Federal Reports

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is commencing the Fiscal Year 2026 AbilityOne Commission (Commission) Financial Statement Audit.  The objective of the audit is to express an opinion on whether the Commission’s financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

The Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, P.L. 101-576, as amended by the Government Management Reform Act, P.L. 103-356, requires 24 major agencies of the Federal Government to prepare and submit audited financial statements.  For Federal entities not covered by the Chief Financial Officers Act, the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 requires those Federal agencies and entities to prepare and submit audited financial statements to the Office of Management and Budget and Congress. 

The audit will be performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS), established by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Government Auditing Standards (2024 Revision).  The independent public accounting (IPA) firm Harper, Rains, Knight & Company (HRK) will conduct the audit, and the OIG will provide oversight as required by the IG Act of 1978, as amended.

Please be advised, the monitoring conducted by the OIG of HRK is not a product in accordance with GAGAS. The IPA firm is the principal auditor, and the OIG will not express an opinion on the U.S. AbilityOne Commission’s financial statements, internal controls over financial reporting, or compliance with laws and regulations. 

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is initiating an evaluation of the Commission’s information security program pursuant to the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA). 

The objective of the evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of the Commission’s information security program and practices.  The evaluation will assess information security program controls to support the OIG’s reporting of FISMA metrics into the Department of Homeland Security’s CyberScope application.  The independent public accounting firm Harper, Rains, Knight & Company will conduct the evaluation with the OIG providing oversight as required by the IG Act of 1978, as amended.

This review will be performed in accordance with the Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation issued by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. 

As part of our mission to safeguard the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) programs from fraud, waste, and abuse, and to identify opportunities for HUD programs to progress and succeed, we selected Colorado for a review of potential improper payments.  Our audit objective was to determine whether Colorado made improper non-Federal match activity payments.  We also assessed whether the Office of Community Planning and Development’s Office of Disaster Recovery (CPD ODR) had sufficient and adequate controls to prevent improper match payments.

We did not identify duplicate or significant amounts of unsupported non-Federal match payments for Colorado.  However, Colorado received $1.3 million of disaster recovery reimbursements from HUD that it reported as matching costs for FEMA’s Public Assistance program, but the costs were other disaster recovery costs.  This occurred because Colorado did not establish financial or payment controls for non-Federal match costs within HUD’s Disaster Recovery Grants Reporting (DRGR) system.  CPD does not require disaster recovery grantees to separately report non-Federal match costs in its data systems.  As a result, Colorado over-reported the amount of HUD disaster recovery funds it spent on non-Federal match activities.  Colorado’s reporting could increase the risk of improper payments as HUD and its stakeholders cannot use HUD’s data systems and reports to ensure that Colorado properly uses its disaster recovery funds for non-Federal match activities.

We recommend that Colorado incorporate financial and other internal controls to ensure that it allocates, tracks, and reports non-Federal match costs separately from non-match costs.  If Colorado does so, it will enhance the accuracy and transparency of its reporting of $1.3 million of disaster recovery funds.  We also recommend that CPD ODR require disaster recovery grantees to report non-Federal match activities or expenses in its data systems in a manner which will show that grantees are properly using their disaster recovery funds for the non-Federal match portion of FEMA’s Public Assistance program.
 

Semiannual Report to Congress (26-1)

Why We Did This Report

We conducted this audit to determine whether the EPA is managing its Superfund special accounts properly and timely in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and guidance.
 

Summary of Findings

Based on our in-depth review of nine Superfund special accounts, we found that the EPA generally managed special accounts in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and guidance, with the exceptions that the EPA needs to take steps to expeditiously use the funds in the Anniston Lead Superfund Site special account and needs to correct special accounts with negative balances in a timely manner.