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
We evaluated TVA’s fuel cost adjustment (FCA) calculations to determine whether TVA was using the appropriate data to calculate the FCA. We determined TVA was not using the appropriate sales data to calculate the FCA due to (1) inaccurate unbilled energy sales, (2) the misclassification of sales made to small direct-served customers, and (3) inaccurate hourly energy loads. In addition to the errors identified, we also determined the FCA process could be improved to reduce the risk of errors in the FCA. Specifically, the FCA process is reliant on many hand offs, manual calculations, queries, and complex spreadsheets. Further heightening the risk of error, we found TVA’s FCA process was not documented.
The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) assessed the effectiveness of the Oklahoma City VA Health Care System’s (Health Care System) oversight of its disbursement agreement and time and attendance for part-time physicians. The OIG found that Health Care System managers did not monitor resident participation to ensure they were performing VA work as scheduled or ensure part-time physicians met their employment obligations. This occurred in part because former leaders of the Health Care System did not establish an effective governance environment. The OIG also found the Health Care System lacked required local policies and procedures for resident educational activity record keeping, did not adequately monitor resident participation in educational activities, and did not reconcile educational activity records with invoices submitted by the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine—the affiliated medical school. In addition, former Health Care System directors did not appoint a team to conduct required periodic audits of the disbursement agreement. As a result, the Health Care System could not provide adequate supporting documentation to substantiate its reimbursement payments for residents. Therefore, the Health Care System’s approximately $6.9 million in reimbursements to the medical school during academic year 2015–2016 are considered improper payments. In addition, there was no assurance the Health Care System received all of the resident services that it paid for. Health Care System managers also did not effectively oversee time and attendance for part-time physicians because they did not monitor time and attendance and ensure part-time physicians recorded work hours daily in the system. Because the Health Care System did not reconcile payments made to part-time physicians on adjustable work schedules with their actual work performance, it made approximately $507,000 in improper payments and there was no assurance that these physicians were fully meeting their VA employment obligations.
We evaluated TVA’s management of employee medical work restrictions and accommodations to determine if they were effectively managed. We determined there were gaps in the management of employee medical work restrictions and accommodations which resulted in the process being ineffective. Specifically, (1) the medical case management process was not consistently followed, including (a) restrictions and accommodations were not managed in accordance with the medical case management process, (b) time limits of work assignment forms and follow-ups were not consistently met, and (c) the monthly constraint review process was not consistently performed; and (2) some line managers were unaware of the restrictions placed on their employees. We also identified other areas for improvement related to Medgate system limitations and training.
The objective of this audit is to determine whether Express Mail refunds were properly issued, supported, and processed at the Chicago, IL, Loop Station. OIG data analytics determined the Chicago, IL, Loop Station had a 17 percent increase in dollars for refunds and voids from April 1 to September 30, 2017, compared to the same period in fiscal year 2016. Of the nearly $17,000 in refunds and voids, $3,066, or 18 percent, were recorded to Express Mail failures. Express Mail failures are determined based on the delivery commitment. Loop Station personnel made 138 refunds to customers due to Express Mail failures during this time period.
The objective of our audit was to determine whether Detroit Public Schools Community District (DPSCD) had taken actions that provide reasonable assurance that previously reported audit findings will not reoccur. We limited our audit to evaluating actions taken in response to findings and recommendations relevant to Title I, Part A, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (Title I), that were disclosed in reports on audits of Detroit Public Schools issued from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2016.We concluded that DPSCD had not taken actions sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that previously reported audit findings will not reoccur. As of February 2017, DPSCD had made progress towards implementing such policies and procedures. However, DPSCD had not effectively implemented all of the procedures that its predecessor, Detroit Public Schools, designed to provide reasonable assurance that previously reported findings of unallowable and inadequately documented costs would not reoccur. Specifically, DPSCD had not effectively implemented procedures for approving and documenting personnel, employee travel, and consultant services costs.
Financial Audit of the Innovation for Improving Early Grade Reading Activity Project in Bangladesh Managed by the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Grant Agreement AID-388-G-15-00001, June 1, 2015, to December 31, 2016
An employee in Perryville, Maryland, received a 10-day suspension March 27, 2018, after posting an image on social media that violated company policy. After receiving an anonymous complaint in October 2017, we found that the employee violated multiple company policies by posting an inappropriate image on Facebook.