What GAO Found Since fiscal year 2014, the Department of the Treasury has increased the size and frequency of its debt auctions to finance persistent government deficits and refinance existing debt. In fiscal year 2025, Treasury held 444 auctions of bills, notes, and bonds to borrow $1.9 trillion for government operations and refinance $9.1 trillion of maturing debt. Treasury issues debt on a regular and predictable schedule to minimize investor uncertainty. It also uses other strategies to help keep borrowing costs lower than they might otherwise be. New Borrowing and Refinancing of Treasury Securities, Fiscal Years 2014–2025 Treasury auctions continue to attract sufficient demand from a variety of investors. As of September 30, 2025, domestic investment funds—such as money market funds, mutual funds, and hedge funds—were the largest buyers at auctions, followed by broker-dealers and foreign investors. Treasury’s debt management practices alone cannot address important risks that could reduce investor demand for Treasury securities and raise government borrowing costs. In some cases, Congress would need to take action to address the underlying causes of these risks. Unsustainable federal debt levels could cause investors to demand higher interest rates to compensate for increased risk—adding to growing federal interest costs. Debt limit impasses increase the risk of a government default, which would diminish the perception of Treasury securities as safe assets. A potential diminished international role for the U.S. dollar would weaken demand for Treasury securities among foreign investors that hold dollars as reserves, use them for global trade, or use them for other financial transactions. Why GAO Did This Study As of February 2026, debt held by the public was over $31 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office projects that federal deficits will average over $2 trillion annually through 2036, further adding to U.S. debt. To finance federal borrowing, Treasury must sell large amounts of Treasury securities at auction. The interest rates that investors are willing to accept at these auctions determines the government’s borrowing costs. Thus, Treasury’s issuance decisions and auction results are important to monitor as Treasury seeks to borrow at the lowest cost over time. GAO was asked to review Treasury’s debt management practices. This report describes debt management challenges and assesses Treasury’s strategies to manage them, describes changes in debt composition, auctions, and investor demand from fiscal years 2014 through 2025, and describes other debt management risks facing Treasury. GAO analyzed Treasury data, reviewed Treasury documents and market analyses, and interviewed Treasury officials and market participants.

What GAO Found GAO identified three potentially transformative technologies that are trending toward maturity and may need congressional attention over the next 10 years. These technologies are: Neural implants for human augmentation. Currently, neural implants are only available to people with certain medical needs. Future implants might enable direct brain-to-brain communication, hands-free control of computers, or the rapid acquisition of new skills and abilities. General availability of neural implants could compromise users' privacy and security, depending on who can access data from such implants. In addition, differentiating between medical and augmentative uses would involve subjective value judgments and ethical questions. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including determining whether to propose standards for the ethical development and use of neural implants or explore ways to ensure that privacy and security concerns are addressed. General purpose robots. General purpose robotics represents a fundamental shift from task-specific automation to flexible, adaptable machines capable of performing a wide range of tasks and potentially learning new tasks. Such robots could assist with a variety of tasks, including helping maintain infrastructure and assisting with disaster response. But their use could also lead to significant social impacts, such as risks associated with giving robots a level of autonomy in hazardous environments. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including determining whether to explore a broad range of oversight, risk assessment, or control mechanisms (such as software controls requiring human confirmation) to help mitigate these concerns. Orbital debris removal technologies. There are more than 15,000 pieces of orbital debris currently tracked, with more than a million pieces that are too small to track but can still damage satellites and other spacecraft that provide important services. Technology is in development to actively remove, relocate, or repurpose large, non-tumbling debris. This could reduce the risk of a catastrophic cascade of collisions, but would not eliminate it because small or tumbling debris constitute the vast majority of dangerous debris. Additionally, further development and use of novel technologies may be hampered by possible legal difficulties posed by the Outer Space Treaty. Policymakers could consider a variety of options, including supporting targeted research to fill technological gaps or initiating legal analyses to develop solutions to legal difficulties. GAO is not making recommendations but has identified several policy considerations for the Congress and others to weigh as these technologies continue developing. Why GAO Did This Study Science and technology are constantly evolving, and there is a need for analysis of emerging trends of the future to help prepare for disruptions that may have major impacts in the lives of Americans. To address this need, GAO developed this report focused on technologies approximately 10 years on the horizon. The goal is to provide foresight into developing technologies that could have significant impacts on Americans. GAO described developments in these technologies and how they may be affected by various elements which may be useful for policymakers, such as legislative bodies, government agencies, or other groups, to consider. These elements include the five domains in the STEER framework: social impacts, technology drivers, environmental impacts, economic drivers, and the regulatory landscape. To conduct this work, GAO relied on a review of scientific literature from academic journals and position papers and held semi-structured interviews with eleven experts across the three technologies. GAO relied on the judgment of its engineers and scientists and consideration of the collected information to describe key aspects of the technological trends, including identifying technological developments, market conditions, or economies of scale that could further accelerate the maturity of these new technologies, and considerations for policymakers.

What GAO Found The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provides grant awards to organizations that support its mission to enhance the health and well-being of all Americans. This includes funding to engage in reproductive health-related activities, such as pregnancy testing and education that crisis pregnancy centers (CPC) offer. CPCs, also called pregnancy help organizations or pregnancy resource centers, are generally nonprofit, faith-based organizations that provide certain reproductive health-related services, encourage parenting and adoption, and do not perform or refer clients for abortion services. GAO found there is no standard definition of a CPC, and differing perspectives exist regarding their characteristics and total number. For example, in 2025, stakeholder estimates in the U.S. ranged from about 2,400 to 2,800 CPCs. Stakeholders reported the majority of CPC funding comes from private sources—such as individuals and nongovernmental organizations. The total amount of federal funds obligated to CPCs is unknown because CPCs are not easily identified in USAspending.gov—the official government-wide source of public data on U.S. spending— compared to some other organizations, such as hospitals. For those CPCs GAO was able to identify, GAO found that HHS directly obligated at least $34 million in federal funds across 16 CPCs to provide reproductive health-related services, from fiscal years 2018 through 2024. However, this analysis likely underestimates total obligations to all CPCs due to challenges identifying these organizations. Why GAO Did This Study GAO was asked to review the amount of federal funding that CPCs have received. This report describes what available data show about CPCs and the amount of federal funds obligated to CPCs in the U.S. and its territories from fiscal years 2018 through 2024 for reproductive health-related grants. In general, an obligation is a commitment made by a federal agency that creates a legal liability to make payment. GAO reviewed HHS grant documentation and analyzed data on HHS grant obligations for fiscal years 2018 through 2024. GAO also interviewed HHS officials and representatives from a nongeneralizable selection of stakeholders with a range of perspectives, such as CPCs and researchers. For more information, contact Mary Denigan-Macauley at DeniganMacauleyM@gao.gov.

What GAO Found  GAO performed agreed-upon procedures solely to assist the Secretary of the Senate in ascertaining whether information from the Senate Gift Shop and the Senate Disbursing Office supported the Senate Gift Shop Revolving Fund’s (Fund) fiscal year 2024 receipts and disbursements. The procedures that GAO agreed to perform were related to the Senate Gift Shop’s processes over (1) daily receipts, weekly deposits, and monthly reconciliations for the Fund’s receipts and (2) purchasing, invoice payment, and monthly reconciliations for the Fund’s disbursements. The Secretary of the Senate is responsible for the sufficiency of these agreed-upon procedures to meet its objectives, and GAO makes no representation in that respect. The report provides details on the agreed-upon procedures and the results of performing each of the procedures. The Secretary of the Senate in an email response stated that she had no comments on the report. Why GAO Did This Study The Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration requested that GAO perform procedures on the Fund’s fiscal year 2024 receipts and disbursements. The Senate Gift Shop is under the authority of the Secretary of the Senate and is responsible for offering members, staff, and the general public the opportunity to purchase Senate memorabilia and gifts. Sales receipts are deposited into the Fund at the Senate Disbursing Office and then used to purchase inventory items for resale, supplies, and other services. For more information, contact: Cheryl E. Clark at clarkce@gao.gov.

What GAO Found Retirement plan sponsors, typically a person’s employer, share participant information, including personally identifiable information (PII), with service providers, such as asset managers and record keepers, who help administer the plan. However, these providers may also use PII and other information to market financial products and services or, in some cases, sell this information, according to GAO’s review of 31 service provider privacy disclosures (see figure). As more entities gain access to participant data, the chance that their information may be inadvertently exposed increases, putting participants at greater risk of identity theft or other fraudulent activity. Service providers that GAO interviewed noted, however, that greater use and sharing of participant information helped them to more effectively target products and services that might benefit participants. 31 Retirement Plan Service Provider Policies on Sharing or Selling Participant Data Selected service provider privacy disclosures that GAO reviewed did not consistently incorporate leading privacy practices. Fair Information Practice Principles emphasize key data privacy protection principles, such as transparency in data practices and restrictions to prevent unauthorized uses of personal information. All 31 disclosures described their policies for the collection and use of personal information, in alignment with the principle related to transparency. However, many of the disclosures did not fully align with other principles. For instance, most disclosures (19 of 31) did not indicate that additional consent would be sought before sharing or otherwise using personal information beyond originally specified purposes, contrary to the principle related to use limitation. Federal agencies and states have taken some steps to protect consumer data privacy, but the Department of Labor (DOL) has not taken actions against retirement plans for sharing participant data. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA) does not address data privacy explicitly, but DOL officials said that the agency believes that ERISA’s duties of prudence and loyalty should sufficiently deter plan sponsors and service providers from unauthorized uses of participant data. In addition, DOL issued cybersecurity guidance in April 2021 that discussed data privacy as a component of cybersecurity. However, DOL’s guidance does not include detailed information about good practices for sharing data about plan participants. Additional guidance would better position plan sponsors and service providers to understand acceptable uses of participant data and the circumstances in which they should obtain permission to use or disclose information about participants, particularly given potentially differing state requirements. Why GAO Did This Study About 126 million Americans participated in defined contribution retirement plans, with assets totaling over $9 trillion, as of 2023 (most recent data). As the number of participants and the volume of assets grow, so too does the importance of ensuring responsible handling of participants’ data. However, participants have filed several lawsuits alleging that service providers used their data for targeted marketing. GAO was asked to review retirement plan data privacy. This report examines (1) how selected retirement plans use and share participant data, (2) how selected service provider policies incorporate leading privacy practices, and (3) how federal agencies and selected states protect consumer data privacy as it applies to retirement plans. GAO assessed publicly available privacy disclosures from a nongeneralizable sample of 31 service providers selected based on size, among other factors. GAO identified the extent to which selected disclosures allowed participant data to be shared or sold for targeted marketing and compared the disclosures to recognized data privacy guidance. GAO also reviewed privacy disclosures from six selected plan sponsors. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations and interviewed officials from DOL and other federal agencies, among others. GAO also assessed state privacy laws and obtained information from officials in three selected states on the laws’ applicability to retirement plans.

What GAO Found The Departments of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) jointly operate the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program. Veterans experiencing homelessness receive HUD housing vouchers and VA case management delivered through local VA medical centers. VA has faced challenges hiring and retaining enough case managers. In fiscal year 2024, more than one-quarter of medical centers with two or more case managers had at least 20 percent of these positions unfilled (see figure). Factors contributing to vacancies included staff burnout and turnover. GAO analysis of VA data shows that annual case manager turnover ranged from 20 percent to 26 percent in fiscal years 2020–2024. Stakeholders at all eight sites GAO visited described periods of high turnover and persistent vacancies. The effects of insufficient staffing include reduced services for veterans and delays in admitting new participants. HUD-VASH Case Manager Staffing Levels in Fiscal Year 2024, by VA Medical Center Each dot represents a VA medical center’s staffing level for the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program. VA has taken steps to improve case manager hiring but has not consistently collected data on reasons that prevented veterans from entering HUD-VASH. Of 174,045 instances of veterans not being referred to the program in 2020–2024, VA did not document the reason in 151,296 (87 percent), according to GAO’s analysis. With more complete data on the reasons, VA could better assess its unmet need, adjust hiring strategies, and allocate case managers accordingly. VA then would be better positioned to serve more veterans. HUD launched the Tribal HUD-VASH pilot program in fiscal year 2016 to test a new approach to serving American Indian/Alaska Native veterans and had served over 1,100 veterans as of April 2025, according to HUD. HUD’s program design aligns to some extent with leading practices GAO identified in prior work. For example, HUD communicated with stakeholders at all stages of the program. But HUD has not clearly defined the program’s objectives or how it will measure progress toward them. HUD also has not implemented an evaluation plan. By fully incorporating leading practices, HUD could help ensure it has the information needed to make informed decisions about the program. Why GAO Did This Study HUD estimated that 32,882 veterans experienced homelessness on a single night in January 2024. Some policymakers note that this population faces significant barriers, including high housing costs. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 includes a provision for GAO to review VA case management and the availability of affordable housing for veterans experiencing homelessness. This report examines, among other things, challenges reported by VA staff and stakeholders related to (1) hiring and retaining case managers for HUD-VASH, and (2) implementing Tribal HUD-VASH. GAO analyzed data on HUD-VASH case managers for fiscal years 2020–2024; reviewed VA and HUD policies and guidance; and reviewed HUD documentation on the Tribal HUD-VASH program. GAO interviewed officials from VA and HUD and housing and service providers at eight sites GAO visited (selected for geographic diversity and prevalence of veteran homelessness).

What GAO Found In recent years, while homeowners insurance premiums increased slightly nationwide, premiums grew more rapidly in certain areas of the country. Premiums as a percentage of 2023 median household income were highest in Florida, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. The average U.S. homeowners insurance premium rose 3 percent in 2019–2024, after adjusting for inflation. But rates in parts of certain states, particularly southern coastal areas at high risk of wind damage, increased 25 percent or more. Estimated Total Change in Homeowners Insurance Premiums After Inflation, 2019–2024 The risk of different types of natural disasters can affect premiums to varying degrees. For example, GAO found that homes in areas with a high risk of wind damage had premiums about 58 percent higher than similar homes in areas with a medium level of wind risk. Moving from a medium to high level of wildfire risk was associated with an 8 percent increase in premiums. Increased risk of natural disasters also can reduce the availability of homeowners insurance. Insurance is state-regulated. The time state regulators take to review requests to raise premiums varies, reflecting differences in regulations and regulator priorities. In 2020–2024, the longest median approval times were in Colorado (331 days) and California (305 days). Some homeowners in states in which regulators take longer to approve premium changes tend to have more difficulty obtaining insurance than in other states. Some states have undertaken efforts to improve the availability and affordability of homeowners insurance, and legislation was introduced in Congress to support these efforts. GAO identified federal policy options that could improve the availability or affordability of the insurance. Stakeholders GAO surveyed expressed the strongest support for options that encourage mitigation, such as tax deductions or credits for building or upgrading homes to better withstand natural disasters. Stakeholders expressed mixed views on direct federal insurance or reinsurance programs and had concerns about federal costs and private market effects. Why GAO Did This Study Homeowners insurance plays a critical role in helping Americans recover from natural disasters, such as hurricanes and wildfires. But insurers have experienced rising losses from such disasters and homeowners in some areas experienced reduced affordability and availability of insurance. That is, insurance prices were greater than some homeowners could afford, and some were not able to obtain insurance. GAO was asked to review issues related to homeowners insurance. This report examines trends in insurance availability and affordability, how insurance is priced and regulated, and views on federal policy options to increase availability and affordability. GAO analyzed 2019–2024 data on private homeowners insurance and 2014–2023 information on insurers of last resort. GAO reviewed reports from government agencies, insurance industry groups, and consumer advocacy organizations. GAO interviewed representatives of the Federal Insurance Office, four insurance industry groups, three consumer advocacy organizations, and four state insurance regulators. GAO also sent a structured questionnaire on proposed policy options to 15 organizations, selected to obtain a range of views. GAO received responses from four industry associations, three consumer organizations, and three state regulators, for a 67 percent response rate. GAO also visited four states to speak with regulators and other stakeholders. For more information, contact Alicia Puente Cackley at CackleyA@gao.gov.