Federal Reports

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

At the request of the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) Supply Chain, we examined the cost proposal submitted by a company for engineering, design, and construction support services. Our examination objective was to determine if the company's cost proposal was fairly stated for a planned 5-year, $20.5 million contract.In our opinion, the company's cost proposal was overstated. Specifically, we found the proposed total labor markup rate, for recovery of the company's indirect costs, was overstated compared to recent actual costs. In addition, we found the company's proposed costs for the request for proposal's (RFP) example projects contained a cost markup not provided for by the RFP's draft contract. We estimated TVA could avoid about $2.24 million over the planned $20.5 million contract by negotiating a reduced total labor markup rate to more accurately reflect the company's recent actual costs. (Summary Only)

In the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Congress established a comprehensive program to preserve the historical and cultural foundations of the nation as a living part of community life. Section 106 of the Act requires federal agencies to consider the effects of projects they carry out, approve, or fund on historic properties. The Tennessee Valley Authority's Cultural Compliance group performs historic preservation reviews (called Section 106 reviews) to assess (1) whether or not historic properties are present, (2) adverse effects of projects on historic properties, and (3) how to mitigate the adverse effects. Due to concerns raised about the efficiency of historic preservation reviews, we performed an evaluation to determine if the process for performing historic preservation reviews was efficient. We determined Section 106 reviews were not consistently tracked resulting in a lack of data to determine the time and costs of the reviews. However, we were able to identify inefficiencies in the Section 106 process. Specifically, we determined the process had inefficiencies regarding (1) prioritization of projects, (2) incorporation of Cultural Compliance in planning, (3) communication between organizations, (4) workload of Cultural Compliance personnel, (5) reliance on contractors, and (6) tracking of cultural resources. We made recommendations to the Vice President, Environment, to address inefficiencies in Section 106 reviews.

What Office of Inspector General Evaluated

The objective of this audit was to determine whether the Library’s Contracts and Grants Directorate had implemented recommendations from previous audit reports and if Contracts and Grants Directorate had not yet implemented all of the recommendations, to describe what steps Contracts and Grants Directorate had accomplished to date and what further actions were required to fulfill any outstanding recommendations.

What Office of Inspector General Found

Based on the results of this follow-up Audit  and prior Audits preceding it, the Inspector General has determined that management has made significant progress in addressing operational, human capital, and internal control weaknesses to merit  removal of contracting from the Library’s list of Top Management Challenges. 

What Office of Inspector General Recommends

None reported

The Office of Inspector General evaluated NASA’s policies and practices regarding the use of non-Agency mobile IT devices to conduct NASA business.