Federal Reports

What We Looked At The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) requires agencies to implement information security programs. FISMA also requires agencies to have annual independent evaluations performed to determine the effectiveness of their programs and report the results of these reviews to the Office of Management and Budget. To meet this requirement, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) requested that we perform its fiscal year 2024 FISMA review. We contracted with Williams Adley & Company-DC LLP, an independent public accounting firm, to conduct this audit subject to our oversight. The audit objective was to determine the effectiveness of STB’s information security program and practices in five function areas—Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. We performed a quality control review (QCR) of Williams Adley’s report and related documentation. What We Found Our QCR disclosed no instances in which Williams Adley did not comply, in all material respects, with generally accepted Government auditing standards. Our Recommendations STB concurs with Williams Adley’s audit’s findings and nine recommendations. 

The EPA failed to properly and timely disclose to the OIG unmistakable indicators of fraud against the EPA, the Clean Air Act, and the EPA's programs and operations by a business entity owner. As a result of the EPA's failure to properly disclose these indicators of fraud in a timely manner to the OIG, the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to pursue criminal charges against the business entity owner involved. Failure to disclose fraud, waste, and abuse, or other potential improper or illegal conduct involving an EPA program or operation can negatively impact the EPA's ability to fulfill its mission and ensure the soundness of, and confidence in, the EPA's programs and operations.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) inspected the Southeast Louisiana Veterans Health Care System in New Orleans, Louisiana, in 2021 and made six recommendations. This follow-up inspection found that issues had not been fully resolved in response to those recommendations. The follow-up inspection reassessed the same financial activities and administrative processes: Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor program use, purchase card use, administrative staffing levels, and pharmacy operations.The inspection team visited the Southeast Louisiana Veterans Health Care System in August 2023; interviewed healthcare system leaders and staff; and reviewed data, supporting documents, and processes related to the healthcare system’s financial efficiency.The OIG identified issues with Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor program use, purchase card use, and pharmacy operations. In each area, the healthcare system made limited progress improving issues identified in the OIG’s 2021 report. The inspection team found that the healthcare system improved administrative staffing efficiency, but more opportunities for improvement exist.The OIG reiterated four recommendations from the 2021 inspection where the plans to address the recommendations had not been fully implemented. The OIG also added seven new recommendations to the healthcare system director designed to help officials improve performance. The intent is for system leaders to use these recommendations as a road map to improve financial operations. The recommendations address issues that, if left unattended, may eventually interfere with effective financial efficiency practices and the strong stewardship of VA resources.

Objective: To determine whether the Social Security Administration timely and accurately processed cases where a beneficiary's Medicare premium was higher than the Agency benefit payment.

An Amtrak carman based in Miami, Florida, signed a civil settlement agreement on September 3, 2024, with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida. The employee was ordered to pay $10,717 in restitution and a $1,883 penalty. Our investigation found that the employee falsified applications for two pandemic relief loans. The first loan was an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) in the amount of $19,500. The loan was for an alleged agricultural business operated out of his home. The second loan was a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan in the amount of $8,217, which was for an alleged trucking business. We interviewed the employee and he admitted that the agricultural business did not exist, and that his trucking business did not have any revenue or any employees. As a result, the employee received funds to which he was not entitled.

We reviewed all 17 recommendations from Report No. C-IN-MOA-0013-2010 and consider them closed.