Federal Reports

Background

The U.S. Postal Service has 50 authorized officer positions, including the postmaster general, deputy postmaster general, and vice presidents. The Postal Service had 48 active officers, including acting officers, as of September 30, 2025. Officers filed 1,011 expense reimbursement requests totaling $1,405,278. In addition, as of the end of fiscal year (FY) 2025, the Postal Service had 13 executive directors who filed 195 reimbursement requests totaling $314,570. Further, the Postal Service hired specially assigned, limited-term contract employees who were not officers, but management elected for their reimbursement requests to receive the same level of review as officers. During FY 2025, the contract employees filed 81 reimbursement requests, totaling $120,075.

What We Did

Our objective was to determine whether Postal Service officers and executive directors complied with policies and procedures regarding travel and representation expense reimbursements. We reviewed a sample of 60 reimbursement requests for officers, including limited-term contract employees, totaling $75,136, and 20 executive directors’ reimbursement requests totaling $28,362 from FY 2025.

What We Found

For the travel and representation expense reimbursements we reviewed, Postal Service officers and executive directors generally followed applicable Postal Service travel policies and included proper support for reimbursement requests. However, we did identify instances of noncompliance where applicable travel policies were not followed and reimbursement requests were not supported, as required. In some cases, the non-compliance related to undocumented policy exceptions. In addition, we noted limited-term contract employees’ reimbursement requests were not always identified for additional review by the Travel and Relocation team.

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

Performance Audit Report on the Federal Labor Relations Authority’s Compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 for Fiscal Year 2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Financial Statement Audit Letter to Management

Our Objective(s)To perform a quality control review (QCR) of Allmond & Company, LLC's (Allmond) management letter related to the audit of the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) financial statements for fiscal year 2025. We reviewed Allmond's management letter, dated January 7, 2026, and related documentation.
About This ReportWe contracted with the independent public accounting firm Allmond to audit NTSB's financial statements. Allmond also issued a management letter discussing internal control matters that Allmond was not required to include in its audit report.
What We FoundThe independent auditor, Allmond, found five internal control matters in NTSB's management of operations:

Financial statements and footnotes did not comply with Office of Management and Budget financial reporting requirements,
Improvements needed in internal controls relating to the processing and review of employee benefit assignments,
Improvements needed in internal control relating to performance of property inventories,
Improvements needed in processing personnel actions, and
Accounts payable accrual calculation duplicated expenses that were separately accrued.

Our QCR disclosed no instances in which Allmond did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards.
RecommendationsWe agree with Allmond's nine recommendations to help strengthen NTSB's internal controls.

This report presents the results of our verification inspection of the U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA) corrective actions for the recommendations from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) Audit of SBA’s Desktop Loss Verification Process (Report 19-23). A verification inspection is a review that focuses on the implementation of closed recommendations from prior OIG reports.

SBA made corrective actions in response to our prior audit and implemented a process to ensure all disaster assistance loans were verified before disbursing funds. However, the corrective actions the agency made in response to our prior audit no longer exist because SBA changed its loan processing management system and developed new processes. We found the same issues identified in our prior audit continue to persist because SBA did not address our recommendations when the agency transitioned to its new loan processing platform in 2023. In some cases, SBA weakened or eliminated internal controls even further.

In this verification inspection, we reviewed the files for 28 SBA disaster assistance loans approved in fiscal year 2025 and found 12 were missing photographs of the claimed damages. Only 1 of the 28 files contained contractor estimates for cost of repair or replacement, insurance reports, or repair receipts. The loss verifiers’ comments in the files were often minimal in supporting their conclusions from the documentation submitted. We will not reopen the recommendations from Report 19-23 but will instead incorporate our findings into a future audit of SBA’s disaster assistance loan loss verification process. SBA elected not to provide a formal response to this report.