An official website of the United States government
Here's how you know
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Brought to you by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency
Federal Reports
Report Date
Agency Reviewed / Investigated
Report Title
Type
Location
National Science Foundation
Performance Audit of Incurred Costs – University of Montana
Hamilton County, OH, and People Working Cooperatively, Inc., Did Not AlwaysComply With HUD’s Requirements in the Use of Community Development Block Grant Funds for a Housing Repair Services Program
Our prior reviews have found that some hospitals did not comply with Medicare coverage and documentation requirements for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). CMS’s Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) program found that the error rate for IRFs increased, ranging from 9 percent in 2012 to a high of 62 percent in 2016. Our objective was to determine whether IRFs complied with Medicare coverage and documentation requirements for fee-for-service (FFS) claims for services provided in 2013.
Department of Homeland Security shall submit a report not later than October 15, 2017, to the DHS Office of Inspector General listing all grants and contracts awarded by other than full and open competition (OTFOC) during fiscal years 2016 and 2017. We contracted with Williams, Adley & Company-DC, LLC to review the OTFOC report and assess DHS compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and departmental procedures. Williams Adley concluded that DHS complied with applicable statutes, regulations, and policies governing grants and contracts awarded by OTFOC in FY 2017. During that year, DHS awarded 62 noncompetitive grants worth about $140 million and 121 noncompetitive contracts worth about $118 million through OTFOC. The independent auditors determined that DHS’ Report on OTFOC for FY 2017 as well as the information related to these grants and contracts in the Federal Procurement Data System – Next Generation and USASpending.gov were accurate. The auditors also found that DHS followed written policies and procedures and the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 when awarding grants and contractsnoncompetitively.
DHS was not fully prepared to implement the Zero Tolerance Policy. Faced with resource limitations and other challenges, DHS regulated the number of asylum-seekers entering the United States through ports of entry at the same time that it encouraged asylum-seekers to come to the ports. During Zero Tolerance, CBP held alien children for long periods in holding facilities intended for short-term detention. DHS also struggled to identify, track, and reunify families separated under Zero Tolerance due to limitations with its information technology systems, including a lack of integration between systems. Finally, inconsistent information provided by DHS to aliens who arrived with children during Zero Tolerance resulted in some parents not understanding that they would be separated from their children, and being unable to communicate with their children after separation. We do not make any recommendations.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through its Public Assistance (PA) Program, is currently responding to Hurricane Irma — one of the most catastrophic disasters in recent United States history. FEMA’s damage estimates for Florida and Georgia exceed $4.2 billion, with debris removal operations constituting approximately 36 percent of the total PA cost. Debris removal costs in Florida and Georgia are estimated to reach approximately $1.5 billion as of May 2018. FEMA’s guidance for debris monitoring lacks sufficient information to ensure adequate oversight. In the 2011 OIG report, FEMA’s Oversight and Management of Debris Removal Operations, we identified deficiencies in FEMA’s debris removal guidance. To resolve these deficiencies, we made 10 recommendations to, in part, strengthen FEMA’s debris removal guidance and procedure. In response, FEMA released additional criteria pertaining to debris estimating and monitoring to enhance the overall effectiveness of the process. FEMA removed the detailed responsibilities when it released its Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide (PAPPG). Going forward from the PAPPG version 1.0, FEMA relies solely on the subrecipient to monitor the debris removal operations, and removes monitoring responsibilities from both FEMA and the State. Subrecipients now have a greater responsibility to identify issues or concerns during debris removal operations. We made three recommendations that when implemented will strengthen FEMA’s debris monitoring operations. FEMA concurred with all recommendations.