Federal Reports

Our Objective(s)To assess FHWA's process for approving Advanced Transportation Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Reimbursements grant program (ATCMTD) disbursements by reviewing and verifying that program disbursements are supported and valid.
Why This AuditFHWA's ATCMTD grant program reimbursed its grant recipients approximately $89 million from fiscal years 2021 to 2023 to improve safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure return on investment. To protect Federal grant funds from misuse, it is key that FHWA has strong financial management and sufficient oversight of the ATCMTD program.
What We FoundFHWA approved direct recipients' ATCMTD reimbursement requests without always validating the sufficiency of supporting documentation.

The effectiveness of FHWA's ATCMTD financial oversight relies on the Agency reviewing direct recipients' supporting documentation prior to approving reimbursement requests for payment.
For one ATCMTD direct recipient in our sample, there was not enough detail in the supporting documentation to support almost $1.9 million in reimbursements.
FHWA's quarterly reports, used to validate ATCMTD direct recipients' supporting documentation for reimbursement requests, did not identify that $1.9 million in costs were not adequately supported.
FHWA's Office of Acquisition and Grants Management made $1.9 million in payments for unsupported costs.

FHWA does not sufficiently monitor State DOTs' oversight and internal controls for validating ATCMTD reimbursement requests.

FHWA's Stewardship and Oversight agreements largely delegate financial oversight to State DOT ATCMTD grant recipients but the Agency must maintain sufficient internal control processes to validate State DOTs are adhering to fiscal expectations.
However, FHWA was not aware there was insufficient information for approving officials to verify costs State DOTs submitted for our six sampled reimbursements. Also, State DOTs in our sample were not maintaining supporting documentation on all ATCMTD reimbursement requests as required by their Stewardship and Oversight Agreements.

RecommendationsWe made 5 recommendations to strengthen FHWA oversight of ATCMTD reimbursement requests.

The U.S. Department of Education administers the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which authorizes formula grants to States under Part B to assist them in meeting the excess costs of providing special education and related services (services) to children ages 3 through 21 with disabilities. Most of the Federal funds provided to States must be passed on to local educational agencies (LEA). Federal funds are combined with State and local funds to provide a free appropriate public education to children with disabilities. Under IDEA, a free appropriate public education is provided through an individualized education program (IEP) based on the individual needs of the child. Omaha Public Schools (Omaha), the largest LEA in Nebraska, was awarded approximately $15.3 million in IDEA Part B funds for school year 2023–2024. We conducted an inspection to determine whether Omaha designed and implemented sufficient processes for overseeing the development of IEPs for children with disabilities and ensuring that those children receive the services described in their IEPs. The inspection covered Omaha’s processes in these areas from July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. We found that Omaha generally designed and implemented sufficient processes for overseeing the development of IEPs and ensuring that children with disabilities receive the services as described in their IEPs. However, there were a small number of instances where IEPs and related documentation did not show that all applicable IEP requirements were met or that students received all of the services described in their IEPs.  When documentation is lacking or does not exist, stakeholders do not have sufficient assurances that the IEP teams considered all required elements when developing the IEPs, the IEPs contained all required information, or all services described in the IEPs were provided to children with disabilities. We made two recommendations to improve Omaha’s oversight of IEP development and documentation of IEP services provided.

The independent public accounting firm of McBride, Lock & Associates, LLC, under contract with the Office of Inspector General, audited Help America Vote Act (HAVA) grants administered by the Oregon Secretary of State, totaling almost $22.1 million. This included federal funds, state matching funds, interest income, and program income earned on the reissued Section 251 and Election Security grants.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm Harper, Rains, Knight, & Company, P.A. (HRK) to audit the Commission’s financial statements and related footnotes as of September 30, 2025.  The contract requires that the audit be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards Office of Management and Budget audit guidance, Government Accountability Office/Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Financial Audit Manual, and Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements.  HRK found:

• The financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the Commission's financial position as of September 30, 2025, and its net cost of operations, changes in net position, and budgetary resources for the fiscal years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
• One material weakness related to the Commission not having appropriate controls in place to review the validity of material financial adjustment transactions recorded by their service provider on their behalf.
  While the report includes one material weakness related to a gap in controls over financial reporting by a shared service provider, HRK’s objective was not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission's internal control or compliance.

The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, requires that the Inspector General take appropriate steps to ensure that any work performed by non-Federal auditors complies with the auditing standards established by the Comptroller General. We evaluated the independence, objectivity, and qualifications of the auditors and specialists; reviewed the plan and approach of the audit; monitored the performance of the audit; sought and obtained clarification of the auditor's methodology and findings; and reviewed HRK's reports and related audit documentation.

HRK is responsible for the attached independent auditor’s report and the conclusions expressed therein. The OIG does not express opinions on the Commission’s financial statements or internal control over financial reporting, or conclusions on compliance or other matters. The audit report provides an opinion on the Commission’s financial statements and communicates reporting requirements on internal control over financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations.

We received an anonymous hotline complaint in January 2025 asking the Office of Inspector General to investigate a conflict of interest involving two senior CPSC officials at the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) directs Inspectors General to conduct an annual evaluation of the agency information security program. FISMA, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) establish information technology (IT) security guidance and standards for Federal agencies. We conducted this evaluation to assess the overall effectiveness of the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s information security (InfoSec) program, assess their compliance with Federal guidance, and respond to OMB reporting questions for the fiscal year 2025 annual assessment.  In FY 2025, we assessed HUD at maturity level 3, consistently implemented, for its overall InfoSec program.  HUD has made incremental progress across its InfoSec program and should continue to take steps to improve the security of its IT systems and assets, which will lead to an increase in its FISMA maturity level.  We assessed HUD’s maturity across 25 metrics.  HUD scored 3.13 in the 20 core metrics that we have assessed every year since FY 2022, and it scored 2.67 in the 5 supplemental metrics that were first assessed in FY 2025.

We contracted with the independent public accounting firm of Sikich CPA LLC to audit the financial statements of HUD as of and for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, and to provide reports on HUD’s (1) internal control over financial reporting and (2) compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters, including whether financial management systems complied substantially with the requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA).  Our contract with Sikich required that the audit be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit requirements, and the Financial Audit Manual of the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 

 In its audit of HUD, Sikich reported 

• A Disclaimer of Opinion on HUD’s financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025.  Management indicated in its written representations that it cannot assert to the fair presentation of the FY 2025 HUD financial statements. Since management could not make this assertion, Sikich was unable to express an opinion on the fair presentation of HUD’s financial statements.
• Two significant deficiencies for fiscal year 2025 in internal control over financial reporting, based on the limited procedures performed.  The significant deficiencies were related to internal control deficiencies identified by the HUD AIR Program and internal control deficiencies over FHA’s loans receivables.   
• No reportable noncompliance issues for fiscal year 2025 with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements or other matters.
• Due to the matter discussed in the Basis for Disclaimer of Opinion paragraph, Sikich was unable to obtain sufficient evidence to conclude whether HUD substantially complied with FFMIA. 

In connection with the contract, we reviewed Sikich’s reports and related documentation and questioned its representatives.  Our review, as differentiated from an audit of the financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards, was not intended to enable us to express and we do not express opinions on HUD’s financial statements or conclusions about (1) the effectiveness of HUD’s internal control over financial reporting; (2) HUD’s compliance with laws, regulations, contracts,  and grant agreements or other matters; or (3) whether HUD’s financial management systems complied substantially with the three FFMIA requirements.  Sikich is responsible for the attached Independent Auditors’ Report, dated December 18, 2025, and the conclusions expressed therein.  Our review disclosed no instances in which Sikich did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards. 

HUD’s financial statements are included in HUD’s Agency Financial Report, which can be found at - https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/afr2025.pdf.