Federal Reports

While conducting site visits at the Los Angeles Terminal Handling Services (THS) for our ongoing Air Mail Not Moving as Assigned audit, the OIG found significant opportunities to improve the Postal Service’s air carrier contract management. The purpose of this alert is to bring these issues to the Postal Service’s attention and make recommendations for immediate corrective action.The Postal Service’s air transportation network costs for fiscal year (FY) 2021 were about $3 billion, as of July 31, 2021. In FY 2020, costs totaled $3.5 billion, an increase of about $390 million (or 12.7 percent) over FY 2019. These costs consisted of contracted services from [redacted], commercial airlines (CAIR), [redacted], supplemental charters, and THS operations.

As part of our annual audit plan, we audited costs billed to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) by Black & Veatch Corporation (B&V) for engineering services under Contract No. 10820. Our audit objective was to determine if costs were billed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. Our audit scope included about $42.46 million in costs billed to TVA from November 2, 2015, through February 13, 2020. In summary:We determined B&V overbilled TVA an estimated $5,771,839, including (1) an estimated $5,657,998 for unapproved OT costs for exempt labor categories, (2) $69,383 in travel and temporary living allowance costs, and (3) a net $44,458 for incorrect hourly billing rates.We noted several opportunities to improve contract administration by TVA. Specifically, we determined TVA paid an estimated $3.3 million more in labor costs by using fixed hourly labor rates instead of negotiating cost reimbursable compensation terms in its contract with B&V. We also found (1) invoices were not submitted timely, (2) B&V did not submit an electronic billing file to the TVA Office of the Inspector General in the format provided for in the contract, (3) site expenses were not provided for in the contract, and (4) the labor categories included in the contract's pricing schedule did not correspond to B&V's internal job titles.(Summary Only)

During our unannounced inspection of Otay Mesa in San Diego, California, we identified violations of ICE detention standards that compromised the health, safety, and rights of detainees. Otay Mesa complied with standards for classification and generally provided sufficient medical care to detainees. In addressing COVID-19, Otay Mesa did not consistently enforce precautions including use of facial coverings and social distancing. Overall, we found that Otay Mesa did not meet standards for grievances, segregation, or staff-detainee communications. Specifically, Otay Mesa did not respond timely to detainee grievances and did not forward staff misconduct grievances to ICE as required.

To see our report, click on the link below

The OIG reviewed 31 proposals for sole source healthcare provider contracts in fiscal year 2020 and provided information that VA contracting officers could use to help negotiate fair and reasonable prices. These contracts allow VA to fill, at a fixed price, positions for which it is unable to hire staff. The proposals typically come from VA affiliated schools of medicine or their associated hospitals or physician practice groups.The combined estimated contract value of the 31 proposals reviewed was $209 million. The OIG identified a total of $81 million in potential cost savings for 29 proposals. As of March 2021, VA contracting officers have awarded 25 of the 31 proposals and have sustained over $16 million in cost savings.OIG reviews of the individual contract proposals were not previously published because they contain clinical staff’s sensitive personal data. This report summarizes the OIG’s prior findings and recommendations in three areas:• Costs underlying proposed hourly rates. For 25 of the 27 proposals reviewed that contained hourly rate pricing, the OIG determined that the prices offered to the government were higher than the supported amounts. Frequently occurring issues included unsupported provider salaries, administrative expenses, fringe benefit amounts, or malpractice insurance premiums.• Offered per procedure prices. The OIG reviewed six proposals with per procedure pricing and determined that they all offered prices higher than the properly calculated Medicare rates.• Potential conflicts of interest. The OIG found potential conflicts of interest for VA personnel for 24 of the 31 proposals reviewed. These personnel held faculty appointments at the affiliated institutions and potentially would also have responsibilities such as monitoring performance of the affiliate’s services. In each instance, the OIG recommended the contracting officer request an opinion from VA’s Office of General Counsel on whether these individuals would have a financial interest in the proposal.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a healthcare inspection to assess allegations that staff at the facility denied a patient’s discharge requests and did not ensure the patient’s access to a patient advocate. The inspection also evaluated OIG-identified concerns related to Inpatient Mental Health Unit and Community Living Center (CLC) staff’s administrative actions during the patient’s admissions.The OIG substantiated that staff denied the patient’s discharge requests. The OIG found that staff failed to follow informed consent procedures. The OIG also found that staff did not conduct a sufficient or timely decision-making capacity evaluation and documented unsupported, conflicting decision-making capacity information in the patient’s electronic health record.The patient remained on voluntary status during Inpatient Mental Health Unit and CLC admissions for nearly 2 years and 11 months. Staff did not adequately assess the patient’s admission status as voluntary or involuntary and did not follow commitment requirements during the first two of the patient’s three Inpatient Mental Health Unit admissions.The OIG found that staff did not comply with requirements when the patient requested an against medical advice discharge. The OIG also determined that staff did not properly identify a surrogate decision-maker and did not address ethical concerns regarding the appropriateness of the patient’s surrogate decision-maker.The OIG substantiated that staff failed to ensure the patient’s access to the patient advocate. Staff did not properly manage a letter from the patient that was intended for a public official.The OIG made seven recommendations to the Facility Director related to informed treatment consent processes, decision-making capacity evaluation completion and documentation, commitment requirements, against medical advice discharge procedures, surrogate decision-maker assignment, patient advocate reporting and tracking processes, and management of the patient’s correspondence request.

This Office of Inspector General (OIG) Comprehensive Healthcare Inspection Program report provides a focused evaluation of the quality of care delivered in the inpatient and outpatient settings of the White River Junction VA Medical Center, which includes outpatient clinics in New Hampshire and Vermont. The inspection covered key clinical and administrative processes that are associated with promoting quality care. This inspection focused on Leadership and Organizational Risks; COVID-19 Pandemic Readiness and Response; Quality, Safety, and Value; Registered Nurse Credentialing; Mental Health: Emergency Department and Urgent Care Center Suicide Risk Screening and Evaluation; Care Coordination: Inter-facility Transfers; and High-Risk Processes: Management of Disruptive and Violent Behavior.When the OIG conducted the virtual review, the executive leadership team had worked together for over one year. Employee satisfaction survey results demonstrated satisfaction with leadership and maintenance of an environment where staff felt respected. However, responses also pointed to opportunities for the Director and Chief of Staff to improve employee feelings of moral distress at work. Patient experience survey results indicated satisfaction with the care provided. The OIG’s review of the medical center’s accreditation findings, sentinel events, and disclosures did not identify any substantial organizational risk factors. The executive leaders were knowledgeable about selected data used in Strategic Analytics for Improvement and Learning models and should continue efforts to sustain and further improve medical center performance.The OIG issued two recommendations for improvement in two areas:(1) Quality, Safety, and Value• Surgical work group meetings(2) High-Risk Processes• Disruptive behavior training