Federal Reports

OIG reviewed FSIS at the national office level to evaluate its implementation of NPIS at covered poultry slaughter facilities.

We Looked AtCongress created the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program in 1990 to provide funding for airports' capital improvement projects and to increase competition between air carriers. While PFCs are local funds, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversees the program. Since 1990, FAA has approved the collection of $103.2 billion in PFC fees, which air carriers collect through passenger tickets and remit to public agencies (airport operators). To be eligible for PFC funding, public agency projects must (1) preserve or enhance the safety, security, or capacity of the national air transportation system; (2) reduce or mitigate airport noise; or (3) promote competition between or among air carriers. Given the public's involvement with PFCs and the substantial dollars the program generates, we initiated this audit; our objective was to review FAA's administration and oversight of airport operators' compliance with the use of PFC funds.What We FoundMost public agencies comply with PFC program requirements, but FAA could use available tools more effectively to strengthen its oversight. For example, to assess compliance, FAA reviews public agencies' independent audit reports, but it does not ensure that those reports are timely or complete. FAA also lacks procedures for documenting public agency data in its database. As a result, the Agency does not require its Airport District Offices to verify that expenditure information is accurate or to record the receipt of audit reports and status of audit findings. Finally, while FAA officials work closely with public agency personnel to ensure that proposed projects are PFC eligible, the Agency does not have a process for determining whether completed projects meet PFC program goals.Our RecommendationsWe made six recommendations to improve FAA's administration and oversight of the PFC program. FAA fully concurred with two recommendations and partially concurred with three, but did not concur with our final recommendation.

Our objective was to determine whether travel, representation, and office expense reimbursements, requested by Postal Service officers during fiscal year (FY) 2018, were supported and complied with Postal Service guidelines.

The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) requires each agency’s Inspector General (IG) to conduct an annual independent evaluation to determine the effectiveness of the information security program (ISP) and practices of its respective agency. Our objective was to evaluate the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA) ISP and agency practices for ensuring compliance with FISMA and applicable standards, including guidelines issued by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and National Institute of Standards and Technology. Our audit scope was limited to answering the FY2018 IG FISMA metrics developed as a collaborative effort by the OMB, Department of Homeland Security, and Council of Inspector Generals on Integrity and Efficiency in consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer Council. The FY2018 IG FISMA metrics recommend a majority of the functions be at a maturity level 4 (managed and measurable) or higher to be considered effective. Based on our analysis of the metrics and associated maturity levels defined within the FY2018 IG FISMA metrics, we found TVA’s ISP was operating in an effective manner.

Report file size exceeds upload limit.