Federal Reports

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted this audit to determine if VA effectively monitored Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor-Next Generation Program (MSPV-NG) order fulfillment and vendor performance. This audit focused on VA medical centers serviced by American Medical Depot (AMD). MSPV-NG is VA’s national program for obtaining medical or surgical supplies across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The audit team reviewed a sample of AMD’s delivery orders and estimated that medical centers received incorrect orders about 60 percent of the time. Incorrect orders occurred when delivery orders and invoice pricing did not match approved costs, products were obtained from unapproved suppliers, or staff obligated funds without proper authority. When necessary supplies are unavailable or incorrect because of vendors’ errors, veterans’ quality of care could be at risk. Orders were incorrect because VHA’s Healthcare Commodities Program Office and VA’s Strategic Acquisition Center did not develop a formal process to validate prime vendor performance reporting and the algorithm used by AMD. In addition, contracting officer representative (COR) positions at four of eight VA medical centers were vacant. CORs are responsible for monitoring vendor accuracy and performance. As a result, VA did not verify AMD’s self reported compliance with performance measures. The audit team found that AMD did not use the calculations and methodologies required by its contract, which led to inaccurate reporting. AMD also used unapproved suppliers. In addition, deliveries and invoice pricing did not match approved product costs, causing improper payments. The audit team estimated that, without correction, VA would improperly pay AMD about $84 million over the next five years. The OIG made 11 recommendations to VA including establishing measures to ensure vendor compliance with contract requirements and developing and implementing processes to validate vendor performance and reporting.

Our objective was to determine whether the Social Security Administration's (SSA) controls prevented the assignment of multiple Social Security numbers (SSN) to non-citizens who applied for SSNs through the Enumeration Beyond Entry (EBE) process.

External peer review of the Farm Credit Administration Office of Inspector General's inspection and evaluation organization, conducted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Office of Inspector General and U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of Inspector General.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) completed a final action verification of all five recommendations in Audit Report No. 08099-0001-12, Audit of Forest Service’s Next Generation and Legacy Airtanker Contract Awards. The purpose of our final action verification was to determine if the Forest Service (FS) provided the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) with sufficient documentation to support that the management decision reached with OIG was sufficient to close the audit report recommendations.

What We Looked AtAllegiant Air—the Nation’s 11th largest passenger airline—grew faster than the airline industry as a whole in 2018 by carrying approximately 14 million passengers. However, incidents at this air carrier—including a series of in-flight engine shutdowns, aborted takeoffs, and unscheduled landings—have raised concerns about its maintenance practices. FAA uses its Compliance Program to achieve rapid compliance with regulatory standards, eliminate safety risks, and ensure positive and permanent changes that benefit the aviation industry. This program is based on the concept that the greatest safety risk comes from an operator who is “unwilling or unable” to comply with rules, rather than a specific event or its outcome. Our objective was to assess FAA’s processes for investigating improper maintenance practices at Allegiant Air. Specifically, we assessed FAA’s (1) oversight of longstanding maintenance issues impacting safety at Allegiant Air and (2) process for ensuring Allegiant Air implemented effective corrective actions to address the root causes of maintenance problems. What We FoundSince 2011, FAA inspectors have not consistently documented risks associated with 36 Allegiant Air in-flight engine shutdowns for its MD-80 fleet or correctly assessed the root cause of maintenance issues. This was because inspectors did not follow FAA’s inspector guidance that requires them to document changes in their oversight once they have identified areas of increased risk. Also, FAA’s Compliance Program and inspector guidance do not include key factors related to carriers’ violations of Federal regulations. Specifically, they do not contain provisions for inspectors to consider the severity of outcomes when deciding what action to take following a non-compliance. As a result, FAA is missing opportunities to address maintenance issues and mitigate safety risks in a timely manner. Our RecommendationsWe made nine recommendations to improve the effectiveness of FAA’s oversight of air carrier maintenance programs. FAA concurred with eight of our nine recommendations and partially concurred with one. We consider the eight recommendations resolved but open, pending completion of planned actions. We are asking FAA to reconsider its actions for the partially-concurred recommendation.