Federal Reports

This report presents the results of our audits of mail delivery operations in the Ohio 1 District in the Central Area.

The U.S. Postal Service’s mission is to provide timely, reliable, secure, and affordable mail and package delivery to over 160 million residential and business addresses across the country. To fulfill this role, the Postal Service is committed to ensuring its delivery platform and services are always a trusted, visible, and valued part of America’s social and economic infrastructure. This includes leveraging people, technology, and systems at approximately 300 processing facilities and 31,100 post offices, stations, and branches in the nation to provide worldclass visibility of mail and packages as they move through the Postal Service’s integrated system. The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviews delivery operations at facilities across the country and provides management with timely feedback in furtherance of this mission.

This report presents a summary of the results of our self-initiated audits of delivery operations and property conditions at three delivery units, as well as district-wide delivery operations in the Ohio 1 District in the Central Area (Project Number 25-141). The delivery units included Station B and Shaker Heights Station in Cleveland, OH, and the Cleveland Heights Branch in Cleveland Heights, OH.

The Office of the Inspector General contracted with Sikich CPA LLC (Sikich) to determine whether contract modifications for the Pod 6 construction contract were reasonable, necessary, within the scope of the contract, and effectively awarded and administered.  Sikich found that the Smithsonian did not consistently administer contract modifications in accordance with the terms of the contract.

BIE did not ensure deficiencies were addressed timely; schools did not consistently implement mitigating measures or close corrected work orders.

The 2026 Census Test is the bureau’s next major test to prepare for the 2030 census. The bureau planned in-field operations at multiple sites to evaluate new and enhanced processes and methods for improving the design of the census, and bureau officials stated that they used a new, innovative data-driven process to select the test sites. 

Our objective was to assess the bureau’s test site selection methodology. However, the bureau could not provide supporting documentation of the judgments, methodologies, and assumptions used to plan, execute, and provide oversight of the selection process. As a result, we could not verify how the bureau selected the sites. 

Without establishing a formal, documented methodology as a solid foundation, as specified by its own statistical quality standards, the bureau risks inefficiencies or suboptimal site selections that could compromise overall readiness for the 2030 census and beyond. We made two recommendations to the bureau to strengthen its processes for reviewing and documenting site selections for future census tests.