Of the 15 federal agencies involved in food safety oversight, FDA and FSIS have primary oversight responsibility. Table 1 summarizes the food safety responsibilities of all 15 agencies. U.S. food safety oversight is not the only federal effort that involves multiple agencies. Many federal government initiatives require the coordinated efforts of more than one federal agency, level of government, or sector. Nevertheless, agencies face a range of challenges and barriers when they attempt to work collaboratively. The need for improved interagency collaboration has been highlighted throughout our work over many years. Our reports over the past 4 years identified more than 90 areas where opportunities exist for executive branch agencies or Congress to reduce fragmentation, overlap, and duplication. We found that resolving many of these issues require better collaboration among agencies. In addition, collaboration and improved working relationships across agencies are fundamental to addressing many of the issues that we have designated as high risk due to their vulnerability to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, or because they are most in need of transformation. Furthermore, for almost 2 decades, we have reported on agencies’ missed opportunities for improved collaboration through effective implementation of GPRA. In our June 1997 assessment of the status of GPRA implementation government-wide, we found that agencies faced challenges addressing crosscutting issues, which led to fragmentation In 2004—more than 10 years after GPRA’s enactment— and overlap. we found that there still was an inadequate focus on addressing issues that cut across federal agencies.GPRA’s enactment, our work continues to demonstrate that the needed collaboration is not sufficiently widespread. Now, more than 20 years since Both Congress and the executive branch have recognized the need for improved collaboration across the federal government. In January 2011, GPRAMA amended provisions of GPRA to add new requirements for addressing crosscutting efforts in federal strategic and performance planning that help drive collaboration, among other things. Our review of HHS and USDA strategic and performance planning showed that both agencies have taken steps to implement GPRAMA’s crosscutting requirements for their food safety efforts. However, the agencies do not fully address crosscutting food safety efforts in their strategic and performance planning. HHS and USDA vary in the amount of detail they provide on their crosscutting food safety efforts in their individual strategic and performance planning documents. Fully addressing crosscutting efforts in strategic and performance planning documents is important in helping to provide a comprehensive picture of the federal government’s performance on food safety. GPRAMA established a new framework for a more coordinated, crosscutting, and integrated approach to focus on results and improve government performance. The new GPRAMA framework could also help to ensure that agencies’ goals are complementary, that strategies are mutually reinforcing, and that common performance measures are used, as appropriate. It added new requirements for addressing crosscutting efforts in federal strategic and performance planning, including the following: Agency strategic goals and objectives. GPRAMA requires agencies to include in their strategic plan a description of how they are working with other agencies to achieve their goals and objectives. Agency performance goals. GPRAMA requires agencies to include in their performance plan a description of (1) the organizations, program activities, regulations, policies, and other activities that contribute to each performance goal, both within and external to the agency and (2) a description of how the agency is working with other agencies to achieve its performance goals. Agency priority goals. Certain agencies—including HHS and USDA—are required to develop a limited number of agency priority goals every 2 years. These goals are to reflect the highest priorities of each agency and be informed by input from both federal and nonfederal stakeholders. According to OMB guidance, in developing their priority goals, agencies are to consider several criteria, including areas where cross-component or cross-agency coordination is needed to improve outcomes. Agencies are also required to conduct quarterly performance reviews. In these reviews, agencies are required to coordinate with relevant personnel within and outside the agency who contribute to the goal’s accomplishment and assess whether organizations, program activities, regulations, policies, and other activities are contributing as planned. In addition, agencies are required to make information about each priority goal available on OMB’s Performance.gov website on a quarterly basis, including a description of (1) the organizations, program activities, regulations, policies, and other activities that contribute to each goal, both within and external to the agency; (2) how the agency is working with other agencies to achieve the goal; and (3) whether relevant organizations, program activities, regulations, policies, and other activities are contributing as planned. Our reporting on GPRAMA’s implementation has found that the executive branch needs to more fully use the GPRAMA framework to address pressing federal governance challenges, including crosscutting issues. We have found that effective GPRAMA implementation could play an important role in clarifying desired outcomes, in addressing program performance that spans multiple organizations, and in facilitating future actions to reduce, address, or better manage unnecessary duplication, overlap, and fragmentation. HHS and USDA strategic and performance planning documents include a number of goals and objectives related to food safety.2.) (See figs. 1 and In HHS’s current performance plan, HHS lists three performance goals related to food safety, including its priority goal on Salmonella reduction. (See fig. 1.) HHS identifies FDA as an internal contributor to these goals but does not discuss any work with other agencies to achieve the goals. GPRAMA Requirement Agencies shall identify agency priority goals from among the performance goals of the agency. Agencies shall identify on Performance.gov federal organizations, program activities, regulations, policies, and other activities—both internal and external to the agency—that contribute to each of their priority goals and to describe whether they are contributing as planned. Agencies shall also describe on Performance.gov how they are working with other agencies to achieve each of their priority goals. HHS and USDA have each identified one priority goal related to food safety, both focusing on a different aspect of Salmonella reduction.figs. 1 and 2.) On Performance.gov, HHS and USDA identify internal contributors to these goals and include some details on the external agencies they are collaborating with and the nature of the collaboration. Specifically, USDA discusses work being carried out internally by FSIS, and HHS discusses work being carried out internally by FDA and CDC, in partnership with IFSAC. Additionally, HHS identifies FSIS as an external contributor, and USDA identifies FDA and CDC as external contributors. However, HHS does not specify what FSIS is doing to contribute to HHS’s goal. USDA does provide an example of actions by CDC and FDA, but the example occurred in the past and is not a current effort to achieve (See the goal. Specifically, USDA states that FSIS worked with FDA and CDC on the development of HHS’s agency priority goal. Both agencies identify FoodNet—a collaborative program led by CDC and involving FDA, FSIS, and 10 state health departments—as the source of the data used to measure progress toward the goals. In addition, USDA states that its goal aligns with illness reductions identified in the Healthy People 2020 initiative. Our review found several relevant crosscutting efforts that are not identified in HHS and USDA strategic and performance planning documents. For example, FDA and FSIS officials both told us that they colead the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, which tracks whether foodborne and other bacteria are resistant to the antibiotics used to treat and prevent the spread of illness. In addition, FDA and FSIS officials told us about their involvement with the Food Emergency Response Network, which integrates the nation’s food-testing laboratories at the federal, state, and local levels to better respond to emergencies involving biological, chemical, or radiological contamination of food. The network’s steering committee is cochaired by senior executives from FDA and FSIS, and its members include numerous federal and state partners. However, neither of these efforts is discussed in HHS and USDA strategic or performance plans or on Performance.gov. Furthermore, HHS and USDA have various interagency agreements in place with other food safety agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, aimed at assisting one another in carrying out their food safety oversight responsibilities. Moreover, in its strategic and performance planning documents, USDA discusses several collaborative mechanisms, such as IFORC and IRAC, in relation to its food safety goals and objectives. IFORC and IRAC also include HHS agencies; however, in its strategic and performance planning documents, HHS does not mention these efforts in relation to its food safety goals and objectives. Similarly, HHS discusses some collaborative mechanisms, such as PFP and Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8),USDA agencies, but USDA does not discuss them. By not fully addressing crosscutting program efforts in their strategic and performance planning documents, HHS and USDA miss important opportunities to help ensure that their food safety goals are complementary, and strategies are mutually reinforcing. In addition, they miss opportunities to highlight their crosscutting efforts and provide greater confidence that they are working in concert with others to achieve common outcomes in a way that conserves scarce resources and enhances the overall effectiveness of the federal effort. FDA and FSIS officials told us they recognize that more could be done to implement GPRAMA crosscutting requirements. Fully addressing crosscutting food safety efforts in individual strategic and performance planning documents is an important first step toward providing a comprehensive picture of the federal government’s performance in overseeing food safety. However, the agency-by-agency focus of individual planning documents alone does not provide the integrated perspective on federal food safety performance necessary to guide congressional and executive branch decision making, and inform the public about what federal agencies are doing to ensure food safety. Those individual documents could, however, provide building blocks toward the next, more challenging task of developing a single, government-wide performance plan for food safety.