1). To remain competitive in the competitive product delivery market, USPS  officials have stated that information gained from scanning is leveraged to  provide customers with real-time visibility for the location of a competitive  product in USPS’s delivery process as well as accurate estimates of the  delivery time of USPS’s competitive products. 2). These barcodes link the item with information in USPS’s  databases such as: the delivery address, the type of USPS product, and  when the item was accepted by USPS. 3). USPS’s Competitive Products Are Almost Always Scanned Correctly, Although Some Missed and Inaccurate Scans Occur

USPS reports we reviewed indicate that competitive products are almost  always scanned and scanned correctly. According to USPS data we reviewed for the first three quarters  of fiscal year 2018, all but one of USPS’s 67 districts met USPS’s  scanning goals for all five required scans for competitive products. Additionally, in one district we visited, a USPS internal report showed that  every group of post offices in the district met its scanning goal for the  arrival-at-unit scan for the week, the preceding 4 weeks, and the year-to- date periods, and all but one group of post offices met their scanning  goals for the acceptable delivery scan for the same measurement period. For example, one USPS internal report for a  district we visited showed that for one week, USPS employees in the  district missed about 0.73 percent of the expected delivery scans for  competitive products. Due to USPS’s large volume of competitive  products, a small percentage of products not scanned can represent large  numbers of items. For example, about 155,000 competitive products were  missing a delivery scan in one district’s 2018 year-to-date report we  reviewed. USPS Has Designed Policies and Procedures to Support Accurate Scanning of Competitive Products, but Limitations Could Contribute to Scanning Errors

		USPS’s Scanning Policies and Procedures Are Not Based on Standards for Operational Internal Controls

USPS has not based its operational policies and procedures, such as  those that support the accurate scanning of competitive products, on any  standards for internal controls. Instead, USPS officials stated that USPS  has designed its operational policies and internal controls over the years  based on its unique responsibilities, management experience, and sound  business practices. However, officials could not identify any specific  standards or framework they had followed. Without standards for an effective  internal-control system for its operational policies and procedures for  scanning competitive products, USPS may miss opportunities to improve  how it achieves its mission to deliver those important products. USPS officials agreed with some of these recommendations  and stated that they are taking action to address them. For  example, GAO analysis of USPS data showed that USPS’s carrier  workforce increased by 6.4 percent between fiscal years 2015 and  2017. USPS Generates Reports for Tracking Scanning Performance, but Reports May Not Be Used Consistently by Managers to Resolve Scanning Issues

Given that inaccurate scans can and do occur, it is important that postal  managers explore and investigate any instances of missed or inaccurate  scans. USPS’s Scanning Performance: Delivery Standard  Operating Procedures for managers are a list of bullet points outlining  managers’ responsibilities to meet scanning performance target goals  and not a list of detailed procedures for managers to follow, such as how  to use Report 1 to identify items that do not have all the required scans. In  addition, USPS officials told us that this list has not been updated since  approximately October 2005. Further, since USPS’s standard operating procedures for  scanning are located in numerous documents and are not always  consistent—and given USPS’s reliance on stand-up talks and meetings to  keep employees current—USPS employees may not always have  accurate scanning procedures easily accessible to them. (Recommendation 2)
The Postmaster General should create standard operating procedures for  managers on how to address inaccurate scans and use available reports  to investigate and resolve scanning issues.
Why GAO Did This Study

USPS's competitive products have become increasingly important, comprising about 28 percent of USPS's total revenue. USPS scans these packages at various points throughout the postal network. When scans are inaccurate or missing, questions are raised about the veracity of USPS's data on scanning performance and can lead to customer complaints.
GAO was asked to review USPS's scanning policies and procedures. In this report, GAO (1) describes USPS's scanning performance and (2) examines how USPS ensures accurate scanning. GAO reviewed USPS's policies and procedures and assessed them against internal control standards; interviewed officials from USPS and five high-volume mailers; and conducted site visits to six post offices in two USPS districts that represented a range of volume, number of routes, and performance.

What GAO Found

Mail products over which the United States Postal Service (USPS) does not exercise market dominance, such as many of its packages, are called competitive products. These items are scanned throughout the mail delivery system to track their progress (see figure). USPS data show that these products are almost always scanned. For example, USPS data showed that for the first three quarters of fiscal year 2018; all but one of USPS's 67 districts met their scanning goals. Additionally, mailers that account for a high volume of USPS's competitive products told GAO that they believed USPS was generally scanning products correctly. However, a small percentage of missed or inaccurate scans occur. For example, a report from one USPS district showed that for one week, 0.73 percent of the products delivered were missing a scan and that for the fiscal year to date almost 155,000 competitive products were missing a delivery scan.
USPS has designed and implemented procedures and activities to help ensure accurate scanning, but some limitations could contribute to scanning errors. For example, USPS has not based its operational procedures for scanning on any internal control standards. USPS officials said the procedures were based on USPS's unique responsibilities, management experience, and sound business practices, but the officials could not identify specific standards or a framework that they followed as the basis for the procedures. USPS officials said they did not believe any internal controls standards applied to these procedures. By not basing procedures on standards, USPS may miss opportunities to improve how it achieves its mission to scan and measure the performance of competitive products. Additionally, USPS's scanning procedure documents, such as for outlining specific delivery scanning steps, are not always consistent, and USPS relies on more informal methods, such as meetings with employees to communicate changes. Thus, employees may not have accurate procedures available to them. Finally, USPS lacks procedures to help managers identify and address incorrect scans, address customer complaints or otherwise address scanning irregularities. For example, USPS's guidance for managers is limited to a list of bullet-points that do not detail the steps managers should follow to resolve scanning irregularities. In addition, this list has not been updated since 2005. Without consistent or detailed procedures, USPS's employees and managers may not scan items accurately or find information needed to resolve scanning issues—a situation that could hinder USPS's ability to reduce inaccurate or missing scans for these important mail products.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that USPS: (1) identify and adopt internal control standards for its operational activities such as for scanning of competitive products; (2) improve the communication of procedures for scanning competitive products; and, (3) create procedures for supervisors on how to address inaccurate scans and resolve scanning issues. USPS agreed to explore addressing the first recommendation and agreed with the other two recommendations.