What GAO Found In August 2025, GAO identified 14 priority recommendations for the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Since then, OPM has implemented three of those recommendations. In July 2026, GAO removed the priority status from three recommendations, bringing the total to eight. GAO is highlighting the following three areas that warrant timely and focused attention: Preventing improper payments, Strengthening IT management, and Managing the federal workforce. Addressing GAO’s recommendations in these areas could help prevent up to an estimated $1 billion per year in improper payments for those ineligible to receive federal health insurance benefits, reduce costs on duplicative or unnecessary software licenses, and improve agencies’ ability to attract top talent to the federal government. Taking action to implement all of GAO’s open priority recommendations could help enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of operations across OPM. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or make progress toward addressing a high risk or duplication issue, among other benefits. Since 2015, GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Cardell Johnson at JohnsonCD1@gao.gov.

What GAO Found In May 2025, GAO identified eight priority recommendations for the Department of Commerce (Commerce). Since then, Commerce has implemented one of those recommendations. In July 2026, GAO added one priority recommendation, bringing the total to eight. GAO is highlighting the following two areas that warrant timely and focused attention: Improving planning for the decennial census, and Protecting personally identifiable information. Addressing GAO's recommendations in these areas could improve census cost and accuracy, particularly for hard-to-enumerate populations, and help Commerce protect personally identifiable information from unauthorized access, tampering, or loss. Taking action to implement all of GAO's open priority recommendations would help enhance mission delivery, risk management, and the efficiency and effectiveness of operations across Commerce. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or make progress toward addressing a high risk or duplication issue, among other benefits. Since 2015, GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Cardell Johnson at JohnsonCD1@gao.gov

What GAO Found As of March 31, 2025, the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) awarded 57 task orders across nine contracts since implementing the End State Contract Model (ESCM) in fiscal year 2020. The ESCM uses task orders for contractors to achieve a stated outcome, or “end state,” to move sites toward completion, manage cost and schedule performance, and reduce DOE’s environmental liability. About half (29) included defined end states and the remainder were for support work or cleanup work that did not yet have a defined end state. EM has not consistently achieved intended results for selected task orders GAO reviewed. Of the nine selected task orders completed as of March 31, 2025, three did not define end states and six defined them but were inconsistent in achieving them. For example, three task orders with defined end states reduced or carried over scopes of work post-award, resulting in contractors completing less work to achieve modified end states. The extent to which EM reduced costs for these task orders is unclear because of inconsistent documentation. Further, EM headquarters did not provide adequate oversight to ensure task orders achieved end states. Without this oversight, EM cannot assess how well it is meeting program goals. EM did not fully use contract incentives to manage costs. As a result, post-award changes to task order requirements led to over $500 million in cost growth. Selected Task Orders with Greatest Cost Growth, as of March 31, 2025 Dollars in thousands   Cleanup site Task order (TO)  Total cost growth  Total cost growth, percent Idaho National Laboratory   TO 3 Integration and Mission Continuity (Phase 1) $42,054 6.29% TO 3.2 Integration and Mission Continuity Hybrid Task Order (Phase 2) $75,553 11.74% Nevada National Security Site TO 2 Environmental Operations $75,793 149.61% Oak Ridge Reservation       TO 3 End States Phase-In $216,661 45.17% TO 6-1 Y-12 Operations and Cleanup End States $23,871 6.05% TO 8-1 Environmental Management Disposal Facility Early Site Prep $1,559 6.48% TO 9-2 Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility Construction and Commissioning End State $25,811 138.89% Source: GAO analysis of Federal Procurement Data System and Strategic Integrated Procurement Enterprise System data and Office of Environmental Management information. | GAO-26-107745 Note: Dollar amounts are rounded to the nearest thousand. For the purposes of this review of task orders, GAO analyzed cost growth based on increases in contract value.  EM’s task orders have different incentives for cost performance, some of which can reduce risk of cost growth. Of the task orders reviewed, those types that put more risk on the contractor generally had the lowest cost growth. EM more frequently used contract types that put more risk on EM, and these experienced the greatest cost growth. Until EM takes steps to address task orders’ cost performance, EM may miss opportunities to better manage cost growth. Why GAO Did This Study EM is responsible for cleaning up 15 sites across the U.S. that are contaminated from decades of nuclear weapons production and energy research. To conduct this work, EM has awarded ESCM contracts since fiscal year 2020. GAO previously found that EM experienced challenges implementing end state task orders and that stakeholders had concerns about fair pricing for cleanup work because of lack of competition among contractors. Since 1990, GAO has designated DOE contract management as a high-risk area. A congressional committee report includes a provision for GAO to evaluate EM’s implementation of the ESCM. This report examines (1) the status of ESCM task orders issued since fiscal year 2020 and the role of contractors in defining end states, (2) the extent to which selected ESCM task orders have achieved intended results, and (3) the extent to which EM is using selected ESCM task orders to manage contract cost performance. GAO reviewed data for all ESCM task orders awarded as of March 31, 2025, evaluated contract documents for 19 selected task orders, and interviewed EM officials. GAO also conducted site visits to the Hanford and Savannah River cleanup sites.

What GAO Found Many countries are undertaking efforts to manage, treat, and dispose of nuclear waste. Several have taken actions that accelerated cleanup, reduced risks, and resulted in cost savings—lessons that could inform the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) efforts. For example: The United Kingdom (UK) saved a total of at least £2 billion (equivalent to $2.6 billion as of March 2026) by implementing a risk-informed approach to managing its nuclear waste. This approach helped minimize how much waste would need disposal in a repository for waste low in radioactivity. Canada has prioritized accelerating cleanup activities at key nuclear waste sites. As a result, it expects to complete cleanup activities at one of these key sites nearly 30 years ahead of schedule. France and the UK have used test facilities that replicate operating facilities to address technical issues and train employees. These efforts have saved each country significant money and minimized disruptions to cleanup efforts. Decommissioned Nuclear Boilers Diverted for Recycling Instead of Disposal in the United Kingdom’s National Low Level Waste Repository EM engages with other countries about nuclear cleanup, but this engagement is limited and not done strategically to identify alternative approaches that could reduce costs and risks at EM’s 15 cleanup sites in the United States. For example, EM participates in international working groups but does not disseminate lessons learned from other countries to EM’s decision-makers. GAO and other organizations have long reported on challenges facing the EM cleanup mission, including that EM does not have a fully risk-informed approach to cleanup. EM site officials told GAO they want more opportunities to engage with other countries, but EM headquarters officials stated that they typically teach other countries, rather than learn from them. Until EM more strategically engages with other countries to identify and evaluate alternative nuclear cleanup approaches, EM will continue to miss opportunities to employ new approaches that its decision-makers could use to reduce risks and costs across the EM complex. Why GAO Did This Study Many countries have nuclear waste resulting from activities such as weapons production, nuclear power generation, and medical uses. Efforts to address this waste can be costly, take decades, and present common challenges. EM is responsible for cleaning up 15 sites across the United States contaminated by nuclear weapons production and energy research. EM has estimated that its cleanup mission could cost between $641 billion and $840 billion and take until 2100. Senate Report 118-188 includes a provision for GAO to report on EM’s efforts to leverage other countries’ lessons learned for managing nuclear waste. This report examines (1) selected countries’ nuclear waste management approaches from which EM could learn, and (2) the extent to which EM has considered other countries' approaches for nuclear waste cleanup. GAO reviewed documents for six selected countries: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, and the UK. GAO interviewed officials from five of these countries and visited selected sites in France and the UK. GAO analyzed documents and interviewed officials from EM headquarters and received written responses from all 15 EM sites about their international engagements.

To alert the audit community to changes in professional standards, we periodically issue Professional Standards Updates (PSU). These updates highlight the effective dates of recently issued standards and guidance related to engagements conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. PSUs contain summary information only, and those affected by a change should refer to the respective standard or guidance for details.

What GAO Found TSA has taken some steps to communicate Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®) program information with stakeholders. However, TSA relies on an ad hoc communication approach rather than a documented communication plan to determine how to share information with stakeholders. This has contributed to some stakeholders reporting that they experienced declining engagement with and delays receiving key program updates from TSA. Developing and implementing a communication plan could help TSA ensure that all stakeholders receive the information necessary to effectively operate the TWIC® program and reduce security risks. The Coast Guard does not share or analyze all of the data it collects during inspections to oversee how facility operators implement the TWIC® program. For example, the Coast Guard collects data on deficiencies, a less severe form of noncompliance, and violations, a more severe form of noncompliance that can result in notices of violation or civil penalties. GAO’s assessment of inspection findings for fiscal years 2019 through 2024 showed: 888 TWIC®-related deficiencies, such as operators not ensuring that facility personnel with security duties were qualified to perform their roles, and 83 TWIC® violations, such as unescorted individuals entering a secure area, highlighting areas that may warrant improvement. However, the Coast Guard does not provide the data to TWIC® inspectors. According to officials, this is because the data did not relate to areas that would require a change to the program. However, by communicating the data with inspectors, regardless of their effect on the program, the Coast Guard could improve inspectors’ awareness of TWIC®-related risks. Total Number of Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC®)-related Deficiencies and Violations, Fiscal Years 2019–2024 Why GAO Did This Study The TWIC® program aims to provide a tamper-resistant biometric card to maritime workers who require unescorted access to designated secure areas of facilities and vessels under Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 regulations. As of August 2025, more than 2 million individuals held a TWIC® credential. TSA oversees TWIC® applicants’ enrollment and background checks. The Coast Guard enforces certain TWIC® regulatory requirements, including by inspecting facilities for compliance. The Transportation Security Screening Modernization Act of 2024 includes a provision for us to review TSA’s security threat assessment programs and we were asked to review other aspects of TWIC® operations. This report examines (1) the extent to which TSA communicates TWIC® program information to stakeholders, and (2) the extent to which the Coast Guard has overseen the implementation of the TWIC® program by facility operators, among other objectives. GAO also examined TSA and Coast Guard policy and data for fiscal years 2019 through 2024. In addition, GAO interviewed agency officials and port stakeholders. To obtain a range of TWIC® perspectives, these stakeholders included TWIC® operators at facilities selected in part for diversity in size and geographic regions.

What GAO Found The unique needs of mothers and young children during disasters include appropriate sheltering, feeding and care supplies, medical and mental health support, and other services, according to relevant literature and disaster service providers from selected local, state, and nonprofit organizations. For example, large shelters may not be the best option for families with infants. Mothers also often need diapers, baby food, and infant formula. Service providers from 12 local, state, and nonprofit organizations GAO interviewed discussed ways they have supported mothers and young children—including pregnant or postpartum women and infants and children who are not yet in school—during disasters. For example, providers said they may prioritize mothers and children for private sheltering, such as hotel rooms, or ensure that mass shelters have private nursing spaces. Providers also said they provide coloring and reading books about disasters to help children process their emotions and trauma. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has assisted disaster providers in efforts to prepare supplies and services for mothers and young children prior to a disaster. For example, FEMA has issued guidance on and held stockpiles of infant and toddler feeding and care supplies. In addition, GAO identified four examples in which FEMA had fulfilled requests for assistance from service providers, such as providing medical transports for newborn infants, during disasters in 2024. FEMA officials shared lessons learned from serving mothers and young children during disasters, such as to evacuate children with their families to avoid the challenges of reunification. Service providers GAO interviewed also shared lessons they learned, such as to prioritize infant formula that can be used without power or safe drinking water and to ensure that mothers and service providers are aware of safe infant feeding practices. Figure: Examples of Observations from Service Providers from One Organization That Helped Mothers and Young Children During Hurricane Helene in 2024 Why GAO Did This Study Natural disasters can devastate communities and displace survivors. In the immediate aftermath of a disaster, survivors need food, water, shelter, and other supports. Studies and reports about past disasters have shown that mothers and young children may be particularly vulnerable. In 2025, GAO added Improving the Delivery of Federal Disaster Assistance to its High Risk List. GAO was asked to examine supports for mothers and young children during immediate disaster response. This report describes some of the unique needs of this population, how these needs are met, and how FEMA supports mothers and young children. GAO reviewed relevant literature on the needs of mothers and children during disasters and interviewed disaster service providers from 12 local, state, and nonprofit organizations. These included organizations that contract with FEMA to provide disaster response, national and state organizations that are involved in disaster-related efforts, and service providers that specifically focus their efforts on mothers and young children. GAO selected these organizations based on the recommendations of GAO stakeholders and interview participants. GAO also selected organizations that had provided services to disaster survivors in five states selected for factors such as having major disasters in 2024 and counties in affected areas with large proportions of children under age 5. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and documents and interviewed FEMA officials, including those overseeing regions that include the five selected states. GAO also examined data from FEMA’s Web Emergency Operations Center database. For more information, contact Kathryn A. Larin at LarinK@gao.gov.

What GAO Found In May 2025, GAO identified 39 priority recommendations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Since then, DHS has implemented five of these recommendations. GAO also closed two recommendations that were no longer valid. In July 2026, GAO identified an additional seven priority recommendations, bringing the total to 39. GAO is highlighting the following three areas that warrant timely and focused attention: Improving disaster preparedness and response, Enhancing information technology and cybersecurity, and Strengthening immigration and border security policies and data. Addressing GAO's recommendations in these areas would improve DHS and Federal Emergency Management Agency service delivery to disaster survivors and communities; ensure the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency provides agencies the information needed to enhance cybersecurity and address risks; and ensure U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement provides decision-makers a more complete understanding of annual immigration detentions and U.S. Customs and Border Protection strengthens interdiction efforts. Taking action to implement all of GAO's open priority recommendations would help enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of operations across DHS. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or make progress toward addressing a high risk or duplication issue, among other benefits. Since 2015, GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Jason Bair at bairj@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) was enacted in 1980, in part to address individuals’ and organizations’ ability to challenge or defend themselves against civil or administrative actions involving the federal government. EAJA authorizes the award of legal fees to parties that prevail against the federal government and meet other eligibility criteria, under certain circumstances. Federal agencies reported paying over $116 million for about 15,000 EAJA awards, on average per year from fiscal years 2019 through 2025. Among the three selected agencies GAO reviewed, the agencies reported the following EAJA data to the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) for this time period: the Department of Labor (DOL)—11 awards totaling about $548,000, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)—11 awards totaling about $437,000, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)—no awards. Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) Awards Reported by the Department of Labor (DOL), National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Fiscal Years 2019–2025 Fiscal year Number of awards (DOL)  Total amount of awards (DOL) Number of awards (NLRB)  Total amount of awards (NLRB) Number of awards (EEOC)  Total amount of awards (EEOC) 2019  1 $87,824 5  $70,000 0 $0 2020  1 $62,500 0  $0 0 $0 2021  4 $72,600 0  $0 0 $0 2022 3 $138,266 1 $150,000 0 $0 2023 1 $110,221 1 $56,374 0 $0 2024 0 $0 2 $55,000 0 $0 2025 1 $76,190 2 $105,539 0 $0 Total 11 $547,601 11  $436,913 0 $0 Source: GAO summary of information published by the Administrative Conference of the United States. | GAO-26-108644 All five stakeholders GAO interviewed cited both benefits and challenges of EAJA. For example, two attorneys who primarily represent clients in labor and employment matters said that for some cases, EAJA enables them to assist clients who otherwise could not afford to pursue cases against the federal government. All five stakeholders cited challenges with EAJA such as meeting EAJA eligibility requirements and recovering legal fees under EAJA. For example, they cited difficulty establishing that a party prevailed against the government. Specifically, one attorney said that the definition of “prevailing party” has narrowed over time due to various court decisions, making it more difficult to meet this requirement. Why GAO Did This Study EAJA awards primarily arise from civil court cases and are typically paid by the specific agency that the party prevailed against. Since 2019, agencies have reported their annual EAJA awards and other data to ACUS. GAO was asked to review data on EAJA awards paid by DOL, EEOC, and NLRB. This report describes these agencies’ EAJA awards for fiscal years 2019 through 2025, as well as selected stakeholders’ views on the benefits and challenges of EAJA. GAO reviewed EAJA award data that federal agencies reported to ACUS for fiscal years 2019 through 2025, the most recent data available. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations related to EAJA. GAO also interviewed DOL, EEOC, and NLRB agency officials and five stakeholders knowledgeable about EAJA, including attorneys and industry representatives. GAO primarily identified these stakeholders through a review of literature on EAJA and a review of available EAJA data. Stakeholders’ perspectives shared with GAO are not generalizable. For more information, contact Thomas Costa at costat@gao.gov.

What GAO Found Rideshare and taxi services help meet the transportation needs of people in the U.S, but stakeholders have raised questions about the services’ safety. Available data sources do not provide a full picture of the number of rideshare and taxi assaults against drivers and passengers from 2021 through 2025. There is no federal requirement to collect such data, but GAO identified some sources at the federal, local, and industry level. For example: Two federal databases provide some information. For example, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated 20 nonfatal injuries to taxi and rideshare drivers due to violent acts by other people from 2023 through 2024, not including self-employed drivers. Most rideshare and taxi drivers are self-employed (i.e., classified by companies as independent contractors). GAO analyzed police data in two cities and found 424 rideshare- and taxi-related assaults in Los Angeles from 2021 through 2023 and 109 in Chicago from 2023 through 2025. These assaults made up less than 1 percent of the overall number of reported assaults in each city during those time periods. Three ridesharing companies voluntarily report some assault data. For example, in 2021 and 2022, two companies publicly reported billions of rides, with a combined 52 fatal assaults and 4,469 of the five most serious types of sexual assault. One of these companies also reported 75,693 reported incidents of other types of sexual assault (e.g., attempted kissing and touching) and sexual misconduct (e.g., leering and explicit comments and gestures). As of June 2026, these companies have not reported the number of assaults for 2023 through 2025 or data on non-fatal physical assaults. Two taxi companies gave GAO non-public data on assaults. For example, one national taxi company identified that it had 17 verified reports of physical assault and three verified reports of sexual assault from 2021 through 2025. Selected rideshare companies launched three new safety features, which add to features rideshare and taxi companies had in place. New Rideshare Safety Features Since 2024 A driver advocacy group and some drivers GAO interviewed identified benefits of the new features. For example, drivers in four of five interviews GAO conducted appreciated the additional passenger verification features. However, they noted technical issues with certain video trip recordings. Representatives from one rideshare company said they have made improvements to the recording feature. Why GAO Did This Study Sami’s Law, enacted in 2023, provides for GAO to study and report every 2 years on the safety of rideshare and taxi drivers and passengers. GAO issued two reports in 2024 on this topic. Specifically, GAO reported on the lack of assault data in GAO-24-106742. In GAO-24-107093, GAO reported on the range of in-application and in-vehicle features that rideshare and taxi companies offer to help ensure safety. This report describes (1) available data on the number of assaults on rideshare and taxi drivers and passengers from 2021 through 2025 and (2) safety features selected rideshare and taxi companies have implemented since 2024, among other topics. To conduct this work, GAO collected and analyzed available data from two federal databases and two city databases that GAO previously identified as tracking rideshare and taxi assault data. GAO also reviewed documents and interviewed representatives from a nongeneralizable selection of four rideshare and four taxi companies. GAO selected companies to vary in size and location, among other factors. GAO analyzed data from three ridesharing companies’ public reports and websites. GAO requested additional non-public data from all eight companies to further understand the scope of assaults. Two taxi companies provided data; three rideshare companies declined to provide non-public data; and the other two taxi companies and one rideshare company do not maintain databases with which to track assault data. Therefore, this report uses publicly reported company data and attributes the information as appropriate throughout. GAO also conducted five nongeneralizable group interviews with nine self-identified rideshare drivers and individual interviews with 15 taxi drivers. For more information, contact Elizabeth Repko at repkoe@gao.gov and Nathan Tranquilli at tranquillin@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA) requires the federal banking agencies to solicit and review public comments on their regulations to identify and eliminate outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations on insured depository institutions, as appropriate. How Federal Banking Agencies Conduct Decennial EGRPRA Reviews Outcomes from the EGRPRA reviews are often difficult to identify, and their connection to subsequent regulatory actions is often unclear. As a result, it can be difficult to determine the extent to which actions described in the EGRPRA report were driven by the review itself. For example, some actions described in the 2017 EGRPRA report were initiated in response to other statutory requirements, while other actions were initiated before or concurrently with the review. Representatives from six of eight organizations GAO interviewed said the reviews do not often lead to actions to modify or eliminate unnecessary regulations, and a public interest group representative noted that it is difficult to connect the EGRPRA reviews with concrete regulatory changes. Another reason EGRPRA reviews’ outcomes are unclear is that the agencies do not have documented procedures for identifying outdated or unnecessary regulations or determining whether issues raised in the reviews warrant action. Two agencies have draft procedures that could help address these gaps, but they have not yet been fully developed or demonstrated in practice. Implementing documented procedures would help ensure that issues identified through the review are systematically evaluated and lead to clear determinations about whether they warrant action and, where appropriate, regulatory changes. Having documented procedures also is important given the long time frame between EGRPRA reviews. Additionally, the agencies’ EGRPRA review processes reflect some leading practices for retrospective regulatory reviews, such as coordinating across agencies and soliciting public input, but do not fully reflect others. In particular, the agencies have not incorporated practices related to prioritizing which rules to analyze, conducting cost-benefit analysis, and assessing the combined burden of multiple regulations. As a result, they may not consistently focus on the most significant issues, assess regulatory impacts and trade-offs, or understand how multiple regulations collectively affect regulated entities. Why GAO Did This Study EGRPRA requires the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to review their regulations at least once every 10 years and submit a joint report to Congress. As of July 2026, the agencies were conducting their third such review. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act includes a provision for GAO to report annually on financial services regulations. This report examines (1) how the federal banking agencies have conducted their EGRPRA reviews, (2) the outcomes of those reviews, and (3) the extent to which they reflect leading practices. GAO reviewed reports by federal agencies; examined available documentation from the previous and current EGRPRA reviews, guidance, and regulations issued by the federal banking agencies; and interviewed agency officials and eight organizations selected because they submitted EGRPRA comments in the previous and current reviews.

What GAO Found Most of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) major projects in development reported no schedule delays or cost overruns in the last year. These projects are in the phase of building and testing their designs. Two of these 18 projects reported annual schedule delays (totaling 2 months) and three reported cost overruns (totaling $501.4 million). Similarly, the portfolio’s cumulative costs and delays increased slightly, from $4.4 billion to nearly $4.7 billion and from 13.1 years to 14 years, respectively. The Orion crew capsule accounts for over half of the major projects’ annual cost overruns and almost 75 percent of their cumulative cost overruns. Cost and Schedule Performance for NASA’s Major Projects Portfolio, 2025–2026 In February and March 2026, NASA announced significant changes to its Artemis missions—its effort to create a sustained lunar operations. The changes included revising the focus of the planned Artemis III, IV, and V missions, and pausing work on three Artemis projects. These projects include the Gateway, a small space station in lunar orbit that would have supported lunar missions. Under its new plan, NASA plans to shift its focus to infrastructure that enables sustained lunar surface operations. Implementing changes to the Artemis missions will create acquisition management challenges for NASA as each Artemis-related project adjusts to the new plans. For example, two Artemis projects were reporting technical and programmatic risks that were likely to delay their schedules. Acting on GAO’s prior recommendations to improve cost transparency, establish cost and schedule controls, and better manage acquisition risk could provide opportunities for NASA to strengthen its acquisition management. In response to the administration’s directive to reduce the size of the federal workforce, NASA reduced its civil servant workforce by 4,000 staff—or nearly 22 percent—in 2025. To date, 25 of 36 projects have reported effects from the reduced staffing. Subsequently, in February 2026, the NASA Administrator announced plans to resume hiring and address skill gaps. The President’s fiscal year 2027 budget request, however, proposes to reduce funding for NASA by more than 20 percent. This request contributes to the ongoing uncertainty as to whether NASA will be able to hire the workforce needed to address skills gaps. GAO will continue to closely monitor NASA’s management of the Artemis projects, as well as the agency’s efforts to address workforce challenges. Why GAO Did This Study NASA plans to invest at least $70 billion in estimated life-cycle costs for its portfolio of major projects (those with costs over $250 million). These projects aim to explore the solar system, return U.S. astronauts to the lunar surface, and advance aeronautic technologies. House explanatory statements have included provisions for GAO to prepare status reports on these projects. This is GAO’s 18th annual report in response to those provisions. GAO assessed (1) the cost and schedule performance of NASA's major projects in development; (2) the risks that could affect major project performance in the future; and (3) how NASA’s workforce reductions since March 2025 have impacted its ability to manage its portfolio of major projects. This report also includes summaries of NASA's 36 major projects. GAO collected and analyzed data on the 36 current NASA major projects; visited NASA facilities; interviewed officials; analyzed cost and schedule performance for the 18 projects in development; reviewed NASA’s recent changes to the Artemis missions; analyzed workforce data; and reviewed documents and reports.

What GAO Found The Office of Isotope Research and Development and Production (IRP), within the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science, produced, sold, and distributed 265 isotopes during fiscal years 2020 through 2025. Many of these isotopes are critical to medical diagnosis and treatment, national security, industrial processes and manufacturing, and quantum science. IRP made over 7,700 isotope shipments, most of which were for medical purposes. Department of Energy Isotope Production Facility IRP assesses market needs for isotopes on a case-by-case basis and manually tracks interactions with industry, customers, and others. However, IRP has not systematically assessed needs or aligned production activities to address those needs. A university production site representative told GAO that clearer market analysis or forecasting would have enabled earlier production preparations for a critical isotope with imminent supply failure. Without a mechanism to systematically assess needs proactively and actions to address isotopes in short supply, IRP may be too slow to respond to customers, who could be forced to rely on sensitive countries to meet their needs or face supply problems. IRP gathers information from industry and others to assess risks to isotope production and supplies, but IRP has not developed timely actions to mitigate such risks. According to IRP data, isotopes with market disruptions decreased from 40 in 2023 to 25 in 2025, but the U.S. continues to rely on sensitive countries for a majority of those remaining isotopes. Without mitigating risks, IRP may be unable to respond to emerging risks in a timely manner. This could lead to disruptions in isotope production and supplies, which have real-world implications for cancer patients, national security, and domestic industries. Why GAO Did This Study IRP is the only domestic supplier for many of the isotopes it sells. Many isotopes are rare or are too expensive or technically difficult for private industry to produce profitably, making IRP critical for producing them. Demand for isotopes is growing, and many of these isotopes are in short supply or represent a supply chain risk for U.S. industries. GAO was asked to review IRP’s management of isotopes. This report examines (1) which isotopes IRP produced, sold, and distributed during fiscal years 2020 through 2025; (2) the extent to which IRP has assessed isotope market needs and aligned its activities to meet them; and (3) the extent to which IRP has assessed risks affecting the supply of selected isotopes and taken action to mitigate those risks. GAO analyzed agency documents and data on isotope revenues, costs, sales, and shipments. GAO also reviewed documentation on IRP’s assessment of demand and risks to isotope production and supply chains. GAO interviewed IRP officials and a nongeneralizable sample of entities that received isotopes from IRP and represented the medical, industrial, and research and development sectors. GAO also visited isotope production facilities and interviewed officials at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.

What GAO Found The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers enters into Project Partnership Agreements (PPA) with nonfederal sponsors to execute water resources projects. These PPAs include a clause to “hold and save the Government from damages arising from the project” except those due to the fault or negligence of the U.S. or its contractors. Corps officials said the clause may protect the federal government from legal costs by discouraging litigation—a key advantage. Nonfederal sponsors described disadvantages they perceive with the clause. These include concerns about the scope of liability and conflicts with certain state laws. Corps officials said the agency has taken steps to address these reported disadvantages, such as including a provision in PPAs stating that the PPA does not obligate future appropriations where it would conflict with state law. Both Corps officials and nonfederal sponsors said that the clause has not been tested in court, so the financial impact of the clause remains uncertain. Nonfederal sponsors and other stakeholders offered a range of recommendations to address what they reported as disadvantages of the clause. However, Corps officials told GAO that implementing such recommendations would increase costs for the Corps and conflict with statutory requirements. Even in light of the reported disadvantages, Corps officials and nonfederal sponsors continue to enter into PPAs, and they described a strong partnership. Examples of Recommendations by Nonfederal Sponsors and Stakeholders to Address Reported Disadvantages of the Hold and Save Clause The Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, and U.S. Forest Service also include clauses in agreements to protect the U.S. against damages. To address related concerns, these agencies have taken steps such as allowing parties to purchase insurance instead. However, Corps officials said their legal requirements differ from other agencies, and therefore they cannot offer similar flexibilities. Why GAO Did This Study Through its Civil Works program, the Corps plans, designs, and constructs water resources projects nationwide for purposes including flood risk management, navigation, and ecosystem restoration. In fiscal year 2025, the Corps received approximately $8.8 billion to carry out these projects. For such projects, the Corps enters into PPAs with nonfederal sponsors, which can include states, local governments and Tribes. Nonfederal sponsors have reported concerns about the statutorily required hold and save clause in these agreements. The Thomas R. Carper Water Resources Development Act of 2024 includes a provision for GAO to review issues related to federal legal protections in PPAs, among other things. This report provides information on reported advantages and disadvantages of the clause, actions taken to address the reported disadvantages, recommendations by nonfederal sponsors and others regarding such clauses, approaches used by selected federal agencies to address concerns about similar clauses that protect the U.S. against damages, and Corps responses. GAO reviewed relevant federal regulations, statutes, agency policies, and sample agreements. GAO also interviewed a group of 12 nonfederal sponsors, two other relevant stakeholders, and Corps headquarters and district officials based on certain criteria. For more information, contact Steve D. Morris at Morriss@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Technology Modernization Fund (TMF) invests funding in agency projects to, among other things, modernize aging federal information technology (IT) systems. From fiscal years 2018 through 2025, the TMF received over $1 billion in net appropriations, of which the Technology Modernization Board invested about $1.03 billion in 68 unclassified projects (see figure). As of June 2025 (the latest data available at the time of this analysis), 24 TMF projects expected to achieve total savings of about $1.06 billion. Eleven of these projects had collectively realized savings of about $13.5 million, and 13 had not yet begun to achieve savings. While savings thus far have been small, the amount is not unexpected given that 21 projects—with expected savings of about $1.04 billion, or 98.3 percent of the total—anticipate achieving their savings in fiscal year 2027 or later. Thirty-seven projects did not expect any cost savings, but are intended to provide other value, such as mitigating security risks. Seven other projects were cancelled prior to June 2025 and no longer expect savings. Most of the projects were still active as of June 2025. Of the six completed TMF projects that expected cost savings, two met or were on track to meet their expected savings (within 10 percent) and four did not meet or were not on track to meet their savings. Officials for the projects that did not meet their expected savings attributed it to various reasons, such as the removal of planned functionality and higher system migration costs than planned, which led to tens of millions less in actual savings than estimated. As required under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984, all procurements, with certain exceptions, must use full and open competition so that any qualified entity can submit an offer. Of 177 TMF contract actions, the majority (154, or 87 percent) were awarded using competitive procedures. This accounted for about $713.1 million (96 percent) of the total funding awarded. In 23 instances where agencies awarded contract actions without such procedures, the agencies documented authorized exceptions. Why GAO Did This Study The federal government has faced longstanding problems in managing its IT. The Modernizing Government Technology Act established the TMF to help address key IT modernization challenges. The Act stated that TMF funds should be used to procure commercial products and services using full and open competition to the greatest extent practicable. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued guidance to agencies applying for TMF funds, directing that project proposals include a reliable estimate of any project-related cost savings. The act includes a provision for GAO to report biennially on the TMF and the expected cost savings of projects that received funding. This fourth report identifies the (1) approved TMF projects, their invested funds, and their expected and actual cost savings; (2) extent to which agencies' completed projects met their expected cost savings targets; and (3) extent to which the agencies used full and open competition for any acquisitions related to TMF invested projects. GAO analyzed and summarized TMF financial data and documentation, including cost estimates, associated with 68 projects in which GSA had invested funds as of June 2025. For applicable completed projects, GAO compared the difference between expected and realized cost savings to OMB’s variance threshold of 10 percent. GAO analyzed contract documentation for 32 projects that issued 177 contract actions between March 1, 2023, and June 2, 2025. GAO determined whether each one was awarded using full and open competition, in accordance with the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 and the Federal Acquisition Regulation. GAO also interviewed relevant agency officials. For more information, contact Carol C. Harris at HarrisCC@gao.gov.

What GAO Found Twenty programs, supporting a broad range of services from health care to disaster assistance, made up nearly 90 percent of federal obligations among programs administered by state and other government entities with obligations of over $100 million in fiscal year 2025. The 20 programs collectively accounted for $1.1 trillion in total federal obligations that year. Subrecipients, contractors, and others can also be involved in these programs, which can be helpful in delivering benefits and services. However, this decentralized structure can leave programs vulnerable to fraud schemes involving all these groups. Information about fraud risks specific to each of the 20 selected programs varies, in part, because federal agencies have not fully assessed their risks. Of the 20 programs, five documented evidence consistent with identifying risks and assessing the likelihood of those risks to prioritize action; the other 15 did not have such documented evidence. GAO’s review of information from GAO, Office of Inspector General, and state audit reports identified both general and specific fraud risks facing federally funded, state-administered programs. Examples of General Fraud Risks in Federally Funded, State-Administered Programs Examples of specific fraud risks GAO identified in the 20 selected programs included cases where a consultant was convicted of falsifying permits used during a $4.3 million airport improvement project; households receiving housing assistance vouchers were underreporting income and landlords were receiving payments for vacant units; and an individual allegedly ran a fraud scheme involving student financial aid applications for over 1,200 people to over 100 schools in 24 states. GAO’s prior work and experiences from the United States and other countries provide insights that can help federal and state agencies, Congress, and others combat fraud. Federal and state agencies can better manage fraud risks and prevent fraud by applying GAO frameworks for managing fraud risks and improper payments, as well as other leading practices; leveraging available federal analytic resources, such as the Do Not Pay program, to verify recipient identity and eligibility before issuing federal funds; and implementing recommendations from GAO and other oversight entities that would address existing program vulnerabilities. Key insights for Congress and federal agencies focus on efforts in three areas: (1) enhancing analytics for detecting fraud, (2) increasing transparency with prevention activities through reporting and data, and (3) adapting approaches to federal programs and professions to address evolving fraud threats. Why GAO Did This Study GAO estimated that the federal government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion annually to fraud, according to data from fiscal years 2018 through 2022. This represented 3 percent to 7 percent of average federal obligations government-wide. While fraud risks can vary substantially by program, every dollar or resource diverted to fraudsters hinders the federal government’s ability to achieve its goals. GAO was asked to review fraud risks in federally funded, state-administered programs. This report—the first in a body of work—provides information on 20 of the largest programs, how they are administered and overseen, what is known about fraud risks and related risk factors in these programs, and examples of leading practices and controls to address the risks. GAO reviewed USAspending.gov data for fiscal year 2025 to identify and select programs. It also reviewed program information, such as from GAO, Congressional Research Service, Office of Inspector General, and state audit organization reports; federal laws, regulations, and agency documents requested from the 20 selected programs; and fraud cases adjudicated by the Department of Justice. GAO reviewed existing research and criteria on practices and controls to address fraud risks, including GAO's Fraud Risk Framework and those identified by experts within the U.S. and internationally.