What GAO Found The Department of Energy (DOE) faces two challenges affecting Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) operations in the near term. First, the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) Office of Naval Reactors (Naval Reactors) is finding it increasingly difficult to meet testing requirements due to the age of the ATR, according to Naval Reactors officials. Second, Idaho National Laboratory’s spent fuel management facility that stores ATR spent fuel is nearing capacity. However, while DOE is working to fund the facility reconfiguration, DOE has not yet completed its evaluation of its Idaho Operations Office’s plan to reconfigure the facility to store spent fuel beyond 2030 when the facility will reach capacity. If DOE continues to delay approval of a reconfiguration plan to enable continued storage of ATR spent fuel after 2030, it risks a suspension of ATR operations, which provides vital testing capability that supports the Navy’s nuclear-powered fleet of submarines and aircraft carriers. Apart from the fuel storage issue, between June 2019 to March 2022 DOE identified three project options—through its Thermal Test Reactor Capability (TTRC) project—to maintain, modify, or replace the ATR and ensure an enduring thermal test reactor capability to meet the Navy’s and other users’ requirements through the mid- 2080s. The options were to (1) maintain and repair the ATR through the mid-2080s, (2) modify the ATR to improve its performance, or (3) replace the ATR with a new test reactor. DOE’s cost estimates for these project options ranged from $4.9 billion to $19.8 billion. Department of Energy’s Advanced Test Reactor Complex and Interior View of the Idaho National Laboratory Spent Fuel Management Facility In December 2025, DOE Office of Nuclear Energy officials told GAO the agency had suspended the TTRC acquisition project. They said that the plan, for now, is to maintain the ATR and improve its reliability to ensure operations until at least the early 2050s. GAO found that this new approach, similar to but less expensive than the first of the project options it identified, would cost approximately $1.26 billion over 20 years. However, DOE officials noted uncertainties in their estimate that may lead to higher costs. For example, DOE’s estimate to replace heat exchangers in the early 2040’s is technically complex and its estimate is primarily based on engineering judgement rather than a detailed, bottom up, cost analysis. DOE officials said they would continue to refine their approach along with cost estimates to meet ATR user requirements. Why GAO Did This Study DOE’s Advanced Test Reactor started operating in 1967 at the Idaho National Laboratory. It is the only U.S. test reactor capable of meeting nuclear fuel and structural material testing requirements for the joint U.S. Navy and NNSA Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, which supports the Navy’s nuclear-powered fleet of submarines and aircraft carriers. DOE and Naval Reactors identified an enduring mission need for a thermal test reactor capability through the mid-2080s, and began planning to address this need in 2019. Senate Report 118-188 to accompany S. 4638, a bill for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, includes a provision for GAO to review DOE’s plans and estimated costs to continue operating or replace the ATR and report on any challenges associated with implementing these plans. This report examines (1) the status of ATR operations, (2) options DOE identified for ensuring an enduring thermal test reactor capability and associated costs, and (3) the status of DOE’s plan for doing so. GAO reviewed ATR and TTRC project documents, toured the ATR, and interviewed DOE and Naval Reactors officials as well as other users of the ATR.

What GAO Found Mariner students typically take training courses to begin or advance their careers, and many such courses are approved by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to meet requirements for credentials to work on vessels. Institutions offering USCG-approved courses include one national and six state maritime academies, colleges and universities, and other training institutions such as ones affiliated with maritime unions. Of non-academy institutions, the Maritime Administration (MARAD) has designated 47 as part of the Centers of Excellence program for domestic maritime workforce training. The eligibility of training institutions for federal financial aid varies. For example, maritime academies are eligible for aid from MARAD and the Departments of Education and Veterans Affairs (VA). In contrast, most other training institutions do not have the approvals required for mariner students to use available aid. Of the 197 non-academy institutions that offered USCG-approved courses as of August 2025, GAO’s analysis found that less than 20 percent of them were approved to accept aid through the Departments of Education, VA, or Labor. Figure: Example of Mariner Career Pathway with Deck Roles MARAD has taken limited steps to help address challenges that mariner training institutions face in being able to accept federal financial aid. Survey respondents from 26 Center of Excellence institutions that offer mariner training said they face challenges such as navigating separate approval processes for Education, VA, and Labor. MARAD has identified strategies to address some of the challenges but has taken limited steps to implement them due to staff resource constraints. By leveraging existing resources, such as the U.S. Committee on the Marine Transportation System (CMTS), a federal interagency coordinating committee, MARAD could work with other agencies to help address challenges, such as sharing expertise from VA and Labor on aid approval processes. MARAD has shared information about its financial aid, and its strategies call for publicizing other agencies’ financial aid. However, MARAD has taken limited steps to implement these strategies. GAO’s review of MARAD websites found links to other agencies’ websites with little context on their financial aid, such as type of aid offered. Respondents from 11 of 26 surveyed institutions reported that MARAD had not communicated with them in the past 3 years on aid available to students, and respondents from another 11 institutions reported they did not know if MARAD had offered such communication. While MARAD has limited resources, additional targeted action to promote financial aid, such as using social media, could help MARAD reach more students. In addition, promoting available financial aid would better position MARAD to support its mission of growing the maritime workforce to promote national and economic security. Why GAO Did This Study The maritime industry relies on mariners to work on vessels carrying goods and passengers domestically and internationally. However, industry stakeholders have raised concerns about a mariner shortage. To work in the industry, mariners often take courses through a training institution. MARAD and the Departments of Education, VA, and Labor administer federal financial aid that students could use for mariner training. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 contains a provision for GAO to review issues related to federal financial aid for mariner training. This report addresses: 1) use of aid available for mariner training through MARAD, Education, VA, and Labor; 2) challenges mariner training institutions face related to this aid and MARAD’s steps to address those challenges; and 3) MARAD’s communication about aid available for mariner training. GAO reviewed MARAD documents and analyzed data from federal agencies and selected training institutions on financial aid for mariner training for fiscal years 2024 and 2025. GAO interviewed officials from MARAD, Education, VA, Labor, USCG, and four maritime unions. GAO also obtained information from a selection of mariner training institutions, including through a survey of 47 institutions in the Centers of Excellence program; 46 institutions responded.

What GAO Found Since GAO's January 2024 report, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) continued to expand its public-private partnership programs—the Reimbursable Services Program (RSP) and the Donations Acceptance Program (DAP). The RSP ensures partners, such as port authorities or local municipalities that own or manage ports, reimburse CBP for providing services that exceed CBP's normal operations. For example, RSP partners pay overtime for CBP personnel that provide services at ports of entry outside regular business hours. The DAP enables partners to donate property or provide funding for ports of entry infrastructure improvements. GAO found that CBP selected an additional 241 RSP applications for partnerships from October 2023 through December 2025, bringing the total of RSP selections to 639 since fiscal year 2013. CBP and its partners executed 798 memorandums of understanding for these 639 RSP partnerships. The memorandums outline how agreements are to be implemented at one or more ports of entry. Most (82 percent) of the memorandums cover agreements at air ports of entry. RSP partners reimbursed CBP a total of $302.8 million for overtime services for calendar years 2014 through 2025, according to CBP data. Number of Applications U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Selected for Its Reimbursable Services Program (RSP), Fiscal Year 2013 Through December 2025 GAO previously reported that the number of requests for RSP services and the number of applications that CBP receives were increasing due to a post-COVID-19 rebound and CBP’s outreach, particularly to general aviation partners. Officials told GAO that CBP’s stakeholder outreach has included communicating application requirements and time frames and encouraging potential applicants to apply in advance of when they will need services. CBP also entered into 24 new donation acceptance partnerships from October 2023 through December 2025, bringing the total number of agreements to 70 since fiscal year 2015. Partners span a variety of sectors such as state and local governments, private companies, and airline companies. Correspondingly, donations served a variety of purposes such as expanding inspection facility infrastructure (e.g., adding inspection lanes and booths), providing biometric detection services, and providing luggage for canine training. As of December 2025, 49 of the 70 projects were at land ports of entry. CBP officials estimated that the total value of all donations received from September 2015 through December 2025 was $277.3 million. Why GAO Did This Study On a daily basis in fiscal year 2024, over 1,150,000 passengers and pedestrians and over 88,500 truck, rail, and sea containers carrying goods worth approximately $9.2 billion entered the United States through 328 U.S. land, sea, and air ports of entry, according to CBP. To help meet demand for CBP inspection services, since 2013, CBP has entered into public-private partnerships under the RSP and DAP. Congress asked GAO to review the agreements, along with the funds and donations that CBP has received under the RSP and DAP. This report is part of a body of work in response to a statute dating back to 2018. In this report, GAO updates key information from its January 2024 report by examining the status of CBP public-private partnership program agreements, including the purposes for which CBP used the funds and donations from these agreements in fiscal years 2024 and 2025. GAO collected and analyzed information on any new RSP agreements, DAP agreements, and memorandums of understanding for both programs for fiscal years 2024 and 2025. GAO also analyzed data on the use of the programs and interviewed CBP officials to identify any significant changes to how the programs are administered. For more information, contact Heather MacLeod at MacLeodH@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Naval Reactors (Naval Reactors) is responsible for cleaning up contamination at four DOE-owned sites impacted by its operations: one each in Idaho and Pennsylvania, and two in New York. Cleanup involves decontamination and decommissioning of excess facilities—including naval nuclear propulsion prototypes—and remediation of contaminated soil. Estimated costs for these cleanup activities are reported as federal environmental liabilities. Demolition of the Submarine First Generation Westinghouse (S1W) Nuclear Propulsion Prototype Facility at the DOE Office of Naval Reactors Site in Idaho In 2019, Naval Reactors partnered with DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) to conduct large-scale decontamination and decommissioning on its behalf. Naval Reactors estimated its environmental liabilities for the inventory of work planned for completion under the partnership would be $5.8 billion in 2025 dollars. EM estimates it can complete the work for approximately $1 billion—a potential $4.8 billion in cost savings if all planned work is completed. Naval Reactors officials attribute the majority of these potential cost savings to EM’s nationwide network of experienced contractors. Naval Reactors and EM initially established a target date of 2050 to complete all work under the partnership but recently accelerated the target date to 2035. Naval Reactors planning documents indicate potential funding shortfalls for EM work under this accelerated timeline, which could present challenges to completing all planned work by 2035. However, EM work completed to date indicates the partnership is on track to save billions, even if all planned work is not completed. Naval Reactors officials said the agency is prioritizing its remaining decontamination and decommissioning work to address its most contaminated assets first, thereby limiting exposure risk to the public and the environment. Why GAO Did This Study Since 2017, the federal government’s environmental liability has been on GAO’s High Risk List of programs and operations that are vulnerable to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, or are in need of transformation. In fiscal year 2025, Naval Reactors had an estimated $6.5 billion in environmental liabilities for cleanup of contaminated facilities and the environment at the four DOE-owned sites. Senate Report 118-188 includes a provision for GAO to evaluate Naval Reactors’ plans for cleanup of legacy or excess contaminated facilities. This report focuses on Naval Reactors’ cleanup at DOE-owned sites, including the impact on related environmental liabilities. GAO assessed documents related to Naval Reactors’ cleanup plans and cost estimates. GAO visited three of the four DOE-owned sites to better understand contamination and cleanup efforts at those locations. GAO also interviewed Naval Reactors headquarters officials responsible for developing and implementing the agency’s decontamination and decommissioning strategy, as well as officials at each of the sites visited. For more information, contact Nathan Anderson at andersonn@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually to buy and maintain high-tech medical equipment (HTME)—such as magnetic resonance imaging equipment—to deliver health care to veterans. To maintain this equipment, and help ensure its safe use, medical centers can purchase maintenance services—often from equipment manufacturers—using agencywide or stand-alone contracts. Agencywide contracts help VA leverage its buying power to obtain quality medical equipment at the best prices possible. VA’s approach to buying HTME, uses agencywide contracts that generally support equipment maintenance. But not all regional contracting officials use these contracts when buying maintenance services and some unknowingly duplicated other officials’ work by awarding their own contracts for the services. Example of High-Tech Medical Equipment GAO found VA procurement guidance contained inconsistent information about whether the agency-wide contracts for HTME are mandatory when purchasing maintenance services. Additionally, regional contracting officials found the national contracting office resources for purchasing maintenance services to be unclear. Clarifying these resources and guidance on whether agencywide HTME contracts are mandatory and how to appropriately use them would reduce administrative burden and could save the government time and money. Selected medical centers generally reported satisfaction with maintenance services, and equipment was maintained per policy. These centers generally obtained similar prices as the agencywide contracts for selected equipment. However, GAO also found instances where regional contracting officials were not efficiently purchasing maintenance services. For example, in a few instances, officials did not clearly document the services purchased or verify that the prices paid matched the prices offered through the agencywide contracts. In one case, officials paid a higher price than the agencywide contract offered for the same service. Regional contracting officials responsible for purchasing maintenance attributed these instances in part to difficulty using resources for VA’s agencywide HTME contracts, and said they plan to seek a refund for the overpayment. Why GAO Did This Study In fiscal year 2024, VA obligated over $608 million for the purchase of HTME and related services, including maintenance. Since 2019, VA Acquisition Management has been on GAO’s High-Risk list, partially due to challenges with VA’s acquisition approach. GAO was asked to review how VA uses contracts to maintain HTME and whether its approach provides the needed flexibility to meet the agency’s mission. This report examines the extent to which (1) VA’s acquisition approach for purchasing HTME supports HTME maintenance and (2) the selected medical centers’ approaches to maintenance result in satisfactory and cost-effective maintenance, among other objectives. GAO analyzed VA’s HTME strategic sourcing contracts and data for federal procurement, contract performance, and equipment maintenance from fiscal years 2022 through 2024. GAO selected a nongeneralizable sample of eight medical centers and 16 maintenance orders and contracts based on diverse geographic regions, medical center characteristics, and contracting approaches. GAO conducted site visits and interviewed relevant regional and national contracting officials.

What GAO Found The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has long encountered challenges in executing and managing its acquisitions. For example, a 2015 independent review identified VA’s supply chain management as unduly complex and duplicative. VA acquisition management has been on GAO’s High Risk List since 2019 because of challenges such as inconsistent leadership and lack of strategic planning. While subsequent high-risk updates have noted meaningful progress, GAO continues to find persistent challenges with VA’s acquisition. VA’s current acquisition workforce is large and decentralized. While most contracting officials are in VA’s operating administrations, primarily the Veterans Health Administration, others are located in offices across the department. The Office of Acquisition, Logistics, and Construction oversees four department-level contracting organizations, but acquisition is dispersed among multiple levels across the agency. As of November 2025, VA’s acquisition workforce consisted of 2,658 contracting officials, spread across numerous organizations. Number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Veterans Affairs Contracting Officials (as of November 2025) VA and its administrations have taken steps in recent years to reorganize some aspects of its acquisition function. However, these efforts were relatively modest and did not collectively address the persistent fundamental challenges GAO has found in the past, such as managing its acquisition workforce and supply chain. Between April and November 2025, VA has reduced its contracting staff by approximately 15 percent and taken some initial steps toward reorganization. For example, in November 2025, VA announced that it plans to realign all procurement offices under a centralized structure at the department-level. However, as of February 2026, VA had yet to develop a full, broader plan that addresses all elements for the reorganization of its acquisition function, which remain under review, according to officials. Major reforms can be challenging and applying selected leading practices for agency reform would improve VA’s chances of success in its reorganization effort. GAO identified the following five leading practices that could help VA ensure the reorganization’s success: establishing goals and outcomes, involving key stakeholders and employees in developing reforms, managing and monitoring progress, conducting strategic workforce planning, and strengthening employee engagement during proposed reforms. Applying our leading practices for agency reform in planning, executing, and monitoring outcomes would allow VA to more effectively purchase the goods and services needed care to the nation’s veterans. Why GAO Did This Study VA manages one of the largest acquisition enterprises in the federal government—obligating tens of billions annually on health care, IT, construction, and benefits delivery. VA acquisition management has been on GAO’s High-Risk List since 2019 due to management challenges in the areas of developing adequate strategies and policies, managing its supply chain, managing its acquisition workforce, and providing consistent leadership and execution of acquisition management priorities. GAO was asked to examine VA’s acquisition organizational structure as the agency begins reorganizing. This report discusses acquisition management challenges that GAO has identified from previous work and identifies selected leading practices for agency reform to consider as VA reorganizes its acquisition function. For this report, GAO reviewed VA documentation and interviewed acquisition officials.

What GAO Found Department of Justice (DOJ) preliminary data indicate there were approximately 8,500 reported allegations of sexual abuse in federal prisons from 2014 through 2022, the most recent year that aggregate data were available. These data include allegations of sexual abuse of incarcerated individuals, including alleged abuse perpetrated by other incarcerated individuals and by Bureau of Prisons (BOP) employees. GAO identified challenges that could limit the effectiveness of BOP’s Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) audits, held every three years. These audits assess BOP facilities’ compliance with the National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape (PREA Standards) that were published by DOJ. Challenges that Could Limit the Effectiveness of PREA Audits Audit Goals. The goal of the audits is to determine facilities’ compliance with the PREA Standards, not for auditors to detect ongoing sexual abuse at the facilities. For example, auditors review whether facilities have PREA policies in place and collect PREA data, but auditors have no specific instructions to detect whether there is ongoing abuse at the facilities. Some BOP facilities passed their PREA audits despite widespread ongoing sexual abuse. Audit Contract.BOP’s current contracting approach for PREA audits may create risks that result in audits not meeting requirements. For example, BOP’s contract for conducting PREA audits conflicts with the Auditor Handbook regarding the amount of time to spend conducting the audit. This poses risks that auditors might not have sufficient time for onsite tasks (e.g., interviewing incarcerated individuals and staff). Auditor Access. GAO identified challenges with auditors accessing BOP documentation during PREA audits. BOP has implemented a new file sharing system, but does not have a plan to evaluate whether the system will address this challenge. By identifying options for audits to better detect ongoing sexual abuse in facilities, addressing risks in the audit contract, and evaluating its new file sharing system, BOP would be better positioned to ensure the effectiveness of its PREA audits. The PREA Standards were implemented in 2012. Since their implementation, there have been significant technological advancements, changes to correctional practices, and lessons learned. Despite these developments, GAO found that the PREA Standards have not been updated to reflect these changes. By conducting a review of the PREA Standards, DOJ could identify opportunities to strengthen prevention, detection, and response to sexual abuse in correctional facilities. Why GAO Did This Study PREA was enacted to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse in U.S. prisons and jails. BOP oversees about 141,000 incarcerated individuals. However, in recent years, several BOP employees have been convicted of sexually abusing incarcerated individuals at men’s and women’s facilities. Since 2022, nine BOP employees have been convicted of sexual abuse at one women’s facility, for example, including the warden and a chaplain. GAO was asked to review BOP’s efforts to address prison rape. This report examines the (1) number of sexual abuse allegations in BOP facilities from 2014 through 2022, (2) extent that BOP leverages oversight mechanisms to detect sexual abuse, and (3) challenges BOP faces in facilitating the reporting process and reducing sexual abuse. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, BOP policies and documents, and data. GAO also interviewed BOP officials responsible for implementing PREA. In addition, GAO visited four BOP facilities to, among other things, conduct nongeneralizable interviews with incarcerated individuals and staff. GAO selected facilities based on variety in location, gender, and number of sexual abuse allegations.

What GAO Found GAO found that 242 federal programs, inclusive of 12 tax expenditures, provide a range of benefits and services to pregnant women, children through age 5, or their families, among other groups. Of the 242 programs, 15 provide some amount of direct services solely to this population. Fiscal Year 2024 Federal Programs That Provide Some Amount of Direct Services Solely to Pregnant Women, Children Through Age 5, or Their Families, by Agency The 15 programs are fragmented across five federal agencies, meaning the programs overlap across the agencies to some extent—with similar populations or services. However, the programs are not duplicative because they vary in beneficiary population characteristics or type of services provided. Officials from all 15 programs reported coordinating with other programs serving pregnant women, children through age 5, or their families. Coordination improves agencies’ ability to provide services and improves outcomes for beneficiaries. Three of the 15 programs have not fully established a performance management process at the federal level—in which they set performance goals, collect performance information, and use that information to assess results: HHS’s Preschool Development Grants Birth Through Five Program. HHS officials said this program does not set federal performance goals because it monitors progress toward state-defined goals in order to maximize state flexibility. However, a federal performance management process allows a program to assess national progress across varied state activities. USDA’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Farmers Market Nutrition Program. USDA officials said such a process is not warranted, in part, because the program is small and lacks dedicated funding for this. However, regardless of program size, Congress and taxpayers need to know how effectively tax dollars are being spent. VA’s Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Maternity Care Coordinator Program. Officials said they are working on establishing a process, but have not yet completed it. By fully establishing such a process, the agencies would have a more systematic way to identify potential strategies to reduce any unnecessary fragmentation and overlap, ensure that the programs are achieving their intended results, and target resources appropriately. Why GAO Did This Study Federal programs play a significant role in supporting many pregnant women, children through age 5, and their families by providing services to address their distinct needs. GAO was asked to identify programs that serve pregnant women, children through age 5, or their families. This report examines (1) federal programs that serve this population, including programs that provide some amount of direct services solely to this population; (2) the extent to which duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists among programs that provide some amount of direct services solely to this population; and (3) the extent to which programs that provide some amount of direct services solely to this population have established a performance management process. GAO identified 250 potentially relevant programs primarily using the federal assistance listings on the System for Award Management website, SAM.gov. To verify the list of programs and collect additional information about them, GAO sent a data collection instrument to the 18 federal agencies that administer the programs. GAO also reviewed relevant agency documentation and interviewed agency officials, as appropriate.

What GAO Found The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) reported over $1.5 billion in repair needs across its about 4,300 operating facilities, as of June 2025. EM’s budget request included over $950 million in maintenance spending in fiscal year 2026, an 80 percent increase since fiscal year 2020. EM Direct-Funded Maintenance and Repair Spending, Fiscal Years (FY) 2020–2026 EM sites and headquarters use data from condition assessments of facilities to make maintenance decisions. EM validates these data for accuracy using scorecards. According to GAO’s analysis, some scorecards included inaccurate or unsupported data and did not have completed corrective action plans. Also, GAO’s review of site responses to a questionnaire found that some sites used different methods to generate data elements categorized as performance measures by a DOE order. As EM uses these data to make decisions for funding repairs, accurate and comparable data would help EM to better plan, prioritize, and fund the continued reduction of its maintenance needs. EM headquarters uses the Master Asset Plan—a document that outlines the infrastructure necessary to meet EM’s current mission requirements—to document its maintenance needs. Eight of 13 EM sites reported that this plan does not capture their maintenance needs, in part because sites have more granular data about their maintenance needs than headquarters uses in this plan. This plan also contains 19 projects identified in a cost savings model that could use surplus funds to produce about $120 million in savings for EM. However, EM has not communicated the benefits of completing these unfunded maintenance projects to Congress. Aligning its plan with EM site needs and communicating potential benefits would help EM to manage its maintenance needs and save millions of dollars in the long term. Why GAO Did This Study EM is responsible for addressing hazardous and radioactive waste at sites contaminated from decades of nuclear weapons production and nuclear energy research. EM has reported significant repair needs and deferred maintenance, which increase safety, cost, and mission risks. EM sites reported that these costs will further increase over the next 5 years. Senate Report 118-188 accompanying a bill for the fiscal year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act includes a provision for GAO to evaluate the status of EM’s infrastructure and how EM completes and prioritizes maintenance of its infrastructure. This report (1) describes the status of EM’s infrastructure, (2) examines the extent to which EM maintenance practices align with DOE policies and guidance, and (3) examines how EM prioritizes maintenance in its budget planning. GAO reviewed data on EM facilities and interviewed EM headquarters, site officials, and contractor staff. GAO also analyzed responses from EM sites to a questionnaire on their infrastructure maintenance and reviewed EM budget materials.

What GAO Found Economic conditions in the Freely Associated States (FAS)—the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), and Republic of Palau—include population loss and economic decline. FSM’s population decreased by 26 percent between the 2010 and 2023 censuses, and RMI lost 20 percent of its population from 2011 to 2021. U.S. and FAS officials said high levels of out-migration have exacerbated skilled labor shortages and rising costs for government services. Though Palau’s population has remained relatively stable, a sharp drop in tourism during the COVID-19 pandemic drove a decline in its gross domestic product from 2019 through 2022. The three countries plan to use compact funding to prioritize education and health. Their allocations of compact grants for fiscal year (FY) 2025 largely support personnel salaries in the education and health sectors, and the countries plan to use compact infrastructure funds for projects that include schools and hospitals. However, FAS officials told GAO that project implementation has encountered obstacles such as delayed compact funds disbursement, rising construction costs, and labor shortages. Examples of Compact-Funded Projects in the Marshall Islands, May 2025 The FAS have not yet met certain oversight requirements established by the amended compacts, while U.S. oversight efforts are underway with some delays. Most documents that FSM, RMI, and Palau are required to submit were not submitted on time, and some remain outstanding. For example, since FY 2019, all three countries’ required single audit reports—critical to U.S. compact oversight efforts—have been late. FAS officials said they are taking steps to improve the reports’ timeliness, such as by increasing financial accounting capacity. U.S. agencies have begun to implement oversight efforts. For example, the U.S.–FSM and U.S.–RMI joint management and accountability committees met in August 2025. However, delayed U.S. appointments to these committees affected members’ ability to discuss all planned issues. Also, the Interagency Group on the Freely Associated States submitted its FY 2024 report on its activities and recommendations for compact implementation to Congress 10 months late. State Department officials told GAO that plans to establish and staff a unit to support FAS relations and compact implementation by March 2029 had been paused due to the federal government’s hiring freeze and operational constraints. Why GAO Did This Study The U.S. has provided economic assistance through compacts of free association to FSM and RMI since 1986 and to Palau since 1994. This assistance—including grants overseen by the U.S. Department of the Interior as well as programs and services provided by various U.S. agencies—is intended to promote the economic advancement and self-sufficiency of the FAS. The compacts also provide the U.S. with military access in these strategically located countries in the Pacific. In 2023, the U.S. signed amended compacts with FSM, RMI, and Palau, extending economic assistance for another 20 years. The compacts provide for, among other things, grant assistance and trust fund contributions for the FSM, RMI, and Palau that total to more than $6 billion collectively through 2043. The Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2024 included a provision for GAO to review U.S. assistance provided under the amended 2023 compacts. This report (1) describes economic conditions and associated risks in each of the FAS, (2) describes funding provided under the amended compacts as well as planned uses of the funding, and (3) examines the extent to which the FAS and U.S. agencies have met selected oversight requirements established by the compacts. GAO reviewed relevant documents and data. GAO also observed projects funded by compact assistance and interviewed FAS and U.S. government officials in the three countries in 2025. For more information, contact Latesha Love Grayer at lovegrayerl@gao.gov.

What GAO Found The use of artificial intelligence (AI) could help federal agencies carry out key activities in federal small business contracting and research programs, according to a panel of experts convened by GAO. Examples of such activities include conducting market research, reviewing proposals, and preventing fraud. The Small Business Administration (SBA), which coordinates agencies’ Offices of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and oversees agencies’ Small Business Innovation Research and Technology Transfer programs, also could use AI to support activities such as analyzing data submitted by agencies and helping to draft annual reports. But these potential AI uses also carry risks, including inaccurate outputs and data privacy or security concerns, according to experts and literature. Agencies also may face barriers in adopting AI, including lack of staff with technical expertise and a cumbersome process for authorizing new technologies. Prior to 2025, SBA had a number of AI use cases—specific scenarios in which AI is designed, developed, procured, or used—in various stages of adoption. In March 2025, SBA paused all AI use to review compliance with recent executive orders and reflect updated agency priorities. SBA officials stated that AI use will restart after revised AI policies are implemented. As of April 2026, SBA officials told us that AI policies were still being revised and that the pause remained in effect, except for seven pilot or pre-pilot projects to test the security, value, and performance of different AI capabilities. SBA has not consistently met requirements for publicly reporting AI use cases. SBA reported its first inventory of its AI use cases in March 2026, but requirements to do so have been in development since 2020. SBA officials said they could not determine why inventories had not been published, citing a lack of documentation and turnover among staff responsible for AI reporting. Federal Agency AI Use Case Reporting Requirements and SBA Actions Without policies and procedures for publicly publishing its AI use case inventory, SBA may continue to risk not complying with the Advancing American AI Act. Not reporting AI use cases also hinders transparency and congressional and public oversight of AI use cases. Why GAO Did This Study AI has seen significant advancements in recent years, with new capabilities and risks emerging at a rapid pace, and federal agencies have increasingly adopted its use. Small business contracting and innovation grants—areas coordinated or overseen by SBA—have drawn particular interest from industry, academia, and government as an area with potential applications for AI. GAO was asked to review issues related to federal use of AI in small business contracting and innovation grants. This report discusses the potential use of AI by SBA, agency Offices of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, and Small Business Innovation Research and Technology Transfer programs, as well as SBA’s public reporting of its AI use. To conduct this work, GAO reviewed federal agency documentation and literature on AI and procurement and interviewed officials from SBA, the Department of the Army, the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of Personnel Management, and the National Science Foundation, selected because they had experience using AI relevant to contracting or innovation grants. GAO also convened a panel of experts with specializations in AI technology, federal AI use, and federal procurement.