What GAO Found In May 2024, GAO identified 13 priority recommendations for the Small Business Administration (SBA). Since then, SBA implemented two of those recommendations. SBA's actions included finalizing a framework for how it will engage communities in its disaster response and developing a process to address delays in annual reporting for a business development program. In addition, GAO removed the priority recommendation designation of one recommendation. In March 2025, GAO identified seven additional priority recommendations for SBA, bringing the total number to 17. These recommendations involve the following areas: Improving oversight and communication related to lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic response, Addressing cybersecurity and IT management challenges, Improving oversight of small business research programs, Improving disaster recovery efforts, Meeting reporting requirements in a more timely manner, and Supporting veteran-owned small businesses. SBA's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015 GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Daniel Garcia-Diaz at garciadiazd@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Department of Energy (DOE) is to provide loans and loan guarantees for innovative and other high-impact energy-related ventures through its Loan Programs Office (office). In recent years, Congress added two new loan programs and hundreds of billions of dollars in new loan authority for the office to manage. At the same time, the number of applications for loans and guarantees increased substantially. In response, the office increased its staff from 104 in 2020 to 412 in 2024, and made organizational changes, among other actions. The office is not on track to issue loans in the amounts Congress authorized. A key example of this is the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment Program. Enacted in August 2022, it received $250 billion in loan authority due to expire September 30, 2026. However, as of September 30, 2024, the office had made one loan for about $1.4 billion. While it has a total of $108.3 billion in outstanding submitted applications for loans and guarantees, the program almost certainly will fall short of the $250 billion in loan authority. Further, DOE needs to thoroughly review the current applications to ensure the government's interests are protected. Department of Energy (DOE) Loan Programs Office Loan and Loan Guarantee Application Process However, the office cannot ensure consistent and accurate application reviews. For example, their guidance is at times incorrect and outdated. In several instances, the guidance refers to documents that officials said are no longer used, and it is at times contradictory or unclear. As a result, staff would likely find it difficult to follow the correct practice. Further, GAO found that the office's guidance does not always follow the law. For projects that are required to be innovative, the office determines innovativeness early in the application review process and risks issuing a guarantee for a project that is no longer innovative. Without confirming innovativeness when it offers conditional commitment, the office may make loans or guarantees for projects that are not eligible. Finally, the office does not comprehensively evaluate its application review process, including whether guidance is up to date, because officials have not considered the application review process to be high risk. Conducting a comprehensive annual review of this process could help the office identify and correct errors to better ensure it is consistently and accurately reviewing applications. Without correcting its guidance, the office cannot be assured that application reviews lead to selecting projects that further program goals. Why GAO Did This Study The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (2021) and the Inflation Reduction Act (2022) added two new loan programs to the three in DOE's portfolio. The additions increased the office's available loan authority many times over, bringing it to over $400 billion. Much of this authority expires in 2026 and 2028. Congress provided in statute for GAO to review DOE's Loan Guarantee Program. GAO's scope for its report is the five loan programs administered by the office. The report examines (1) how the office has addressed the expansion of its loan programs and loan authority; and (2) the extent to which the office's application review guidance and procedures ensure consistent and accurate application reviews. GAO analyzed DOE actions to address an increase in applications. GAO also identified the extent to which DOE was planning to use the amount of its loan authority. It also reviewed application review guidance, documentation, and training, and interviewed DOE officials.

What GAO Found Private sector worker and employer stakeholder organizations that GAO interviewed said the most common work arrangement among the groups they represent is telework that allows workers to work 2 or 3 days each week at the employers’ site and work from home the remaining days. For employer stakeholders, deciding whether to adopt telework depends on whether the type of job is suitable for telework and how telework might affect operating costs and the ability to monitor workers’ job performance, among other things. The greatest benefit of telework identified by employer stakeholder organizations was the improved ability to recruit and retain workers. Worker stakeholder organizations also identified recruitment and retention as a main benefit of telework. Expert researchers and worker and employer stakeholder organizations said another benefit of telework is that it increases workforce participation of: (1) workers with disabilities, (2) workers who have caregiving responsibilities, (3) older workers, and (4) two-career couples. Conversely, the greatest challenge of telework that both employer and worker stakeholder organizations identified was building workplace culture. Specifically, they noted that teleworking can lead to a decrease in relationship building between co-workers, as well as between workers and their managers. Additionally, worker stakeholder organizations said that employers’ return-to-office requirements that reduce or eliminate telework can lead to worker turnover. Stakeholders reported a variety of other potential benefits and challenges of telework for workers and employers (see figure). Potential Benefits and Challenges of Telework Identified by Private Sector Worker and Employer Stakeholder Organizations The experts GAO spoke with also identified policies that in their view could address challenges related to telework, including challenges for those teleworking in states other than where their employer is located. For example, experts advocated for a policy to clarify, when the employer and teleworking employee are in different states, which state taxes the teleworker’s income. The Department of Labor (DOL) has issued guidance on how federal labor law applies to teleworkers. For example, in 2020 and 2023, DOL issued two Field Assistance Bulletins that explain how employers can exercise reasonable diligence in tracking teleworkers’ work time and ensure that they pay teleworkers properly. Why GAO Did This Study The ongoing use of telework since the COVID-19 pandemic ended has been an evolving area. GAO was asked to examine a number of issues related to telework. This report examines employer and worker stakeholder and experts’ views on telework, experts' views on public policies that could affect telework, and labor law guidance DOL provides on telework. GAO interviewed officials from 11 organizations that represent private sector workers and employers in industries with the highest rates of telework and in specific groups that may have had significant or unique experiences with telework (e.g., older workers, workers with disabilities, and small businesses). GAO interviewed seven expert researchers and a representative from a private sector research organization. The researchers GAO selected included three whose studies were cited multiple times in GAO’s 2023 report and experts who were referred to GAO by the initial three researchers. The views of stakeholder organizations and experts were not generalizable. GAO also interviewed DOL officials and summarized DOL guidance for employers of teleworkers. For more information, contact John Sawyer at sawyerj@gao.gov.

What GAO Found In May 2024, GAO identified 12 priority recommendations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since then, EPA has implemented three of those recommendations. EPA implemented two of the three recommendations by developing an interagency framework to expand both monitoring and forecasting of freshwater harmful algal blooms. EPA implemented the third recommendation by building a network of climate-focused technical assistance providers for water and wastewater systems to address climate-related infrastructure challenges. In April 2025, GAO identified no new priority recommendations for EPA, bringing the total number of open priority recommendation to nine. These recommendations involve the four following areas: Ensuring cybersecurity at EPA, Protecting the nation's water quality, Improving the nation's air quality, and Addressing data and risk communication issues related to drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. EPA's continued attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015, GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Mark Gaffigan at gaffiganm@gao.gov.

What GAO Found GAO conducted focus groups with nearly 50 patent examiners from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) where they told GAO that they prioritize examination output (i.e., the number of patent applications reviewed) over the quality of the review. The examiners said that the USPTO focuses more on the volume of work completed, which can affect the thoroughness of examinations. This focus on output has persisted since GAO's review in 2016. Examiners cited a variety of challenges in patent examination, including time pressures, and noted that patent applications have become more complex (see table). Challenges identified by examiners in GAO's focus groups were also reported in USPTO's bi-annual examiner surveys. The USPTO has undertaken several initiatives to address examination challenges and improve patent quality, but it has generally not effectively planned or assessed these initiatives. For example, in fiscal year 2021, the USPTO changed patent examiner performance appraisals to put more emphasis on patent quality but did not evaluate whether this improved patent quality. In addition, the USPTO uses pilot programs to develop and test changes to the examination process. However, the USPTO's implementation of pilot programs is inconsistent, and the agency is missing opportunities to inform future pilots. The agency lacks a formalized structure for the creation and oversight of these programs. GAO found that the USPTO's pilot programs do not consistently follow leading practices for effective pilot program design. For example, GAO found that seven of the 14 pilot programs did not evaluate outcomes to inform decisions about scalability and when to integrate the pilots into overall efforts. The USPTO evaluates examiner performance in several ways, including supervisory quality reviews. GAO found that these reviews likely overstate examiners' true adherence to quality standards and may not encourage examiners to consistently perform high-quality examination. GAO identified several limitations in how the USPTO measures examiner performance: Supervisors are not required to use sound selection methods, such as random selection, for the work they review for quality. Supervisors can exclude some identified errors from examiner performance evaluations. Examiners can receive a passing quality score when all their reviewed work includes errors. The USPTO measures compliance with each of the four statutory patentability requirements individually (see figure). However, the agency does not have a patent quality goal for the share of patents that should comply with all four requirements at once. According to data the USPTO presented for fiscal year 2023, compliance rates for each of the four statutory patentability requirements ranged from 92 percent to 98 percent, while the percentage of patents simultaneously compliant with all four requirements was 84 percent. By communicating an overall quality goal, the USPTO would provide stakeholders with a more accurate representation of patent quality. USPTO Compliance Rates with Statutory Patentability Requirements While the USPTO has several measures of patent quality and examination timeliness, it has not tracked or communicated indicators that measure the economic or scientific value of patents, despite having a strategic goal to measure innovation. GAO identified potentially relevant indicators of value in a review of the literature, including how often patents are cited by other patents. Assessing and adopting measures of the economic or scientific value of patents would better position the USPTO to educate and inform Congress, federal agencies, and stakeholders about key trends in innovation across various sectors of the economy, and act on meaningful changes. Why GAO Did This Study The U.S. patent system helps encourage innovation by allowing patent owners to generally exclude others from making or using a patented invention for up to 20 years. The USPTO employed 8,944 patent examiners at the end of fiscal year 2024 who review patent applications to determine if the inventions merit a patent. In fiscal year 2024, the USPTO received approximately 527,000 new patent applications and granted about 365,000 patents. Examiners search U.S. and foreign patents and scientific journals to determine if an application complies with statutory patentability requirements (eligible subject matter, novelty, nonobviousness, and clear disclosure). Pressure for examiners to review applications in a timely manner competes with pressure to issue quality patents that meet statutory patentability requirements. Some researchers say that patent invalidation rates in the courts suggest that patent quality may be lower than what USPTO's quality metrics indicate. For example, according to one study, about 40 percent of litigated patents are found invalid, although these patents might not be representative of all patents. Patents that do not meet statutory patentability requirements can inhibit innovation or create costly legal disputes for patent owners and technology users. GAO has previously reported on patent examination and quality challenges in GAO-16-490 and GAO-16-479. GAO was asked to review issues related to patent examination and quality. This report (1) examines challenges that patent examiners face that could affect the quality of issued patents; (2) assesses initiatives the USPTO has taken to improve patent quality, including pilot programs, and the extent to which the agency has measured the effectiveness of those initiatives; (3) evaluates how the USPTO assesses patent quality and examiner performance regarding quality; and (4) assesses how the USPTO communicates patent quality externally. To conduct this review, GAO interviewed agency officials and held six focus groups with nearly 50 randomly selected patent examiners representing nearly all technology areas; reviewed USPTO documentation on performance reviews and patent quality initiatives among other things; analyzed the USPTO’s Office of Patent Quality Assurance metrics, policies, and data; collected data and information on patent pilot programs; assessed USPTO pilot programs against leading practices for effective pilot programs; and examined USPTO’s patent metrics and literature on alternative indicators of patent value.

What GAO Found GAO found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not fully meet 10 of the 21 identified statutory requirements for the 2023 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review and accompanying report. Among other elements, DHS did not fully meet requirements for prioritizing missions, providing a budget plan to meet those missions, and issuing the report by the established time frame. For example, DHS was to issue the report every 4 years beginning in fiscal year 2009, however, DHS did not issue a report for 9 years following issuance of its 2014 report. As a result, DHS drafted a new strategic plan during that time without affirming the homeland security priority missions through the review. DHS officials could not explain why DHS did not fully meet the statutory requirements because there is limited documentation of the steps taken for conducting the review. The figure below depicts phases for conducting the review, but DHS documentation does not have details on the processes and procedures for conducting each phase. Developing and documenting processes and procedures for conducting the review could better position DHS to meet all statutory requirements and use timely information in planning its efforts to address constantly evolving homeland security threats. Phases for Conducting the 2023 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review GAO found that DHS has processes to use the report as a foundation for making annual resource decisions. Specifically, DHS has internal guidance for using it to inform its strategic plan and budget. However, the effectiveness of this guidance and use of the report depends on DHS issuing the report prior to its Strategic Plan. Not issuing the report on time could lead to a strategic plan that does not take into account the most recent homeland security environment. Additionally, DHS is statutorily required to consult with certain stakeholders, including other federal agencies and state agencies, when conducting the review. DHS states in its 2023 report that DHS's success in accomplishing its missions depends on partnerships with these stakeholders, but stakeholders GAO contacted said they generally do not use the report. Developing and documenting processes and procedures for engaging stakeholders may help ensure that DHS solicits and incorporates meaningful input from all stakeholders. It could also result in a better understanding of all stakeholders' roles and responsibilities in their partnerships with DHS. Why GAO Did This Study Homeland security threats continue to evolve and include challenges ranging from terrorist attacks to natural disasters. This situation underscores the need for DHS to periodically examine and strengthen the nation's homeland security strategy. The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act require that every 4 years DHS—in consultation with other stakeholders—conduct a Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, which is a comprehensive examination of the nation's homeland security strategy. GAO was asked to assess DHS's 2023 review and report. This report assesses the extent to which (1) DHS met statutory requirements and (2) DHS and its stakeholders use the report to execute their homeland security roles. GAO analyzed relevant statutes and documentation of the review and report. GAO also interviewed stakeholders, including representatives of eight DHS component agencies; three other federal agencies, such as the Department of Defense; and 11 external stakeholders, such as state agencies.

What GAO Found Commuter rail is a transit alternative to driving between suburban communities and city centers. Industry-wide data show that the nation's 31 commuter rail systems as a whole are providing service above pre-pandemic levels, but significant variation exists by system. GAO's analysis of data from the Department of Transportation (DOT) shows that service at 19 systems was near or above pre-pandemic levels from July through December 2024. However, service at five systems remains more than 25 percent below pre-pandemic levels, and service at the remaining seven systems varies between 8.5 and 23.7 percent below. DOT data also show that ridership for most systems continues to lag behind service levels, though substantial variation also exists. At six systems, ridership from July through December 2024 had recovered or nearly recovered from 2019 levels but were below 2019 levels for the remaining 25 systems. Officials from some of the 10 systems GAO interviewed identified ways they have adapted service to attract riders and better meet changing passenger needs. These adaptations include expanding operations beyond traditional commuting hours, offering free fares and flexible passes for certain passengers (e.g., youth passes), and strategically expanding and adapting service based on community needs and feedback. Data from GAO's survey of commuter rail systems show that fare revenue from riders was 31 percent lower in fiscal year 2023 for all systems, compared to 2019. To help offset this reduction in fare revenue, commuter rail systems reported increases in the percentage of their total funding comprised of federal, local, or other sources. COVID-19 relief funding comprised a significant portion of the 2023 increase in federal funding (see figure). As of February 2025, officials from 15 of 22 systems that responded to GAO's request said they did not have any COVID-19 funding remaining. Commuter Rail Systems' Total Funding by Source, Fiscal Years 2019, 2023   Note: Other funding can include funding from fees paid to use existing track, sale of assets, parking fees, or other sources. The vast majority of systems also reported increased operating costs in fiscal year 2023 compared to 2019, with a 28 percent increase in nominal operating costs across all systems. According to officials GAO interviewed and GAO's analysis, inflation contributed substantially to the increase in costs. Beyond inflation, officials also said that labor and material costs contributed to higher operating costs, which are affecting systems' ability to plan and implement projects necessary for future operations. Why GAO Did This Study Roughly 5 years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, transit agencies report that it has significantly affected how individuals use and prioritize public transit in their daily activities. Many rail systems historically operated to serve passengers riding to and from city centers. Commuter rail was particularly affected by the pandemic and related increased telework. In response to the pandemic, Congress provided over $69 billion in relief funding to the transit industry. The federal public health emergency ended in 2023. GAO was asked to provide an update to its 2021 report on the status of commuter rail systems' operations and funding. This report examines how, since the COVID-19 pandemic, (1) commuter rail service and ridership have changed; and (2) funding sources and operating costs for these systems have changed. GAO analyzed DOT service and ridership data from January 2019 through December 2024 for the nation's 31 commuter rail systems. GAO also collected and analyzed funding and cost data for these systems for fiscal year 2023 using a web survey and compared these data to fiscal year 2019 data. GAO also reviewed relevant federal statutes and guidance and interviewed DOT officials, industry association representatives, and a nongeneralizable sample of 10 transit agencies operating commuter rail systems. These agencies were selected based on ridership levels and whether the agencies offered multiple transit modes, among other things. For more information, contact Andrew Von Ah at vonaha@gao.gov.

What GAO Found Each year, the federal government distributes billions in funding through federal highway formula grant programs (commonly referred to as formula programs) to Tribes and states to build highway infrastructure and for other purposes. These grants are distributed to recipients using statutory formulas and may be used to build and repair infrastructure and facilitate the movement of people and goods. GAO interviewed 31 selected highway program funding recipients, subrecipients, and stakeholders and then surveyed them to gauge their level of support for variables that could be used in formulas to distribute funding through potential new highway formula programs. Most of the 28 survey respondents supported 27 variables that could be used to distribute funding for potential new programs. Almost all the supported variables related to infrastructure condition, freight movement and economic vitality, safety, and system reliability. Specifically, respondents supported variables such as total lane miles, vehicle miles traveled, and bridge condition. While selected funding recipients, subrecipients, and stakeholders identified and rated variables that could be used, they generally did not support creating new federal highway formula programs. GAO found that federal data sources are available and can be used to measure 22 of the 27 supported variables. Most of the data are maintained by the Department of Transportation, primarily as part of its Transportation Performance Management program and the annual Highway Statistics Series. Of the five supported variables for which GAO did not identify a federal data source, agency officials noted privacy concerns or no requirement to collect such data, among other reasons for not collecting the data. Photo of Interstate 5, Los Angeles, California Why GAO Did This Study The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act authorized and appropriated over $300 billion in funding for highway formula programs for fiscal years 2022 through 2026. As Congress deliberates about what to include in the next surface transportation authorization, it may create new formula programs, which it has done in some prior surface transportation authorizations. GAO was asked about variables that could be used for potential new federal highway formula programs. This report describes: (1) the views of selected stakeholders with expertise and federal highway funding recipients on variables that could be used for potential new federal highway formula programs and (2) federal data that could measure these variables. GAO reviewed applicable federal statutes and regulations, notices, and fact sheets to understand which variables are used to distribute funding under current highway formula programs. GAO used interviews and a survey to elicit views from selected federal highway funding recipients, subrecipients, and stakeholders. Specifically, GAO asked 31 interviewees to identify variables that could be used in formulas for potential new federal highway programs, and then surveyed them, receiving responses from 28 on their support for 96 suggested variables. GAO selected a non-generalizable mix of funding recipients, such as Tribes and state departments of transportation, based on their location. GAO also reviewed federal datasets and interviewed relevant agency officials to determine the availability of federal data to measure variables identified by interviewees. For more information, contact Elizabeth Repko at repkoe@gao.gov.

Why This Matters Increasingly, veterans seeking health care have been referred by Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers to community providers outside VA. The quality of the care those veterans receive can be affected by how successfully community and VA providers exchange medical records, as well as community providers’ ability to understand the unique needs of veterans. GAO Key Takeaways Veterans used over 350,000 referrals to receive behavioral health services (e.g., psychotherapy for depression) from community providers in fiscal years 2021 through 2023. Many veterans who were cared for by community providers later returned to VA medical centers for further care. To coordinate this care, community providers must send medical documentation (e.g., diagnoses, prescriptions, progress notes) to VA after the veteran’s initial and final visits for each referral. VA does not monitor whether these medical record exchanges are completed across all medical centers. But we found that 33 percent of these referrals were missing records for initial visits, when we reviewed the data that VA has readily available. Further, no such data are available for final visits, so the extent to which those exchanges are completed is unknown. Likewise, VA is not monitoring the extent to which community providers complete any of eight core trainings on opioid safety, suicide prevention, and other veteran-centric topics. We found that about 2 percent of the community providers with a behavioral health referral from fiscal years 2021 through 2023 had completed one or more of these trainings. Medical Records for Behavioral Health Referrals, Fiscal Years 2021 Through 2023 How GAO Did This Study We analyzed VA data on its behavioral health referrals from fiscal years 2021 through 2023 and community providers’ completion of core trainings. We reviewed VA’s medical record exchange guidance, and interviewed VA officials, staff from five VA medical centers, and representatives from three veteran service organizations.