Our Objective(s)To assess FAA's oversight of airport sponsors' compliance with the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act and the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) rent relief and economic relief reimbursement eligibility requirements.
Why This AuditThe CRRSA Act and ARPA awarded $10 billion in economic relief to eligible U.S. airports and concessions at those airports to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. By the end of December 2023, FAA had expended more than $8.5 billion in concession rent relief and economic relief grants. We previously identified weaknesses in FAA's policies and procedures for monitoring COVID-19 relief funds. Because of those weaknesses, we initiated this audit.
What We FoundFAA's revised policies have resulted in greater adherence to reimbursement requirements.
Our previous review of FAA's oversight of the COVID-19 relief grant funds determined that the Agency's oversight process regarding supporting documentation impacted its ability to monitor program performance. During that review, we identified $271 million in unsupported costs, $85 million in questioned costs, and $3 million in improper payments.
We recommended that FAA assess the risk of improper payments for different types of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) reimbursement requests and revise its policy on supporting documentation requirements to account for risk level. In response, FAA revised its COVID grant programs guidance, effective March 27, 2023.
With these changes, FAA significantly reduced unsupported and questioned costs, as well as improper payments.
FAA inconsistently implemented the CRRSA Act and ARPA rent relief programs.
To receive rent relief funds, FAA required airport sponsors to complete a Concession Plan. We found that FAA approved 76 percent of Concession Plans for the Airport Coronavirus Response Grant Program (ACRGP) and 70 Percent of Concession Plans for the Airport Rescue Grants Program (ARGP).
Our review of 60 plans identified some inconsistencies in the program's implementation and an error in FAA's review, including a nonprofit business receiving rent relief, inconsistent application of airport lounges' eligibility as concessions, and airport sponsors inconsistently populating data fields for Concession Plans. Despite these inconsistencies we did not identify any significant improper rent economic relief payments in our review sample.
RecommendationsFAA has reduced unsupported and questioned costs and improper payments for ACRGP and ARGP, so we are not making new recommendations.
