Federal Reports

The USDA OIG's Office of Analytics and Innovation has developed a second version of Broadband: A Data Stroll in partnership with the U.S. Department of Commerce OIG and the Federal Communications Commission OIG. 

We performed an audit of the costs billed to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) by Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc (B&M) under Contract No. 15388 for engineering services.  Our audit objectives were to determine if (1) costs were billed in accordance with the contract terms, (2) the reasonableness of TVA’s process for evaluating and awarding proposed fixed price tasks issued under the contract, and (3) tasks were issued using the most cost-efficient pricing methodology.  Our audit scope included about $20.12 million in costs paid by TVA under Contract No. 15388 between September 25, 2020, and December 31, 2023.  This included approximately $19.97 million for fixed price projects and $156,136 for cost-reimbursable projects.  Our audit primarily focused on fixed price projects under the contract.  In summary, we determined:

• B&M did not provide credits to TVA for unearned fee, resulting in an overbilling of $16,854. 
• TVA did not evaluate fee for all tasks greater than $50,000 as required by the contract. 
• There were inconsistent guidelines regarding when competition was required and, as a result, TVA routinely direct-assigned fixed price tasks to B&M.  Without adequate competition between the contract partners on fixed price tasks, TVA is less able to ensure it is paying a fair fixed price amount.
• The use of fixed price compensation terms for tasks caused TVA to pay at least $644,550 more than it would have if the tasks had been issued under cost‑reimbursable payment terms.  Additionally, we estimated TVA could potentially avoid up to $2.52 million in future costs by issuing tasks under cost-reimbursable payment terms for the remaining contract spend.

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

This Office of Inspector General (OIG) Healthcare Facility Inspection program report describes the results of a focused evaluation of the care provided at the VA Southern Oregon Healthcare System in White City. 

This evaluation focused on five key content domains:
   •    Culture
   •    Environment of care
   •    Patient safety
   •    Primary care
   •    Veteran-centered safety net

The OIG issued one recommendation for improvement in one domain:
   1.    Environment of care
   •    Relocate papers and folders outside of examination rooms or secure them in protective coverings

This Office of Inspector General (OIG) Care in the Community healthcare inspection program report describes the results of a focused evaluation of community care processes at eight VA Desert Pacific Healthcare Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 22 medical facilities with a community care program. 

This evaluation focused on four domains:
   •    Leadership and Administration of Community Care
   •    Community Care Diagnostic Imaging Results
   •    Administratively Closed Community Care Consults
   •    Community Care Provider Requests for Additional Services

The OIG issued 12 recommendations for improvement in the four domains:
   •    Leadership and Administration of Community Care
     o    Community oversight councils functioning according to charters
     o    Completing the operating model staffing tool reassessment
     o    Entering patient safety events in the Joint Patient Safety Reporting system
     o    Briefing patient safety trends, lessons learned, and corrective actions
     o    Scanning community care documents into the electronic health record
   •    Community Care Diagnostic Imaging Results
     o    Attaching diagnostic imaging results to the Community Care Consult Result note
     o    Using the significant findings alert for abnormal results
   •    Administratively Closed Community Care Consults
     o    Making two attempts to obtain medical documents after administrative closure
   •    Community Care Provider Requests for Additional Services
     o    Processing requests
     o    Incorporating requests in the electronic health record
     o    Verifying providers’ signatures on forms
     o    Sending denial letters to community providers