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
Federal Maritime Commission
Semiannual Report to Congress: Covering April 1, 2019 - September 30, 2019
The Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of Inspector General (CNCS-OIG) presents its Fall 2019 Semiannual Report, covering the six-month period of April 1, 2019 – September 30, 2019.
The Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued the Semiannual Report to Congress (SAR) April 1 – September 30, 2019. The SAR summarizes the results of OIG oversight, provides statistical information, and lists all reports issued April 1 – September 30, 2019. During this reporting period, OIG audits, investigations, inspections, evaluations, and other reviews identified over $1.81 billion in monetary benefits for a return of $24 for every dollar invested in OIG oversight. Also during this reporting period, OIG issued 161 reports and publications on VA programs and operations, made 661 recommendations, and conducted investigations that led to 131 arrests.
The OIG investigated an allegation that a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) employee may have accessed and viewed child pornography on a Government computer on multiple occasions.We found that the employee accessed and viewed adult pornography on the Government computer while inside a Government office but found no evidence the employee viewed child pornography. The employee admitted viewing adult pornography on multiple occasions but denied any involvement with child pornography. Accessing and viewing pornography on a Government computer violates DOI policy; the employee said he knew that DOI policy prohibited his actions.The employee retired during our investigation.
DHS did not have the Information Technology (IT) system functionality needed to track separated migrant families during the execution of Zero Tolerance. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) adopted various ad hoc methods to record and track family separations, but this practice introduced widespread errors. These conditions persisted because CBP did not address known IT deficiencies before the Zero Tolerance Policy was implemented in May 2018. DHS also did not provide adequate guidance to personnel responsible for executing the policy. Because of the IT deficiencies, we could not confirm the total number of families DHS separated during the Zero Tolerance period. DHS estimated Border Patrol agents separated 3,014 children from their families while the policy was in place. DHS also estimated it completed 2,155 reunifications, although this effort continued on for seven months beyond the July 2018 deadline for reunifying children with their parents. However, we conducted a review of DHS data during the Zero Tolerance period and identified 136 children with potential family relationships that were not accurately recorded by CBP. In a broader analysis of DHS data between the dates of October 1, 2017 to February 14, 2019, we identified an additional 1,233 children with potential family relationships not accurately recorded by CBP. Without a reliable accounting of all family relationships, we could not validate the total number of separations, or the completion of reunifications. Although DHS spent thousands of hours and more than $1 million in overtime costs, it did not achieve the original goal of deterring “Catch-and-Release” through the Zero Tolerance Policy. Moreover, the surge in apprehended families during this time period resulted in children being held in CBP facilities beyond the 72-hour legal limit. The Department concurred with all five report recommendations.
Peer Review of the Internal Quality Control System for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General’s Office of Program Audits and Evaluations and the Office of Information Technology Audits and Cyber