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
Internal Revenue Service
Management of the Offer in Compromise Public Inspection Program Continues to Be a Concern
The OIG investigated allegations that a Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) manager violated Federal procurement laws and regulations by improperly influencing recommendations made by procurement source selection committees and by inflating Independent Government Cost Estimates (IGCEs). We also investigated allegations that the manager’s supervisor also improperly influenced the committee’s recommendations and obtained protected source selection information.We found that the BSEE manager and her supervisor mishandled source selection information by altering source selection reports, which are used to prioritize vendor ratings, and by influencing source selection committee members to change their vendor recommendations. In addition, the manager released protected source selection information to BSEE employees not authorized to receive it. We also found that the manager’s supervisor requested and received protected source selection information that he was not authorized to receive. Finally, we found that the manager also directed staff to increase the IGCEs to meet predetermined budgets, which contradicts the objective and independent nature of an IGCE.
Agreed-Upon Procedures Report of USAID Resources Managed by Dignitas International in Malawi Under Cooperative Agreement 674-A-00-10-00034-00, January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2016
In March 2017, the President of the National Border Patrol Council testified to Congress that Air and Marine Operations (AMO) flew “very little” at night and that United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) pilots had to fly missions for U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents in the Rio Grande Valley sector. We initiated an inspection in July 2017 to determine whether AMO and Coast Guard supported USBP Agents at night in the Rio Grande Valley sector. CBP should improve its air coordination to respond to the highest priority of USBP requests. During our inspection, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) established an operations center to improve air coordination at night in the Rio Grande Valley sector, but the operations center did not establish metrics to gauge the effectiveness of air coordination. If CBP continues to implement the operations center and develop metrics to gauge the effectiveness of air coordination, those efforts should improve the effectiveness of air support in the Rio Grande Valley sector and enhance unity of effort among CBP components.
Investigative Summary: Findings of Misconduct by U.S. Marshals Service Management for Committing Gross Mismanagement Resulting in a Gross Waste of Taxpayer Funds in its Handling of Serious Misconduct Allegations Against a Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal
We conducted a limited scope audit of Mainstreet Uptown Butte, Inc. (MSUB) for the period of June 1, 2015 to March 31, 2018. Limited scope audits involve a limited review of financial and nonfinancial information to ensure validity and accuracy of award recipients’ reported information, and compliance with state and Federal requirements. Our limited scope audit concluded that MSUB generally complied with the financial management system and recordkeeping requirements established by OMB and NEA. However, we identified some areas requiring improvement, as follows: MSUB reported unallowable costs in its total outlays for two NEA Awards; MSUB did not report accurate costs in its financial management system for one NEA Award; MSUB did not report actual costs on its Federal Financial Reports (FFR) for three awards; MSUB did not maintain adequate documentation to support costs charged to three awards; MSUB reported costs outside the period of performance for one NEA Award; MSUB did not separately identify costs by award in its financial management system; MSUB did not submit the required FFR and the Final Descriptive Report within 90 days from the end of the period of performance for one award; MSUB did not have written policies and procedures in place to ensure that contractors or recipients were not debarred or suspended from receiving Federal assistance prior to the award or payment of Federal funds; and MSUB did not have written policies and procedures for managing Federal awards.