Federal Reports

The audit objectives were to determine whether program funds were managed in accordance with the ARC and Federal grant requirements.

This report presents the results of our audit of U.S. Postal Service’s financial controls and safeguarding assets at selected retail units.

The Postal Service operates approximately 31,000 retail units that provide services to customers nationwide. Retail unit employees are required to adhere to policies and procedures regarding financial reporting and the safeguarding of assets. All retail units must report their financial activity to Accounting Services daily, and retail unit management is responsible for the security of accountable items. Controls over these processes are essential for ensuring financial information is reliable and assets are protected. During a prior audit, we identified potential security matters and financial control issues at selected retail locations. As a result, we visited 10 additional retail units to determine compliance with policies and procedures and whether issues were remediated.

What We Did

Our objective was to determine compliance with policies and procedures regarding financial controls and safeguarding assets at selected Postal Service retail units. Specifically, we interviewed Postal Service management and retail associates, observed the safeguarding of assets, reviewed Postal Service (PS) Form 1412 supporting documentation, and inventoried arrow keys present at the retail units.

This review found VISN 12 medical facilities (covering parts of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin) did not consistently identify veterans eligible for community care, inform them of their care options, and deliver timely care. Among the causes, schedulers lacked the means to identify all available appointments. VHA guidance was also uneven, requiring schedulers to check all eligibility criteria for new patients but only wait times for established patients, hindering care option notifications to existing patients.
VISN 12 took 44 days on average from scheduling to appointment for community care and 35 days for VA care—exceeding timeliness goals. In addition, it had about 250 consults incomplete for longer than one year.
The VISN 12 director concurred with the OIG’s recommendations to improve scheduler performance. The OIG has two planned follow-up national reviews regarding eligibility and care option notifications, as well as on timeliness of care.

Improved Documentation and Guidance Can Help Strengthen Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Review Program, Report No. 586

The OIG found that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) effectively uses operating experience (OpE) information to inspect Emergency Diesel Generators (EDGs) at operating nuclear power plants. However, the agency could strengthen the Reactor OpE Program by updating guidance and assessing the program, and ensuring the EDG Technical Review Group (TRG) members know their roles and responsibilities.
Currently, the guidance provided in Office Instruction LIC-401, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Reactor Operating Experience, and NRR’s Operating Experience Staff Handbook is outdated. In addition, the NRC does not have an assessment process for the Reactor OpE Program. Assessing the Reactor OpE Program periodically could help staff and management determine whether the program meets its objectives and staff are using relevant guidance to process OpE information. Moreover, the NRC lacks policies and procedures for the EDG TRGs, which may lead to inconsistent practices, reduced productivity, and missed opportunities to disposition EDG-related OpE information.
The OIG makes seven recommendations to strengthen the Reactor Operating Experience Program implementation process.

The Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) provides debt financing in the form of loans and loan guarantees to support innovative clean energy, advanced transportation, and tribal energy projects in the United States. To help carry out its mission, the LPO utilizes contractors and third-party advisors to assist with loan application processing, which increases the risk for conflicts of interest.

Given the LPO’s reliance on contractors and third-party advisors, we initiated this audit to determine whether the LPO had an
effective framework in place for managing conflicts of interest for contractors providing support and advisory services to its Office.

We found that the LPO did not have an effective framework in place for managing conflicts of interest for contractors providing support to the LPO. Specifically, the LPO was not aware of all the relationships that could cause conflicts of interest. We also found that the LPO did not ensure adequate management of conflict of interest disclosures and waiver requests, and did not ensure its prime contractor fully implemented key aspects of its strategy for managing potential conflicts of interest.

These issues occurred because the LPO did not have controls in place to identify and manage conflicts of interest. Specifically, the LPO had not developed and implemented a formal, centralized tracking system or policies and procedures for managing conflicts of interest. Additionally, the LPO relied upon third-party advisors and other contractors to self-identify conflicts of interest and did not ensure adequate oversight of its prime contractor.

To address the issues identified in this report, we have made two recommendations that, if fully implemented, should help ensure that decisions about awarding and managing loans and loan guarantees are in the Government’s and the public’s best interest.