An official website of the United States government
Here's how you know
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Brought to you by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency
Federal Reports
Report Date
Agency Reviewed / Investigated
Report Title
Type
Location
U.S. Postal Service
Virtual Post Office Box Roundtable Discussion Summary
We found that for the time period covered by our audit, Miami-Dade County Public Schools could not reconcile about $2.3 million in Recovery Act Title I funds and about $1.2 million in IDEA funds with the Florida Department of Education’s Cash Advance and Reporting of Disbursements System. As a result, we could not determine whether data that Miami-Dade reported to the Florida Department of Education, which was in turn reported on the Recovery Act Web site, was accurate. We also found that Miami-Dade improperly classified more than $400,000 in transportation costs as supply costs. We recommended that the Florida Department of Education require Miami-Dade to develop and implement adequate fiscal and management controls to maintain reliable financial records.
As a result of delays and overruns on the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Watts Bar Nuclear Unit 2 (WBN U2) construction project, questions have been raised about the quality of the work performed. Nuclear Construction (NC) Quality Assurance (QA) plays a key role in ensuring that work completed meets high-quality standards. The objective of our review was to determine if the NC QA program was effective in its oversight of the WBN U2 construction project. We found NC QA has generally been effective in its oversight of the construction project; however, a breakdown in the QA program resulted in a lack of oversight in one area. With the exception of the breakdown in QA discussed below, no significant issues were identified. In addition, we reviewed documentation that showed NC QA conducted oversight activities and Bechtel performed QA activities. As issues were identified, Problem Evaluation Reports (PERs) were generated to address those issues. A breakdown in the QA program related to the commercial-grade dedication program was identified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Specifically, there was no oversight of the commercial-grade dedication program by QA since 2008. In response, TVA conducted an evaluation to see if problems existed in other areas. TVA's evaluation found a few areas that required minor adjustments, and those adjustments were made. Furthermore, TVA assembled an independent, technical team to review commercial-grade dedication packages, and as of May 2013, no significant issues had been identified. We also found, that while the turnover of one system has occurred, a process for transitioning the authority for the execution of the QA program from Bechtel QA to NC QA has not been implemented, which could limit the effectiveness of the NC QA's oversight efforts. The process for transition of authority from Bechtel QA to NC QA will provide evidence that the construction phase QA requirements in the Nuclear Quality Assurance Plan have been met and also help to prevent any steps or reviews from being missed. We made recommendations to management to address the findings in the report.