Federal Reports

This report presents the results of our self-initiated audit of the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) Compensation and Benefits (Project Number 25-033). Our objective was to determine whether the PRC followed all applicable laws, regulations, and policies around employee compensation and benefits.

The PRC is an independent agency of the executive branch that has exercised regulatory oversight over the U.S. Postal Service since its creation by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. As of the end of calendar year (CY) 2024, the PRC was comprised of about 93 full-time employees. While the PRC maintains its own Human Resources department, the agency uses several Postal Service systems to administer benefits, such as pay and leave.

The PRC did not always carry out policy consistently regarding the disbursement of benefits, and we identified opportunities for the PRC to realign processes with agency policy and improve internal controls to verify benefits are provided in line with policy. Specifically, we found instances of the PRC not following its policy related to remote work. Additionally, the PRC used inconsistent processes regarding hiring incentives and locality pay. Further, we identified an internal control issue related to leave requests.

In August 2023, the Office of Inspector General received an allegation that a contractor had not provided any deliverables supporting the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) $90 million Safety, Analytics, Forecasting, Evaluation, and Reporting (SAFER) system. The allegation claimed that the project was halfway through its 5-year contract period, but it had been “staggeringly unproductive given the money spent.” 

We initiated this inspection to determine the facts and circumstances regarding alleged productivity weaknesses and lack of deliverables from the contractor supporting NNSA’s SAFER system.

We did not substantiate the allegation that a contractor had productivity weaknesses and had not provided any deliverables on its project with NNSA. However, we identified inadequate project planning and management of the SAFER system by NNSA. For instance, key performance indicators were not developed to measure project success. In addition, user acceptance criteria was not established to measure the success of the development process and ensure that delivered functionality aligned with user requirements. Further, a required Contractor Performance Assessment Report was not completed for the base year of the contract but was completed in subsequent years.   

Based on feedback provided by SAFER users and a lack of acceptance criteria to measure the success of the development process for the safety programs, we question whether SAFER is meeting user needs. Although not fully implemented, we were unable to obtain evidence that SAFER had produced widespread benefits and improved oversight across the NNSA enterprise.

As a result of the weaknesses identified, NNSA may be unable to determine the overall health of its safety programs and potential improvements needed to those programs. The lack of progress in completing actions outlined in the Federal Data Strategy may also have hindered effective data-driven decision making. Without improvements, NNSA may continue to encounter weaknesses related to managing the SAFER project, which could delay project progress.

We made three recommendations related to establishing quantifiable metrics to measure the performance of NNSA’s investments and ensuring that data management practices and project management requirements are followed. These recommendations should improve the management of the SAFER project and help inform future technology projects.  

The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed established policies and procedures for the audit function of U.S. AbilityOne (AbilityOne) OIG in effect at September 30, 2024.  Based on our review, the established policies and procedures for the audit function at September 30, 2024, were current and consistent with applicable professional standards, as stated.

In addition to reviewing established policies and procedures for the audit function of AbilityOne OIG, we applied certain limited procedures in accordance with guidance established by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) Guide for Conducting Peer Reviews of Audit Organizations of Federal Offices of Inspector General related to AbilityOne OIG’s monitoring of generally accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS) engagements performed by Independent Public Accountants (IPAs) under contract where the IPA served as the auditor.  It should be noted that monitoring of GAGAS engagements performed by IPAs is not an audit; therefore, it is not subject to the requirements of Government Auditing Standards.  The purpose of our limited procedures was to determine whether AbilityOne OIG had controls in place to ensure that IPAs performed contracted work in accordance with professional standards.  We conclude that AbilityOne OIG has such controls in place.  

Our objective was not to express an opinion; accordingly, we do not express an opinion on AbilityOne OIG’s monitoring of work performed by IPAs.

Why We Did This Report

Under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was provided with over $60 billion in appropriations for Agency programs, including the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Programs, the Superfund Program, geographic programs, and more. Since the IIJA’s enactment, the EPA Office of Inspector General has been conducting timely and relevant oversight to ensure that IIJA funds—taxpayer dollars—are used effectively. Our third annual IIJA progress report covers February 1, 2024, through January 31, 2025, and provides an update on our oversight of the EPA’s use of IIJA funds.

Summary

This report provides updates on the oversight work the OIG planned, initiated, or completed during its third year of IIJA oversight. It also details the OIG’s declaration of 2025 as the “Year of Innovation” and highlights the OIG's continued efforts to engage IIJA stakeholders.