INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA

Transcription

1 INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA MAY MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION SUBJECT: Government Accountability Office (GAO) Weekly Activity Repati Attached for the week ending May 23, 2014, are three new GAO announcements and highlights for three GAO final reports. There were seven cases closed and three cases transferred to Audit Follow-Up during this period. Attachment: As stated cc: Posted In GAO Affairs Internet Page ~~~ Acting Assistant Inspector General for Communications and Congressional Liaison

2 Primary Action Office Survey / Review New Announcements TABLE OF CONTENTS GAO Activity Report May 23, 2014 Subject GAO Code and / or GAO Report Number 1. USD(C) HASC Panel Recommendation Followup Date of New Announcement: USD Review of DOD s Prepositioning Strategy (AT&L) Date of New Announcement: DEPT BioWatch: Technical Capabilities of Current ARMY and Planned Systems Date of New Announcement: GAO Final Reports 1. DOD FEDERAL SOFTWARE LICENSES: Better GAO CIO Management Needed to Achieve Significant Savings Government-Wide 2. DEPT FRESHWATER: Supply Concerns Continue, GAO ARMY and Uncertainties Complicate Planning USD Defense Acquisitions: Update on DOD s Efforts GAO R (P&R) to Implement a Common Contractor Manpower Data System Closed, Terminated or Transferred Cases 1. Transferred FEDERAL CONTRACTING: Commercial Item GAO Test Program Beneficial, but Actions Needed to Mitigate Potential Risks 2. Transferred STRATEGIC SEAPORTS: Opportunities Exist GAO SU to Improve Interagency Coordination, Readiness Reporting and Port Preparedness 3. Closed OIL AND GAS: Updated Guidance, Increased GAO Coordination and Comprehensive Data Could Improve BLM s Management and Oversight

3 4. Closed Defense Infrastructure: In-Kind Projects GAO R Initiated during Fiscal Years 2011 and Closed Army Modular Force Structure: Annual Report GAO Generally Met Requirements, but Challenges in Estimating Cost 6. Transferred ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS: VA and GAO DOD Need to Support Cost and Schedule Claims, Develop Interoperability Plans, and Improve Collaboration 7. Closed VA Education Benefits: VA Should Strengthen Its GAO Efforts to Help Veterans Make Informed Education Choices 8. Closed DEFENSE INFRASTRUCTURE: Army Has a GAO Process to Manage Litigation Costs for the Military Housing Privatization Initiative 9. Closed DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS: Assessments of GAO SP Selected Weapon Programs Closed NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT: GAO Little Information Exists on NEPA Analyses

4 Enclosure Enclosure Information on New Engagement Engagement subject: Engagement code: Source for the work: HASC Panel Recommendation Followup GAO is conducting this work on its own initiative pursuant to its authority under 31 U.S.C Objective/Key question: (1) To what extent has DOD implemented the HASC Panel recommendations? Agencies and anticipated locations (HQ and field) to be notified: Our work will be performed primarily at the Office of the Secretary of Defense; Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller); Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer; Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness Directorate; Departments of the Air Force, Army, and Navy; Defense Finance and Accounting Service; and Defense Logistics Agency Page2

5 Enclosure Information on New Engagement Engagement subject: Review of DOD's Prepositioning Strategy Engagement code: Source for the work: Consistent with our Congressional Protocols, GAO is beginning this work in response to a congressional mandate. Section 2229(a) of Title 10 of the United States Code requires GAO to review DOD's strategy and implementation plan for prepositioned materiel and equipment. Objective(s)/Key guestion(s): Our objective is to review DOD's strategic policy and implementation plan for prepositioned programs under Section 2229(a) as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, Section 321. Our key question is: To what extent has DOD developed a strategic policy and implementation plan for its pre positioned programs that address legislative requirements? Agencies and anticipated locations (HQ and field) to be notified: We will perform our review primarily at the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. We will conduct further work with other DOD offices as needed. Page2

6 Enclosure INFORMATION ON NEW GAO ENGAGEMENT Engagement Subject: BioWatch: Technical Capabilities of Current and Planned Systems Engagement Code: Source for the Work: GAO is beginning this work in response to a request made by the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and its Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Objective(s)/Key Question(s): (1) To what extent has the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determined the existing BioWatch Generation 1/2 system's technical capability to detect a biological attack? (2) To what extent do the Generation 3 system's technical capabilities meet DHS's requirements and operational needs for phase 2 testing, and what, if any, developmental testing is ongoing or planned for the Generation 3 system? (3) To what extent will the Generation 3 system provide benefits to the user over the existing Generation 1/2 system? Agencies and Anticipated Locations to be Contacted: Multi-agency review. We will be contacting the Department of Homeland Security. We will also be contacting the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Energy, including the Sandia National Laboratories and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the Department of Defense (DOD), including proving grounds where BioWatch technologies were tested. Page2

7 GAO Highlights May 2014 FEDERAL SOFTWARE LICENSES Better Management Needed to Achieve Significant Savings Government-Wide Highlights of GA , a report to the Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate Why GAO Did This Study The federal government plans to spend at least $82 billion on IT products and services in fiscal year 2014, such as software licenses. Federal agencies engage in thousands of licensing agreements annually. Effective management of software licenses can help avoid purchasing too many licenses that result in unused software. GAO was asked to review federal agencies' management of software licenses. GAO (1) assessed the extent to which OMB and federal agencies have appropriate policies on software license management, (2) determined the extent to which agencies adequately manage licenses, and (3) described agencies' most widely used software and extent to which they were over or under purchased. GAO assessed policies from 24 agencies and OMB against sound licensing policy measures. GAO also analyzed and compared agencies' software inventories and management controls to leading practices, and interviewed responsible officials. To identify sound licensing policy measures and leading practices, GAO interviewed recognized private sector and government software license management experts. What GAO Recommends GAO recommends OMB issue a directive to help guide agencies in managing licenses and that the 24 agencies improve their policies and practices for managing licenses. OMB disagreed with the need for a directive, but GAO believes it is needed, as discussed in the report. Most agencies generally agreed with the recommendations or had no comments. View GA For more information, contact Carol R Cha at (202) or chac@gao.gov. What GAO Found The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the vast majority of agencies that GAO reviewed do not have adequate policies for managing software licenses. W hile OMB has a policy on a broader information technology (IT) management initiative that is intended to assist agencies in gathering information on their IT investments, including software licenses, it does not guide agencies in developing comprehensive license management policies. Regarding agencies, of the 24 major federal agencies, 2 have comprehensive policies that include the establishment of clear roles and central oversight authority for managing enterprise software license agreements, among other things; 18 have them but they are not comprehensive; and 4 have not developed any. The weaknesses in agencies' policies were due, in part, to the lack of a priority for establishing software license management practices and a lack of direction from OMB. Without an OMB directive and comprehensive policies, it will be difficult for the agencies to consistently and effectively manage software licenses. Federal agencies are not adequately managing their software licenses because they generally do not follow leading practices in this area. The table lists the leading practices and the number of agencies that have fully, partially, or not implemented them. 24 Major Agencies' Implementation of Software License Management Leading Practices Fully Partially Not Leading practice implemented implemented implemented Centralized management Established software license inventory Tracking and maintain inventory Analyzing software license data Providing sufficient training Source: GAO analysis of agency data. The inadequate implementation of leading practices in software license management was partially due to weaknesses in agencies' policies. As a result, agencies' oversight of software license spending is limited or lacking, and they may miss out on savings. The potential savings could be significant considering that, in fiscal year 2012, one major federal agency reported saving approximately $181 million by consolidating its enterprise license agreements even though its oversight process was ad hoc. Given that agencies lack comprehensive software license inventories that are regularly tracked and maintained, GAO cannot accurately describe the most widely used software applications across the government, including the extent to which they were over and under purchased. Further, the data provided by agencies regarding their most widely used applications had limitations. Specifically, (1) agencies with data provided them in various ways, including by license count, usage, and cost; (2) the data provided by these agencies on the most widely used applications were not always complete; and (3) not all agencies had available data on the most widely used applications. Until weaknesses in how agencies manage licenses are addressed, the most widely used applications cannot be determined and thus opportunities for savings across the federal government may be missed United States Government Accountability Office

8 GAO Highlights May 2014 FRESHWATER Supply Concerns Continue, and Uncertainties Complicate Planning Highlights of GA , a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study The nation's water bodies have long supplied Americans with abundant freshwater, but recent events, such as the ongoing California drought, have focused attention on competing demands for this limited resource. In the United States, the states are primarily responsible for managing freshwater resources, and many federal agencies influence states' management decisions. In 2003, GAO issued a report providing an overview of trends in freshwater availability and use, as well as states' views on ways the federal government could assist states to help meet future water management challenges. GAO was asked to report on changes since This report examines (1) issues related to freshwater availability and use; (2) expectations for water availability and use over the next 10 years and how these expectations may affect water planning; (3) steps, if any, states have taken to manage freshwater resources; and (4) actions, if any, federal agencies have taken to support management of freshwater availability and use and perspectives from state water managers, experts, and literature on what the federal government can do to enhance its support. GAO conducted a survey of 50 state water managers with a response rate of 1 00 percent. GAO also reviewed reports and documents from entities, such as federal agencies and environmental organizations, and interviewed federal officials and experts, including environmental and industry officials, to understand freshwater issues across the nation. GAO is not making recommendations. View GA For more information, contact Anne-Marie Fennell at (202) or fennella@gao.gov. What GAO Found Key issues related to freshwater availability and use-such as concerns about population growth straining water supplies, lack of information on water availability and use, and trends in types of water use-remain largely unchanged since 2003, according to state water managers, experts, and literature. In addition, GAO's review found certain issues, such as the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events, including droughts and floods, on water resources and the effect of the energy sector on water quantity and quality, have gained prominence. According to state water managers, experts, and literature GAO reviewed, freshwater shortages are expected to continue into the future. In particular, 40 of 50 state water managers expected shortages in some portion of their states under average conditions in the next 10 years (see fig.). However, uncertainty stemming from factors, such as patterns of economic growth and land use change, is likely to complicate future state water managers' planning efforts. Sources: GAO analysis of state water managers' responses to GAO survey; Map Resources (map). Number of states in each category Shortage category Statewide D Regional 24 c=j Local 15 c=j None No response 2 ~ or unoerta1n GAO's review found that over the last decade states have taken a number of steps to improve management of freshwater availability and use. These include conducting freshwater resource studies and assessments, developing drought preparedness plans, developing water management tools, taking conservation actions, and taking steps to address climate change impacts on water resources. Since 2003, federal agencies have taken various actions to support freshwater management. For example, the Department of the Interior's U.S. Geological Survey initiated the National Water Census to assess water availability and use across the nation. Also, numerous agencies participate in the National Drought Resilience Partnership, created in In addition, state water managers, experts, and literature GAO reviewed identified actions the federal government could take to support state water management efforts, including increased collaboration among federal agencies and with states and other stakeholders, and maintaining and collecting key data United States Government Accountability Office

9 441 G St. N.W. Washington, DC May 19, 2014 The Honorable Carl Levin Chairman The Honorable James M. Inhofe Ranking Member Committee on Armed Services United States Senate The Honorable Howard P. Buck McKeon Chairman The Honorable Adam Smith Ranking Member Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives Defense Acquisitions: Update on DOD s Efforts to Implement a Common Contractor Manpower Data System The Department of Defense (DOD), the federal government s largest purchaser of contractorprovided services, reported that it obligated about $187 billion more than half of its total contract obligations on service contracts in fiscal year DOD relies on contractors to perform functions as varied as professional and management support, information technology support, medical services, and weapon system and intelligence support. In recent years, Congress has enacted legislation to improve DOD s ability to manage its acquisition of services; to make more strategic decisions about the right workforce mix of military, civilian, and contractor personnel; and to better align resource needs through the budget process to achieve that mix. For example, Section 2330a of title 10 of the U.S. Code requires DOD to annually compile and, for the military services and defense agencies to review, an inventory of services contracted for or on behalf of DOD during the preceding fiscal year, in part, to help provide better insight into the number of contractor full-time equivalents (FTE) providing services to the department. Further, the military services and defense agencies are required to use the inventory to inform strategic workforce planning decisions, and DOD is required to use the inventory to better align resource needs through the budget process. Within DOD, the offices of the Comptroller and the Under Secretaries of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (AT&L), and Personnel and Readiness (P&R) have shared responsibility for issuing guidance for compiling and reviewing the inventory. We have previously reported on DOD s efforts to compile and review its inventory of contracted services, including initiatives to standardize contractor manpower data collection across the department. 1 In January 2011, we recommended that DOD develop a plan of action to facilitate 1 GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Continued Management Attention Needed to Enhance Use and Review of DOD s Inventory of Contracted Services, GAO (Washington, D.C.: May 23, 2013); GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Further Actions Needed to Improve Accountability for DOD s Inventory of Contracted Services, GAO Page 1 GAO R DOD Inventory of Contracted Services