitor PALT on a department-wide basis, such as by reviewing PALT data maintained by the defense components or discussing PALT changes with the components. A DOD tool, the PALT Tracker, implemented in February 2019 for the detailed tracking of PALT for procurements over $250 million in value, has data gaps, which limits its usefulness as a monitoring tool. Components reported that it is burdensome and duplicative of other systems they use. DOD would benefit from engaging with the components to determine how existing procurement data can be leveraged to enhance DOD's visibility into PALT changes and whether the PALT Tracker is still needed. If the PALT Tracker remains necessary to supplement existing procurement data, then improvements are needed to ensure its data are complete. Why GAO Did This Study DOD uses contracts to procure goods and services ranging from cutting-edge military aircraft to common office supplies. DOD leadership and contractors have expressed concern about the length of time it takes to award contracts, which includes PALT. DOD began collecting data to measure PALT in June 2018 for contracts and orders valued above $250,000. A committee report included a provision for GAO to review DOD's efforts to address PALT. This report assesses changes in PALT over a four-year period and the extent of efforts—both DOD-wide and by selected DOD components—to manage and monitor the length of time it takes to award contracts. GAO selected the four DOD components (Army, Navy, Air Force and Defense Logistics Agency) with the most contracting activity from fiscal years 2019 through 2022 and analyzed data on PALT. GAO also reviewed relevant DOD guidance and memorandums, and interviewed officials at DOD and the selected components.

Advanced Air Mobility: Legal Authorities and Issues to Consider for Operations

What GAO Found Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is an emerging concept of air transportation that will leverage new types of aircraft and innovative technologies, such as electrified propulsion systems, to move people and goods, while operating more quietly than traditional aircraft and with reduced aircraft emissions. In 2022, GAO reported that stakeholders said the federal government—including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) within the Department of Transportation (DOT)—and industry will need to address a variety of issues before AAM operations can be widely implemented, including bringing AAM aircraft into commercial use. DOT identified a variety of legal authorities that are relevant to the future regulation of civilian AAM operations, and FAA—which is responsible for ensuring the safety and efficiency of the U.S. aerospace system—has taken actions using these authorities. These actions include publishing proposed rules, developing interim guidance, and reviewing existing policies. For example: Aircraft certification. FAA prescribes rules for aircraft certification and safety. FAA is in the process of certifying initial AAM aircraft designs using existing certification processes and rules. Pilot and mechanic training. FAA determines the knowledge, experience, and training requirements for pilots and mechanics. In a June 2023 notice of proposed rulemaking, FAA proposed temporary pilot training standards that would apply to initial groups of AAM pilots. FAA said that it would develop rules on AAM mechanic certification at a later time, if needed. Airspace management. FAA prescribes aircraft operational requirements, such as minimum flight altitudes. FAA's 2023 AAM Implementation Plan says that near-term AAM operations can be managed with existing air traffic control tools, procedures, and protocols. Vertiport construction and noise management. FAA issued interim guidance on vertiport design standards and is considering the impact of AAM operations as the agency reviews its noise policy. ​​​​​​Officials from DOT and selected tribal, state, and local government officials generally agreed that FAA has exclusive legal authority over three of these topic areas—(1) certification and safety of AAM aircraft, (2) pilot and mechanic training, and (3) airspace management. Tribal, state, and local governments have certain legal authorities related to vertiport construction and noise management. For example, tribal, state, and local governments have the authority to develop and enforce zoning regulations, which would determine where vertiports could be built and could influence how communities experience noise from AAM aircraft. According to government officials, industry stakeholders, and others we interviewed, there are certain issues to consider in the short term (present day through 2028) as the AAM industry develops, while other issues may be more relevant in the long term as AAM operations evolve (after 2028). Issues for consideration in the short term. Officials with whom we spoke noted that they are awaiting the finalization of rules or guidance from DOT on key topics. For example, some local officials said that it would be premature to discuss changes to existing requirements for AAM aircraft vertiport infrastructure until FAA completes its recommendations for the clearance needed around AAM aircraft takeoff and landing locations. Issues for consideration in the long term. In the longer term, some interviewees expressed the view that issues might arise in key areas as the industry develops and the tempo of AAM operations increase. For example, a few interviewees noted that the current approach for certifying AAM aircraft might become too time-consuming if manufacturers seek to certify numerous diverse AAM designs. In addition, some interviewees anticipated that current federal airspace management regulations will be appropriate for initial, piloted AAM operations, but as some of these aircraft are expected to be capable of autonomous flight, regulations will need to evolve to manage uncrewed, autonomous AAM aircraft. Why GAO Did This Study The Advanced Air Mobility Coordination and Leadership Act, enacted in October 2022, included a provision for GAO to conduct a study on the roles, responsibilities, and interests of federal, tribal, state, and local governments with regards to AAM. This report describes (1) the legal authorities held by DOT relevant to the future regulation of civilian AAM operations, and actions taken relevant to these authorities, (2) relevant legal authorities of selected tribal, state, and local governments, and (3) issues to consider as the AAM industry develops, as identified by selected government entities and other stakeholders. To address each objective, we focused on five key areas that we have previously found to be important to the development of AAM operations. These topic areas include: certification and safety of aircraft, pilot and mechanic training, airspace management, vertiport construction, and noise management. For more information, contact Heather Krause at 202-512-2834 or krauseh@gao.gov.

Civilian Harm: DOD Should Take Actions to Enhance Its Plan for Mitigation and Response Efforts

What GAO Found The Department of Defense's (DOD) August 2022 action plan generally captures recommendations from nine studies on civilian harm. Officials from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy—the office that led the development of the action plan and is leading its implementation—told GAO that that these studies were fundamental in developing the action plan. While there is no requirement that the action plan incorporate all of the recommendations from these studies, the action plan captures 61 of 68 recommendations from the nine studies. For example, it incorporates recommendations from two studies to develop guidance for addressing civilian harm across the full spectrum of DOD operations. The action plan does not capture seven recommendations, such as five that focused on specific military operations or DOD components. DOD has begun work on all 11 objectives of the action plan, according to Policy officials, initially focusing on implementing five (see figure). The officials stated that the five objectives are particularly critical in the implementation of the action plan. For example, the Army is leading a DOD-wide workforce study to determine the personnel needs for the implementation of the action plan. That is, the study will assess the need for 166 full-time equivalents across DOD components, as initially set forth in the action plan. DOD's Initial Focus in Implementing the Civilian Harm Action Plan However, DOD has not addressed two key challenges as it has begun to implement the action plan. First, some DOD component officials do not know what constitutes improvement. For example, officials from one component told GAO that they do not know what the end state is for the action plan. Establishing performance goals and measures could help DOD target resources and make adjustments in the remaining years of implementation, currently planned to go through 2025. Second, some DOD component officials are unclear on how the action plan is relevant to nonkinetic activities, such as space and cyber operations. A Policy official stated that figuring out the specifics of how to mitigate and respond to civilian harm in nonkinetic activities was not a priority for DOD, but this will become increasingly important. Without conducting an assessment to clarify how to mitigate and respond to civilian harm for nonkinetic activities, DOD components will not be positioned to implement the action plan for those activities. Why GAO Did This Study DOD has reported to Congress that civilian casualties are a tragic and unavoidable part of war. Nevertheless, the U.S. military is steadfastly committed to protecting civilians in military operations. As a part of the commitment to continue improving DOD's approach to civilian harm mitigation and response, in August 2022, the department issued an action plan to help improve the approach. House Report 117-397 includes a provision for GAO to review DOD's processes to identify and evaluate studies on the protection of civilians in U.S. military operations. GAO examined (1) how the action plan captures the studies on civilian harm and the associated recommendations, (2) the status of the action plan's implementation, and (3) the extent to which DOD has addressed any challenges in implementing its action plan. GAO analyzed DOD and external studies on civilian harm, reviewed reports and briefings on action plan implementation, and interviewed officials from DOD components with knowledge of the development and implementation of the action plan.

Central America: USAID Should Strengthen Staffing and Fraud Risk Management for Initiative Addressing Migration to the U.S.

What GAO Found In November 2021, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) announced Centroamérica Local (CL), an initiative to empower local organizations in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to implement programs addressing root causes of migration to the U.S. GAO's review of all 18 CL grants and other awards from August 2021 through June 2023 found each included elements aligning with at least one of five pillars of the U.S. Strategy for Addressing the Root Causes of Migration in Central America (Root Causes Strategy). GAO also found USAID consulted with local stakeholders, including implementing partners and mission staff, in developing CL. Stakeholders told GAO that USAID's CL project development process—“co-creation”—is more collaborative than prior localization efforts and better addresses local needs. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Application and Co-Creation Process The El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras missions assessed staffing levels and requested additional positions to support localization. However, their staffing to oversee CL and other localization efforts has gaps resulting from resource constraints, such as space limitations. For example, in Guatemala, the new embassy compound is too small to accommodate all USAID mission staff. USAID has taken short-term measures, such as allowing one mission to hire short-term contractors. However, mission officials said they will need to hire additional staff to oversee the growing number of smaller awards for CL. Identifying long-term solutions to the missions' staffing shortages would help ensure adequate oversight of CL. The El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras missions have taken steps to identify and mitigate risks, including fiduciary, programmatic, reputational, and fraud risks that could affect CL. However, the missions have not followed GAO's leading practices for assessing fraud risk. The missions considered and documented some fraud risk through annual risk management processes but have not examined program-specific fraud risks. Also, missions and implementing partners have access to fraud awareness training, but attendance is not mandated or tracked because USAID does not require it agencywide. As a result, USAID lacks assurance that its missions and partners know how to identify and mitigate key fraud risks to CL-related programs. Why GAO Did This Study Hundreds of thousands of Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Honduran nationals are encountered at the southwest U.S. land border each year. In July 2021, the White House launched the Root Causes Strategy to address economic, governance, and security factors driving migration to the U.S. from Central America. In November 2021, USAID announced CL, a 5-year, $300 million initiative. Through CL, USAID seeks to empower local organizations in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to address root causes of migration by, among other things, advancing economic growth, improving governance, and strengthening security. GAO was asked to review USAID's implementation of CL. Although the initiative is too new for an evaluation of its effectiveness, this report examines, among other things, the extent to which USAID (1) integrated elements of the Root Causes Strategy and consulted local stakeholders in developing CL; (2) assessed and adjusted its staffing levels for grant management and program oversight; and (3) identified risks to CL, including fraud risks. GAO reviewed USAID documents, analyzed USAID data, and interviewed USAID officials in Central America and Washington, D.C. GAO also interviewed local stakeholders in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

Intellectual Property: Stronger Fraud Risk Management Could Improve the Integrity of the Trademark System

What GAO Found The Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA) established two new procedures—expungement and reexamination—that allow individuals and businesses to challenge a registered trademark on the basis that it was not used in commerce, as is normally required. A successful challenge results in the trademark being removed from the register, thus making it available for potential use for the challenger or other applicants. GAO found that from December 2021 through June 2023 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and attorneys representing trademark owners filed nearly 500 petitions under the new procedures. Collectively, these petitions resulted in the removal of more than 2,500 falsely claimed goods and services from the trademark register. Trademark attorneys told GAO that the new procedures can be cost-effective and low-risk. Existing USPTO programs have also addressed inaccurate or false trademark applications and registrations. The agency's post registration audit program removed trademarked goods and services in about half of its randomly selected audits each year from the start of the program in 2017. This suggests that there may be more than 1 million false and inaccurate registrations out of about 2.8 million overall due to an influx of applications, among other factors. Fraudulent Images of the Same Flashlight with Different Logos Included in Trademark Applications Submitted to USPTO The USPTO has taken steps to limit fraud risks, such as establishing a culture conducive to fraud risk management. However, the USPTO has not conducted a comprehensive fraud risk assessment of the trademark register or designed a fraud risk strategy. Implementing leading practices from GAO's Fraud Risk Framework would allow the USPTO to comprehensively consider fraud risks, establish more effective controls, and fully articulate a tolerable level of fraud risk while considering the costs and benefits of potential control activities. GAO also found that the USPTO's current data systems do not allow the agency to: (1) assess the effectiveness of current trademark fraud prevention programs and (2) implement new technologies for identifying fraud. Academics told GAO that computational tools such as predictive analytics could help the USPTO identify trademark applications with false or inaccurate information more effectively. Why GAO Did This Study Registering a trademark such as a word or symbol is often an essential part of building a business. In recent years there have been a growing number of trademark applications that include false or inaccurate images showing goods that are not actually sold or used in commerce. This has made it more difficult for businesses to find unused trademarks. The TMA includes a provision for GAO to review the USPTO's efforts to address inaccurate and false claims in trademark applications and registrations. This report examines (1) the extent to which the USPTO and third parties used the new TMA procedures; (2) other USPTO initiatives; and (3) the extent to which USPTO used fraud risk principles to address the issue. GAO analyzed USPTO trademark data related to TMA's new procedures and interviewed USPTO officials on other programs and procedures used to protect the integrity of the trademark register. GAO also evaluated the USPTO's current fraud risk practices against key elements of GAO's Fraud Risk Framework and conducted semi-structured interviews with trademark attorneys, top trademark-owning companies, academics, and trademark industry associations to obtain their views on the new procedures.

Surface Transportation: DOT Considers Multiple Factors when Choosing the Volpe Center to Conduct Research

What GAO Found The U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) operating administrations enter into agreements with DOT's John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center) for a variety of services, including research. DOT officials told GAO that they consider multiple factors when choosing the Volpe Center to conduct research or perform other services. These factors include: Expertise. DOT officials told GAO that they consider the Volpe Center's expertise and institutional knowledge on a topic. For example, the Federal Highway Administration has leveraged the Volpe Center's technical expertise in noise reduction and air quality to create tools for state and regional officials to demonstrate reduced congestion and improved air quality. Nature of the work. DOT officials told GAO that, because the Volpe Center is a part of the agency, certain issues (e.g., inherently governmental functions) are best addressed by Volpe Center staff. For example, Volpe Center staff have long served as the primary technical resource informing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's fuel economy standards rulemaking. Response time. DOT officials told GAO that the Volpe Center's ability to rapidly respond to agency needs is also a consideration. Volpe Center officials cited the center's recent work to help form the new Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, which involved performing technical reviews of grant applications, as an example of its ability to respond rapidly. The proportion of research funding committed to the Volpe Center compared to other entities varied across five selected DOT operating administrations in fiscal year 2022 (see figure). Combined, these operating administrations committed a total of $50.5 million—13 percent of their total fiscal year 2022 research funding—to the Volpe Center. The remaining 87 percent went to other entities such as universities, businesses, and non-profit organizations. Research Funding Committed to the Volpe Center and Other Entities by Five Department of Transportation Operating Administrations, Fiscal Year 2022 DOT operating administrations manage their respective research portfolios. According to DOT officials, each operating administration's distribution of research funding is driven by its mission and role, the scope of individual projects, and the factors described above. Why GAO Did This Study DOT's research activities are critical to its mission of making the nation's transportation system safer and more efficient. In 2020, GAO found that this research may be conducted by the agency's operating administrations, nonfederal research entities, or DOT's Volpe Center. DOT established what is now the Volpe Center in 1970. Its mission is to improve the U.S. transportation system by anticipating emerging issues and advancing technical, operational, and institutional innovations for the public good. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act includes a provision for GAO to review the surface transportation activities at the Volpe Center. This report describes (1) factors that selected DOT operating administrations consider when choosing the Volpe Center for research or other services, and (2) how much research funding selected DOT operating administrations committed to the Volpe Center compared to other entities in fiscal year 2022, among other objectives. GAO selected five DOT operating administrations for analysis that have a surface transportation-focused mission, are responsible for duties and initiatives intended to improve the safety of the traveling public, and entered into agreements with the Volpe Center in fiscal year 2022. GAO also reviewed relevant laws and DOT policies; analyzed DOT data; and interviewed officials from DOT, the Volpe Center, and the five selected operating administrations. For more information, contact Elizabeth Repko at (202) 512-2834 or repkoe@gao.gov.

Freedom of Information Act: Additional Guidance and Reliable Data Can Help Address Agency Backlogs

What GAO Found Federal agencies are generally required to process Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests within 20 working days. However, the government-wide request backlog has risen over the last decade (see figure), demonstrating that agencies face persistent challenges processing requests within required time frames. Year-End FOIA Request Backlogs Government-wide, Fiscal Years 2013–2022 In annual reports, agency Chief FOIA Officers have cited key factors contributing to increases in their backlogs. Factors include the increasing complexity of FOIA requests, staffing challenges, and increasing litigation. Agencies also reported on actions taken to address their backlogs. For example, agencies reported using data to actively monitor the status of requests and inform actions to close them. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Information Policy (OIP) helps agencies administer FOIA, but additional guidance and other resources could better support agency efforts to address backlogs. OIP directs agencies with significant backlogs to create backlog reduction plans. However, OIP does not specify what agencies should include in these plans so most have not included key elements. Of the 14 agencies directed to develop 2023 plans, two included goals and none included timelines for implementing actions. By providing such guidance, OIP could ensure agencies specify goals, milestones, and metrics to track progress. OIP instructs agencies to calculate the average time it takes the agency overall to process requests. However, since 2013, many agencies have reported inaccurate times in one or more years. Improvements to OIP's data checks and training could help improve the accuracy of these data. In focus groups with GAO, agency officials and nongovernmental stakeholders suggested various changes to FOIA, such as expanding the records agencies must release without a request, to help agencies address backlogs. However, there was generally little consensus on specific changes they would recommend. Why GAO Did This Study FOIA requires federal agencies to provide the public with access to government information. FOIA request backlogs hinder government transparency and prevent individuals' timely access to information. GAO was asked to review government-wide issues related to agency FOIA request backlogs. This report (1) describes factors federal agencies identified as causes of backlog increases, (2) describes methods agencies reported using to address backlogs, (3) assesses relevant government-wide guidance and resources, and (4) describes the perspectives of agency officials and nongovernmental stakeholders on proposed FOIA changes to help agencies address backlogs. To address these objectives, GAO analyzed Chief FOIA Officer reports published between 2019 and 2023 by all agencies receiving 50 or more FOIA requests each year. GAO also conducted four focus groups with FOIA officials from major federal agencies and one with nongovernmental stakeholders from academia, media, and the FOIA requester community. GAO analyzed data from FOIA.gov, reviewed government-wide FOIA guidance and resources, and interviewed agency officials.

Ukraine: DOD Should Improve Data for Both Defense Article Delivery and End-Use Monitoring

What GAO Found Since Russia's full-scale invasion began in February 2022, the U.S. has provided more than $42 billion in security assistance, including defense articles, training, and services, to the government of Ukraine. U.S.-origin defense articles have been provided primarily using Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), which allows the President to transfer articles and services from U.S. stocks, and the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), which the U.S. government may use to provide articles and services to Ukraine. The Department of Defense (DOD) has established new entities to deliver an unprecedented volume of defense articles to Ukraine in condensed time frames using PDA and USAI. However, DOD has not fully documented the roles and responsibilities of these new entities. Doing so would help provide clarity around the processes for quickly delivering defense articles in current and potential future conflicts. U.S.-Origin Defense Articles Loaded from Aircraft to Truck for Delivery to Ukraine DOD does not have quality data to track delivery of defense articles to Ukraine. DOD guidance on PDA does not clearly define at what point in the delivery process defense articles should be recorded as delivered or provide clear instructions for how DOD service branches are to confirm delivery. As a result, DOD officials sometimes record defense articles as delivered while they are in transit, weeks before they arrive in Ukraine. Additionally, DOD has not used its data systems to track the delivery of some defense articles provided under USAI. DOD officials use these data to ensure that defense articles have been delivered, to request funding for replacement of certain PDA articles, and as a baseline for conducting end-use monitoring. By taking steps to ensure the accuracy and completeness of its data, DOD will better ensure that it has the quality data needed to inform strategic decisions. DOD has a program to monitor the end-use of all defense articles provided to Ukraine but has had to alter some traditional end-use monitoring procedures in response to the ongoing conflict. For instance, DOD has been unable to directly observe some sensitive defense articles and has allowed Ukrainian officials to self-report the status of such articles. However, DOD has not formally assessed the effectiveness of its modified approach. By conducting such an assessment, DOD will better understand whether its adjusted monitoring approach ensures that defense articles are used for the purposes for which they were provided and will have the feedback needed to inform additional policy changes. Why GAO Did This Study The U.S. has been a leading provider of security assistance to Ukraine since Russia's full-scale invasion of the country on February 24, 2022. The amount and speed at which assistance has been distributed has raised questions about the need for greater efforts to monitor and ensure accountability for the defense articles provided. Senate Report 117-130 includes a provision for GAO to review the allocation and use of security assistance in Ukraine since the start of the conflict. GAO's review examines (1) processes DOD has used to provide U.S.-origin defense articles to Ukraine, (2) the extent to which DOD has tracked the delivery of defense articles to Ukraine, and (3) the extent to which DOD and the Department of State have monitored the end-use of defense articles delivered. GAO analyzed agency documentation; met with DOD and State officials in the U.S., Germany, and Poland; and assessed DOD data on defense article deliveries to Ukraine from August 2021 to October 2023.

Grants: AmeriCorps Should Take Multiple Actions to Better Manage Fraud Risks

What GAO Found AmeriCorps—also known as the Corporation for National and Community Service—administers a variety of grant programs that support service opportunities aimed at addressing community needs. The agency has taken some steps to manage fraud risks in its major grant programs. For example, as part of ongoing efforts to formalize its fraud risk management program, in September 2023 AmeriCorps developed a draft standard operating procedure that documents key roles of those leading fraud risk management activities. Nevertheless, many of the agency's efforts to manage fraud risks do not fully align with selected leading practices in GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. For instance, AmeriCorps has not established a process to conduct regular fraud risk assessments in its major grant programs. The agency's current fraud risk assessment was conducted at the agency level and was not tailored to identify or address program-specific risks. The agency's programs vary in size and scope. For example, one program funded over 7,000 volunteers, while another program funded over 115,000 volunteers. The agency-level assessment may not result in the information necessary to effectively manage program-level fraud risks. Furthermore, AmeriCorps' current agency-level fraud risk assessment does not fully align with leading practices in GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. Specifically: Identifying fraud risks. The fraud risk assessment did not fully identify specific risks or differences across its major grant programs—such as size and scope—that may warrant separate consideration. Assessing inherent fraud risks. AmeriCorps did not assess the likelihood or impact of the inherent fraud risks it identified. Setting risk tolerance. AmeriCorps set a fraud risk tolerance that does not align with guidance on the level of risk the agency is willing to accept. Specifically, AmeriCorps' guidance calls for a low fraud risk tolerance. However, the agency's fraud risk assessment set a higher risk tolerance, accepting more risk than called for by the agency's guidance. Considering existing controls. AmeriCorps did not fully consider the effect of existing controls because it had not assessed its inherent fraud risks. Conducting fraud risk assessments that fully align with leading practices can help ensure that AmeriCorps produces the program-level information necessary to strategically manage fraud risks across its major grant programs. AmeriCorps plans to explore and implement feasible antifraud data analytics, as called for by leading practices. However, the agency faces challenges that may hinder these efforts. For example, AmeriCorps does not collect any information on individual volunteers in certain programs, which may limit potential analytics. AmeriCorps has system modernization efforts currently underway that may improve data quality and allow for additional antifraud analytics. However, its plans do not explain whether its analysis will include the benefits and costs of collecting additional information or the anticipated benefits of its modernization efforts. Including these factors will help ensure that AmeriCorps fully explores the feasibility of antifraud data analytics in its major grant programs. Why GAO Did This Study AmeriCorps' grant programs address various community needs, including disaster relief, educational support, and environmental stewardship. In fiscal year 2023, the agency received over $900 million to fund these grant programs. However, AmeriCorps has faced financial management challenges. In fiscal year 2023, AmeriCorps' Inspector General identified improving financial management and prioritizing fraud prevention and detection as major management challenges. GAO was asked to review issues related to AmeriCorps' management of fraud risks in its grant programs. This report examines the extent to which AmeriCorps' (1) fraud risk management activities for major grant programs and (2) antifraud data analytics align with selected leading practices from GAO's Fraud Risk Framework. GAO reviewed relevant policies and documentation, analyzed data, and interviewed agency officials and compared this information with selected leading practices.

Educación Superior: Las Instituciones de Servicio a Hispanos informaron de grandes necesidades de instalaciones e infraestructura digital

This is the Spanish language highlights associated with GAO-24-106162. Lo que encontró la GAO Las Instituciones de Servicio a Hispanos (HSI, por sus siglas en inglés), es decir, universidades con una matrícula de estudiantes universitarios de al menos el 25 por ciento de hispanos, tienen grandes necesidades de instalaciones, según la encuesta generalizable de la GAO sobre las HSI. Según la encuesta de la GAO, se estima que, en promedio, el 43 por ciento del espacio edificable de las HSI (es decir, los pies cuadrados) necesita reparaciones o reemplazo. Los atrasos en mantenimiento diferido, los daños ocasionados por desastres naturales o climáticos severos y los esfuerzos de modernización de las instalaciones impulsan las necesidades de instalaciones de las HSI. Por ejemplo, las HSI tienen un retraso en promedio en mantenimiento diferido de casi $100 millones, según la encuesta de la GAO. Además, se estima que el 77 por ciento de las HSI tienen al menos un proyecto de mantenimiento diferido que aborda una cuestión de salud o seguridad. Más aun, se estima que el 65 por ciento de las HSI han experimentado al menos un desastre natural o un evento climatológico severo en los últimos 5 años que ha dado como resultado la necesidad de reparar o reemplazar algunas instalaciones. Las HSI también informaron sobre necesidades de infraestructura digital insatisfechas relacionadas con el acceso y conectividad a Internet, la ciberseguridad, y los esfuerzos de aprendizaje híbrido, según la encuesta de la GAO. Por ejemplo, la GAO estima que, en aproximadamente un tercio de las HSI, más del 10 por ciento de los estudiantes no pueden conectarse de manera confiable a Internet fuera del campus, ya sea porque no pueden costear una conexión a Internet o porque ellos no tienen un dispositivo adecuado. La mayoría de las HSI (aproximadamente el 74 por ciento) también ha experimentado un ciberataque en los últimos 5 años. Las HSI realizaron inversiones recientes en aprendizaje híbrido como resultado de la pandemia de la COVID-19 y la financiación federal relacionada. Sin embargo, la GAO estima que el 90 por ciento de las HSI que ofrecen cursos híbridos enfrentan algún desafío para continuar impartiéndolos, según los resultados de la encuesta. Ejemplos de instalaciones e infraestructura digital en las HSI Las HSI dependieron de múltiples fuentes para financiar sus necesidades de proyectos de capital durante los últimos 5 años. Estas fuentes frecuentemente incluían subvenciones o consignaciones de capital estatal para las HSI públicas y matrículas y cuotas para las HSI privadas, según la encuesta de la GAO. La GAO estima que el 43 por ciento de las HSI estaban satisfechas con su acceso general a financiación. Sin embargo, las HSI informaron que enfrentaban desafíos comunes para conseguir financiación para proyectos de capital. Por ejemplo, según la encuesta de la GAO, se estima que el 74 por ciento de las HSI públicas consideran que la financiación estatal insuficiente es un desafío para abordar las necesidades de proyectos de capital. Además, alrededor de tres cuartas partes de las HSI privadas enfrentan desafíos debido a la diminución de los ingresos por matrículas y cuotas. El Departamento de Educación cuenta con tres programas de subvenciones para HSI eligibles. Aunque las HSI pueden utilizar estos fondos para apoyar proyectos de capital, en cambio, generalmente utilizan estos fondos de subvención para otras necesidades, como servicios estudiantiles, según los funcionarios del Departamento de Educación. Por qué llevó a cabo este estudio la GAO Las HSI desempeñan un papel destacado en el sistema de educación superior del país. Por ejemplo, 574 de las HSI inscribieron más de 2 millones de estudiantes hispanos en el año escolar de 2021 a 2022, lo que representa el 60 por ciento de todos los estudiantes hispanos que cursan estudios universitarios. Como la mayoría de las universidades, las HSI deben seguir invirtiendo en sus instalaciones e infraestructura digital para poder atender a sus estudiantes con seguridad y eficacia. Un informe de 2021 de la Cámara de Representantes incluye una disposición para que la GAO examine las necesidades de infraestructura, tanto física como digital, en las HSI. Este informe describe (1) las necesidades de instalaciones, (2) las necesidades de infraestructura digital y (3) las fuentes de financiación para los proyectos de capital de las HSI. Para realizar este trabajo, la GAO encuestó una muestra representativa de las HSI en los EE. UU. (incluido Puerto Rico) y recibió respuestas generalizables de 169 universidades. Las estimaciones de la encuesta tienen un margen de error no mayor que más o menos 8 puntos porcentuales con un nivel de confianza del 95 por ciento. La GAO también analizó los datos más recientes de las HSI sobre características institucionales y de los estudiantes universitarios (2021 a 2022), finanzas (2020 a 2021), programas de subvenciones para las HSI (2017 a 2022) y fondos de ayuda de COVID-19 (2021). La GAO también visitó 10 HSI que fueron seleccionadas para representar diferentes tamaños, sectores (público o privado sin fines de lucro) y regiones geográficas, y entrevistó a funcionarios del Departamento de Educación y organizaciones de las HSI. Además, la GAO revisó las leyes, los reglamentos, y los directrices federales relevantes. Para más información, contactar a Melissa Emrey-Arras al (617) 788-0534 o emreyarrasm@gao.gov.

FEMA: Opportunities Exist to Address Mission Challenges and Increased Workload

What GAO Found The increasing frequency of disasters overall and the additional responsibilities for responding to other events have stretched the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) workforce in unprecedented ways. GAO's work has identified various challenges FEMA has faced in its efforts to respond to these additional events. The scale and scope of federal efforts and funding required to address the COVID-19 pandemic tested FEMA's and other federal agencies' capacity to mount an equitable and effective nationwide response. FEMA's role included lost wages assistance; COVID-19 funeral assistance; public assistance to state, tribal, and territorial governments; mission assignments to other federal agencies; and mobile vaccination units. For example, GAO reported in April 2022 that FEMA had received and was processing more than 444,000 applications for COVID-19 funeral assistance since April 2021—when it began accepting applications—compared to the approximately 6,000 cases of funeral assistance the agency had processed over the decade prior to the pandemic. FEMA reported that as of December 2023 it has obligated $123 billion in response to the pandemic and projected that it will obligate a total of $144 billion by the end of fiscal year 2024. In addition to the 59 major disaster declarations for COVID-19, as of July 2022, FEMA had about 500 non-COVID-19 active major disaster declarations in various states of response and recovery. At the same time, FEMA recently reported a projected deficit of nearly $6.4 billion in the fund by September 2024 GAO has also identified several gaps in FEMA's internal controls meant to prevent improper or potentially fraudulent payments in funeral assistance. In April 2022, GAO recommended that FEMA implement additional control activities to ensure that consistent and accurate data are available to prevent and detect improper payments and potential fraud. FEMA has fully addressed this recommendation implementing additional controls but as of April 2023 has only partially addressed the recommendation on data consistency and accuracy. Until FEMA fully addresses this recommendation, they will continue limited ability oversee and prevent and detect fraud. GAO's past work has identified longstanding challenges facing the FEMA workforce, which have been exacerbated given FEMA's additional responsibilities. Specifically, in May 2023, GAO reported that FEMA had a disaster workforce strength of approximately 11,400 employees at the beginning of fiscal year 2022, a gap of 35 percent between the actual number of staff and the staffing target of 17,670. FEMA officials stated that they faced additional responsibilities due to COVID-19, while also managing the traditional seasonal peaks of disaster activity during the year. This created burnout for many employees and increased employee attrition. GAO recommended that FEMA document plans to monitor and evaluate the agency's hiring efforts to address staffing gaps, among other recommendations. As of January 2024, FEMA has taken some steps to address these recommendations, including developing yearly hiring targets to ensure they are on pace to meet overall hiring goals. To fully address the recommendation, FEMA should finalize its staffing plans. Why GAO Did This Study FEMA leads the nation's efforts to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. In recent years, the increasing frequency and costs of disasters, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other responsibilities have placed additional pressures on FEMA. This statement discusses GAO's prior work and recommendations related to FEMA's (1) roles and responsibilities outside of natural disasters and (2) workforce challenges. This statement is based on products GAO issued from May 2020 through May 2023, along with selected updates to address GAO recommendations, and updates from FEMA. For those products, GAO reviewed and analyzed federal laws, agency guidance, and other agency documents. GAO also analyzed data on FEMA's workforce, and disaster assistance, among others. GAO interviewed knowledgeable officials from FEMA; other selected federal agencies; and state, local, and territorial officials impacted by disasters.

Higher Education: Hispanic-Serving Institutions Reported Extensive Facility and Digital Infrastructure Needs

Para la versión de esta página en español, ver a GAO-24-107052. What GAO Found Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI)—colleges with an undergraduate student enrollment that is at least 25 percent Hispanic—have extensive facility needs, according to GAO's generalizable survey of HSIs. Based on GAO's survey, an estimated 43 percent of HSIs' building space (i.e., square footage) needs repairs or replacement, on average. Deferred maintenance backlogs, damage from natural disasters or severe weather, and facility modernization efforts drive HSIs' facility needs. For example, HSIs have an average deferred maintenance backlog of almost $100 million, based on GAO's survey. Further, an estimated 77 percent of HSIs have at least one deferred maintenance project that addresses a health or safety issue. In addition, an estimated 65 percent of HSIs have experienced at least one natural disaster or severe weather event in the past 5 years that has resulted in the need to repair or replace some facilities. HSIs also reported unmet digital infrastructure needs related to internet access and connectivity, cybersecurity, and hybrid learning efforts, according to GAO's survey. For example, GAO estimates that at roughly a third of HSIs, more than 10 percent of students cannot reliably connect to the internet off-campus either because they cannot afford an internet connection or they lack an appropriate device. Most HSIs (an estimated 74 percent) have also experienced a cyberattack within the previous 5 years. HSIs made recent investments in hybrid learning as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and related federal funding. However, GAO estimates 90 percent of HSIs that offer hybrid courses face some challenge continuing to deliver them, based on survey results. Examples of Facility and Digital Infrastructure at Hispanic-Serving Institutions HSIs relied on multiple sources to fund their capital project needs over the last 5 years. These sources frequently included state capital grants or appropriations for public HSIs and tuition and fees for private HSIs, according to GAO's survey. GAO estimates 43 percent of HSIs were satisfied with their overall access to funding. However, HSIs reported common challenges securing funding for capital projects. For example, an estimated 74 percent of public HSIs consider insufficient state funding to be a challenge towards addressing capital project needs, based on GAO's survey. Additionally, about three quarters of private HSIs face challenges due to declining tuition and fees revenue. The Department of Education has three grant programs for eligible HSIs. Although HSIs can use this funding to support capital projects, instead, they generally use these grant funds for other needs, such as student services, according to Education officials. Why GAO Did This Study HSIs play a prominent role in the nation's higher education system. For example, 574 HSIs enrolled over 2 million Hispanic students in the 2021–2022 school year, representing 60 percent of all Hispanic students in college. Like most colleges, HSIs must continue to invest in their facilities and digital infrastructure to serve their students safely and effectively. A 2021 House report includes a provision for GAO to examine the infrastructure needs—both physical and digital—at HSIs. This report describes HSIs' (1) facility needs, (2) digital infrastructure needs, and (3) funding sources for capital projects. To conduct this work, GAO surveyed a representative sample of HSIs in the U.S. (including Puerto Rico) and received generalizable responses from 169 colleges. Survey estimates have a margin of error no greater than plus or minus 8 percentage points at the 95 percent level of confidence. GAO also analyzed the most recent HSI data on college student and institutional characteristics (2021–2022), finances (2020–2021), HSI grant programs (2017–2022), and COVID relief funds (2021). GAO also visited 10 HSIs—selected to capture different sizes, sectors (public or private nonprofit), and geographic regions—and interviewed Education officials and HSI organizations. In addition, GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov.

Pages