Federal Reports

AmeriCorps OIG investigated allegations that individuals posing as AmeriCorps employees on social media sites offered grant funds in exchange for a fee, such as gift cards or cell phones, as part of a scheme known as "advance fee fraud." The evidence collected through the investigation supports the finding that the fraud suspects executed the schemes by utilizing fake social media profiles, Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) phone numbers, fake email addresses, and Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). At the conclusion of the investigation, AmeriCorps OIG made six recommendations to AmeriCorps, which concurred with five of the six.

AmeriCorps Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigated allegations that Corp Regional de Guayama de Servicios a la Comunidad (CRGSC), located in Cayey, PR, drew down grant funds through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Payment Management System (HHS-PMS) for its Foster Grandparent Program (FGP) without corresponding supporting documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430.

To ensure the continued operations of the International Space Station and the safety of the crew, NASA and its spacesuit support contractor must ensure the suits used for spacewalks, designed more than 50 years ago, are well-maintained and reliable. The contractor, Collins Aerospace, has struggled to ensure sufficient life support components for the suits are delivered when needed and within budget and that meet quality expectations. While Collins’ performance over the last several years has declined, NASA has limited leverage to incentivize improved performance.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a healthcare inspection to determine whether leaders and staff followed required procedures related to suspected elder abuse of a community living center (CLC) resident at the St. Albans VA Medical Center in Queens, part of the VA New York Harbor Healthcare System (system). 

The OIG determined leaders and staff failed to follow procedures to report suspected abuse. A nursing assistant witnessed another nursing assistant allegedly abuse a resident but failed to immediately notify a supervisor, due to being “scared.” Nursing leaders and staff did not immediately ensure the resident’s safety, and did not report the suspected abuse to a unit social worker, VA Police, the resident’s family, and the New York State Department of Health. A nurse practitioner evaluated bruises on the resident and did not document a complete physical exam, consider whether the bruises were related to abuse, or inform the resident’s family. Staff described a culture of silence in the CLC in which staff generally did not report, or underreported, patient safety incidents due to fear of reprisal or administrative burdens. 

Leaders conducted two factfinding investigations into the alleged abuse; however, neither factfinding was thorough, which led to inaccurate conclusions. Factfinding 2 was completed approximately five months after the alleged abuse, exceeding a 14-day completion requirement. An accurate conclusion would have indicated the allegation of patient abuse was plausible and required system leaders to conduct an administrative investigation board. 

The OIG found additional reporting deficiencies related to other incidents of suspected resident abuse; insufficient staff training; substandard documentation by staff, which hindered reviews and investigations; and omissions in Veterans Health Administration and system abuse-related policies. 

The OIG made one recommendation to the Under Secretary for Health, who concurred in principle, and six recommendations to the System Director.
 

Our objectives were to determine whether the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (Wisconsin) designed and implemented (1) application processes that adequately assessed nonpublic schools’ eligibility for Emergency Assistance to Nonpublic Schools (EANS)-funded services or assistance and complied with other applicable requirements, and (2) oversight processes to ensure that EANS-funded services or assistance were used for allowable purposes. Although we found Wisconsin’s processes to assess nonpublic schools’ eligibility for EANS-funded services and assistance ensured that funds were obligated within 6 months of receipt and that applications for the EANS programs were generally approved or denied timely in accordance with Federal regulations, we found that Wisconsin allocated ARP EANS funds to nonpublic schools that did not meet program eligibility requirements and did not verify some information that nonpublic schools provided in their applications for EANS funds. Additionally, Wisconsin’s oversight of its contractor’s administration of EANS expenditures and inventory processes could be improved. Specifically, Wisconsin did not effectively monitor its contractor to ensure that expenditures were properly accounted for, supporting documentation was maintained, and assets purchased with EANS funds were tracked. Further, Wisconsin’s processes did not ensure that fees charged to the nonpublic schools’ EANS funds were reasonable and appropriate. However, Wisconsin’s oversight was adequate to ensure that EANS-funded services and assistance were for allowable purposes.  Wisconsin’s improper approval of ineligible nonpublic schools’ applications resulted in providing over $20 million in ARP EANS-funded services and assistance to 184 nonpublic schools. Further, because Wisconsin did not verify certain information in nonpublic schools’ applications, it provided $838,829 for EANS-funded services and assistance to one ineligible school and did not have assurance that all schools that were approved to participate in the programs had a nonprofit status. We made seven recommendations to address the issues we identified in Wisconsin’s administration and oversight of its EANS programs.