Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Medicare Part D, the voluntary, outpatient prescription drug benefit for eligible individuals 65 years and older and certain individuals with disabilities, is at risk for fraud, waste, and abuse. Part D is administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). All Part D sponsors--private companies that operate Part D benefit plans--are required to have programs to safeguard the Part D program from fraud, waste, and abuse. GAO refers to these programs as fraud and abuse programs. This statement discusses CMS's oversight of Part D sponsors' fraud and abuse programs, including its past efforts and planned oversight activities. It is primarily based on the GAO report, Medicare Part D: Some Plan Sponsors Have Not Completely Implemented Fraud and Abuse Programs, and CMS Oversight Has Been Limited (GAO-08-760). The five Part D sponsors GAO reviewed for that report had not completely implemented all of CMS's elements for Part D fraud and abuse programs at that time. CMS agreed with GAO's recommendation in the report that it conduct timely audits of Part D sponsors' fraud and abuse programs. For the 2008 report, GAO reviewed laws, regulation, and CMS documents, …

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks raised concerns about the security of Department of Energy (DOE) sites with weapons-grade nuclear material, known as Category I special nuclear material (SNM). To better protect these sites against attacks, DOE has sought to transform its protective forces protecting SNM into a Tactical Response Force (TRF) with training and capabilities similar to the U.S. military. This testimony is based on prior work and has been updated with additional information provided by protective forces' union officials. In a prior GAO report, Nuclear Security: DOE Needs to Address Protective Forces' Personnel System Issues (GAO-10-275), GAO (1) analyzed information on the management, organization, staffing, training, and compensation of protective forces at DOE sites with Category I SNM; (2) examined the implementation of TRF; and (3) assessed DOE's two options to more uniformly manage protective forces; and (4) reported on DOE's progress in addressing protective force issues. DOE generally agreed with the recommendations in GAO's prior report that called for the agency to fully assess and implement, where feasible, measures identified by DOE's 2009 protective forces study group to enhance protective forces' career longevity and retirement …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This report responds to two ongoing GAO mandates under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). It is the fifth in a series of reports since passage of the Recovery Act on the uses of and accountability for Recovery Act funds in 16 selected states, certain localities in those jurisdictions, and the District of Columbia (District). These jurisdictions are estimated to receive about two-thirds of the intergovernmental assistance available through the Recovery Act. It is also the second report in which GAO is required to comment on the jobs created or retained as reported by recipients of Recovery Act funds. GAO collected and analyzed documents and interviewed state and local officials and other Recovery Act award recipients. GAO also analyzed federal agency guidance and spoke with officials at federal agencies overseeing Recovery Act programs."

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This letter formally transmits the briefing in response to a mandate in the conference report (No. 111-298) and senate report (No. 111-31) to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010. In accordance with the direction in those reports, and in consultation with congressional staff, we are reporting on (1) actions taken by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) to establish the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC) and (2) challenges OEC and ECPC officials reported that could affect interagency coordination through ECPC. Based on the results of our review, we are not making any recommendations for congressional consideration or agency action."