Federal Reports

We contracted with the independent public accounting firm of Sikich CPA LLC to audit the financial statements of HUD as of and for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, and to provide reports on HUD’s (1) internal control over financial reporting and (2) compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters, including whether financial management systems complied substantially with the requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA).  Our contract with Sikich required that the audit be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit requirements, and the Financial Audit Manual of the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 

 In its audit of HUD, Sikich reported 

• A Disclaimer of Opinion on HUD’s financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025.  Management indicated in its written representations that it cannot assert to the fair presentation of the FY 2025 HUD financial statements. Since management could not make this assertion, Sikich was unable to express an opinion on the fair presentation of HUD’s financial statements.
• Two significant deficiencies for fiscal year 2025 in internal control over financial reporting, based on the limited procedures performed.  The significant deficiencies were related to internal control deficiencies identified by the HUD AIR Program and internal control deficiencies over FHA’s loans receivables.   
• No reportable noncompliance issues for fiscal year 2025 with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements or other matters.
• Due to the matter discussed in the Basis for Disclaimer of Opinion paragraph, Sikich was unable to obtain sufficient evidence to conclude whether HUD substantially complied with FFMIA. 

In connection with the contract, we reviewed Sikich’s reports and related documentation and questioned its representatives.  Our review, as differentiated from an audit of the financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards, was not intended to enable us to express and we do not express opinions on HUD’s financial statements or conclusions about (1) the effectiveness of HUD’s internal control over financial reporting; (2) HUD’s compliance with laws, regulations, contracts,  and grant agreements or other matters; or (3) whether HUD’s financial management systems complied substantially with the three FFMIA requirements.  Sikich is responsible for the attached Independent Auditors’ Report, dated December 18, 2025, and the conclusions expressed therein.  Our review disclosed no instances in which Sikich did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards. 

HUD’s financial statements are included in HUD’s Agency Financial Report, which can be found at - https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/afr2025.pdf.

We contracted with the independent public accounting firm Sikich CPA LLC to audit the financial statements of Ginnie Mae as of and for the years ending September 30, 2025 and 2024, and to provide reports on Ginnie Mae’s (1) internal control over financial reporting and (2) compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. Our contract with Sikich required that the audit be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit requirements, and the Financial Audit Manual of the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 

In its audit of Ginnie Mae, Sikich reported 

• That Ginnie Mae’s financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ending September 30, 2025 and 2024, were presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
• No material weaknesses or significant deficiencies for fiscal year 2025 in internal control over financial reporting, based on limited procedures performed.
• No reportable noncompliance for fiscal year 2025 with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements or other matters. 

 In connection with the contract, we reviewed Sikich’s reports and related documentation and questioned its representatives. Our review, as differentiated from an audit of the financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards, was not intended to enable us to express and we do not express opinions on Ginnie Mae’s financial statements or conclusions about (1) the effectiveness of Ginnie Mae’s internal control over financial reporting and (2) Ginnie Mae’s compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements or other matters. Sikich is responsible for the attached Independent Auditors’ Report, dated December 18, 2025, and the conclusions expressed therein. Our review disclosed no instances in which Sikich did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards.

 When Ginnie Mae publishes its Annual Report, we will update this post to include this report and a link to Ginnie Mae's audited financial statements.

Opinion on the Reclassified Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying Reclassified Financial Statements of the U.S. Postal Service, which comprises the Government-wide Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System (GTAS) Reconciliation Report -Reclassified Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2025, and the related GTAS Reconciliation Reports -Reclassified Statement of Net Cost and Reclassified Statement of Operations and Changes in Net Position, for the year then ended (hereinafter referred to as the Reclassified Financial Statements) and accompanying Note 36. In our opinion, the Reclassified Financial Statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Postal Service as of September 30, 2025, and its net costs and changes in net position for the year then ended in accordance with United States (U.S.) Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

Basis for Opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards applicable to financial audits contained in the U.S. Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the U.S., and Office of Management and Budget (0MB) Bulletin Number 24-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor's Responsibility section. We are required to be independent of the Postal Service and to meet our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence.

This report represents our current assessment of the U.S. Small Business Administration's programs and activities that pose significant risks, including those that are particularly vulnerable to fraud, waste, error, mismanagement, or inefficiencies. The Challenges are not presented in order of priority, as we believe that all are critical management or performance issues.

The report summarizes the activity of the FEC Office of Inspector General from April 1, 2025 through September 30, 2025.

In accordance with the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, OIG is submitting a statement on what it considers to be the most significant management and performance challenges facing the Peace Corps. At Peace Corps OIG, we base this statement on the following: our audit, evaluation, and investigative work; our knowledge of the Peace Corps’ activities and operations; and the insights of agency senior leaders who provide their perspectives and expertise. For fiscal year (FY) 2026, we identified the following challenge areas:  Volunteer Delivery System; Volunteer Health and Safety; Human Capital Management; and Information Technology Security Management.

Addressing the issues related to these challenge and performance areas will enhance the agency’s operational efficiencies, minimize potential fraud, waste, and abuse, and improve mission effectiveness.

We found that the company has started upgrading its maintenance facilities to support its major fleet acquisitions, but challenges in planning and managing this effort have delayed its progress. As a result, some facilities will not be ready in time to service the company’s new trains, which could hinder its ability to fully operate the new equipment at their intended service levels. Instead, the company may need to store some new trains intermittently, which could postpone the capture of additional revenue. Further facility delays—which remain a risk—would add to the existing delays in fully operating its new fleets.

Two factors contributed to these circumstances. First, the company’s facility planning has significantly lagged behind its fleet planning despite the two efforts being closely interconnected. Second, the company is separately managing dozens of facility projects rather than managing them as a single, coordinated effort, as called for by company and industry standards.

We recommended that the company continue to develop a joint strategic fleet/facilities plan that defines company goals, timelines, and next steps. We also recommended that the company develop a management framework for its facility upgrades, including a risk management process.

Background

Business mailers accounted for approximately $16.2 billion of the Postal Service’s revenue through marketing and other large-scale mailings, of which $9.4 billion (58 percent) was generated through the PostalOne! application in fiscal year 2024. PostalOne! provides business mailers with a web-based alternative to manual business mail acceptance processes and interfaces with 45 different Postal Service systems to provide mailers a streamlined process for mail entry, payment, tracking, and reporting. As such, it is critical that changes to PostalOne! are communicated and managed effectively to avoid disruptions in service.

What We Did

Our objective was to determine whether the Postal Service appropriately implemented and communicated changes to PostalOne!.

What We Found 

The Postal Service generally communicated PostalOne! changes to mailers effectively by using available resources—such as websites, alerts, briefings, and meetings—and made further improvements to communications with mailers. Further, although the Postal Service mostly followed its approved processes for change and problem management, opportunities exist to improve these processes. Specifically, the Postal Service can improve closure of changes, closure of high and critical incident tickets, and after-action reporting of incidents. Strengthening controls in the management of changes to PostalOne! can improve customers’ ability to use the application and reduce potential security risks.

Recommendations and Management’s Comments

We made four recommendations for the Postal Service to improve its change request processes, resolution of critical and high incident tickets, and after-action reporting and management agreed with all four. We consider management’s comments responsive to all four recommendations as corrective actions should resolve the issues identified in the report. Management’s comments and our evaluation are at the end of each finding and recommendation.