A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In five selected states, GAO determined that the separate State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) plans were generally comparable to the benchmark plans selected by states in 2012 as models for the benefits that will be offered through qualified health plans (QHP) in 2014. The plans were comparable in the services they covered and the services on which they imposed limits, although there was some variation. For example, in coverage of hearing and outpatient therapy services, the benchmark plan in one of the five states--Kansas--did not cover hearing aids nor hearing tests, while the CHIP plans in all states covered at least one of these services. Similarly, two states' CHIP plans and three states' benchmark plans did not cover certain outpatient therapies--known as habilitative services--to help individuals attain or maintain skills they had not learned due to a disability. States' CHIP and benchmark state plans were also similar in terms of the services on which they imposed day, visit, or dollar limits. Plans most commonly imposed limits on outpatient therapies and pediatric dental, vision, and hearing services. Officials in all five states expect that CHIP coverage, …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The Census Bureau (Bureau) is not producing reliable schedules for the two programs most relevant to building the Master Address File (MAF)--the 2020 Research and Testing program and the Geographic Support System Initiative."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In GAO's opinion, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) fairly presented, in all material respects, the 2012 and 2011 financial statements for the two funds it administers--the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) and the FSLIC Resolution Fund (FRF). Also, in GAO's opinion, FDIC maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting relevant to the DIF and the FRF as of December 31, 2012. Further, GAO did not find any reportable instances of noncompliance with provisions of the laws and regulations it tested."

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In February, GAO submitted its fiscal year (FY) 2014 budget request for a modest increase of 1.9 percent to bolster its staff capacity and retain its highly skilled workforce. Consistent with guidance from the appropriations committees and OMB, the FY 2014 request was based on the annualized level of the initial continuing resolution (CR) which provided a slight increase over FY 2012 in FY 2013. Since that time, several actions have significantly reduced GAO's FY 2013 appropriation from $511.3 million in FY 2012 to $479.5 million in FY 2013, including 1) a reduction of $5 million imposed in the final CR resulting in an enacted level of $506.3 million, and 2) the $25.7 million sequester and $1 million rescission required by the Budget Control Act--a total reduction of $31.7 million or 6.2 percent below FY 2012."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The annual appropriation for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program allows grantees to use up to 20 percent of program funds for planning, management, and administration (collectively referred to as "administration"). Specifically, grantees may use these funds for a range of activities, including general management, oversight, and coordination; fair housing activities; preparing community development plans; and policy planning. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) uses broad categories, such as "general program administration" and "fair housing activities," to record grantees' administrative expenses. According to HUD's data for the last decade, grantees primarily recorded their administrative expenses under the general program administration category, which includes staff salaries. Grantees GAO interviewed added that they also used administrative funds to cover general administrative costs such as supplies, training, and travel."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins ""

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The network providers and equipment manufacturers GAO spoke with reported taking steps in their security plans and procurement processes to ensure the integrity of parts and equipment obtained from foreign sources. Although these companies do not consider foreign-manufactured equipment to be their most pressing security threat, their brand image and profitability depend on providing secure, reliable service. In the absence of industry or government standards on the use of this equipment, companies have adopted a range of voluntary risk-management practices. These practices span the life cycle of equipment and cover areas such as selecting vendors, establishing vendor security requirements, and testing and monitoring equipment. Equipment that is considered critical to the functioning of the network is likely to be subject to more stringent security requirements, according to these companies. In addition to these efforts, companies are collaborating on the development of industry security standards and best practices and participating in information-sharing efforts within industry and with the federal government."

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In the past 2 years, notable progress has been made in the vast majority of areas that were on GAO's 2011 High Risk List. Congress passed several laws and took oversight actions to help address high-risk areas. Top administration officials at the Office of Management and Budget and the individual agencies have continued to show their commitment to ensuring that high-risk areas receive attention and action. Additional progress is both possible and needed in all the high-risk areas on GAO's 2013 list."

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Since GAO reported on overstays in April 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has taken action to address a backlog of potential overstay records by reviewing such records to identify national security and public safety threats, but unmatched arrival records remain in DHS's system. In April 2011, GAO reported that, as of January 2011, DHS's Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS) contained a backlog of 1.6 million potential overstay records. DHS uses ADIS to match departure records to arrival records and subsequently close records for individuals with matching arrival and departure records. Unmatched arrival records--those that do not have corresponding departure records--remain open and indicate that the individual is a potential overstay. In the summer of 2011, DHS reviewed the 1.6 million potential overstay records. As a result, DHS closed about 863,000 records and removed them from the backlog. Since that time, DHS has continued to review all potential overstay records for national security and public safety concerns. However, as of April 2013, DHS continues to maintain more than 1 million unmatched arrival records in ADIS. GAO's preliminary analysis identified nonimmigrants traveling to the United States on …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Sponsors of private sector pension plans are required to submit various reports to federal agencies and disclosures to participants depending on the plans' type, size, and circumstances. GAO identified more than 130 reports and disclosures stemming from provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA), and the Internal Revenue Code, as administered largely by three ERISA agencies: the Department of Labor (Labor), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). Although each plan sponsor is required to submit only certain of these reports and disclosures, determining which ones can be challenging and the agencies' online resources to aid plan sponsors with this task are neither comprehensive nor up-to-date."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The Census Bureau (Bureau) issued significant changes to rules governing the records that communities use to challenge the Bureau's population estimates. Previously, the Bureau routinely accepted all challenges, largely without regard to the data sources cited or provided so long as they supported the calculations and covered the appropriate reporting periods. According to Bureau officials, these changes are based on research that shows that estimates based on some methods and records (e.g., births, deaths, and migration) are substantially more accurate than estimates based on others. Among other changes, the Bureau modified procedures so that challenges by subcounty governments to the Bureau's estimates of people living in housing units will no longer affect countylevel population estimates. Moving forward, any such challenge resulting in an increase in the estimate of a subcounty population will be offset by a downward revision to the population estimate of all other communities in the same county. Also, the Bureau plans to routinely review population challenges in light of each community's population growth trend.Corroborating data will be required for challenges inconsistent with the trend."