Federal Reports

We found the EPA’s financial statements to be fairly presented and free of material misstatement.

What We Looked AtWe contracted with the independent public accounting firm KPMG LLP to audit the Department of Transportation's (DOT) consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2021, and September 30, 2020. KPMG was required to provide an opinion on those financial statements, report on internal control over financial reporting, and report on compliance with laws and other matters. The contract also required KPMG to perform the audit in accordance with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit guidance, and the Governmental Accountability Office's and Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's Financial Audit Manual. We performed a quality control review of KPMG's report dated November 12, 2021, and related documentation, and inquired of its representatives.What We FoundOur quality control review disclosed no instances in which KPMG did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards.RecommendationsDOT concurred with KPMG's seven recommendations. We agree with KPMG's recommendations and are not making any additional recommendations.

Attached is a copy of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation Office of Inspector General (DFC OIG) Semiannual Report to Congress (SARC) for the reporting period April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021. This report is submitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 5 of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. August 2021 marked the one-year anniversary of DFC Inspector General Tony Zakel and we have made many strides. Foremost was onboarding experienced leaders and employees to support our oversight mission to ensure America’s international development finance initiatives are implemented and managed without instances of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. A description of our activities and the results of our efforts are provided in the report. We extend our appreciation to the U.S. Agency for International Development OIG for its continued support as we become fully operational.

National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) Semiannual Report to the NCUA Board and the Congress highlighting our accomplishments and ongoing work for the 6-month period ending September 30, 2021.

Our objective was to determine whether Postal Service payments to contract cleaners were valid, timely, and made in compliance with Postal Service payment policy.

Management Letter for the FY 2021 Financial Statement Audit

EAC OIG, through the independent public accounting firm of Brown & Company CPAs and Management Consultants, PLLC, audited EAC’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2021, and September 30, 2020.

Independent Audit Report for FEC's FY 2021 Financial Statement Audit

Audit of the FY 2021 Financial Statements

What We Looked AtWe contracted with the independent public accounting firm Harper Rains Knight & Company, PA (HRK), to audit the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2021; provide an opinion on those financial statements; and report on internal control over financial reporting, compliance with laws, and other matters. The contract required the audit to be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit guidance, and the Government Accountability Office’s and Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency’s Financial Audit Manual. We performed a quality control review (QCR) of HRK’s report dated November 5, 2021, and related documentation, and inquired of its representatives. What We FoundOur QCR disclosed no instances in which HRK did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards. RecommendationsHRK made no recommendations.

Independent Auditor's Report and Financial Statements for the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2021 and 2020

The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 requires each inspector general to prepare an annual statement summarizing what the inspector general considers to be “the most serious management and performance challenges facing the agency” and to briefly assess the agency’s progress in addressing those challenges.After robust research and analysis, the EPA OIG identified seven top management challenges that we believe represent the EPA’s greatest vulnerabilities to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement and the EPA’s most significant barriers to accomplishing its mission during fiscal year 2022. In addition to three challenges retained from our previous top management challenges report, which we reshaped and refocused into two, we identified five new top challenges that focus on emerging or increased environmental and operational threats. These seven top challenges reflect overarching issues that affect multiple EPA programs and responsibilities and that may prevent the Agency from efficiently and effectively protecting human health and the environment:Mitigating the Causes and Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. The EPA must take a leadership role in limiting climate change and mitigating its effect on human health and the environment.Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice Across the Agency and Government. As part of its effort to integrate environmental justice across its programs, the EPA must address the environmental hazards and cumulative risk facing at-risk communities and effectively communicate that risk to those communities.Ensuring the Safe Use of Chemicals. The EPA must develop timely and accurate chemical risk assessments to identify acceptable exposure levels for humans and the environment.Safeguarding Scientific Integrity Principles. Science-based decisions at the EPA must be based on principles of scientific integrity to ensure that human health and the environment are protected by using the best-available science.Ensuring Information Technology and Systems Are Protected Against Cyberthreats. Information technology is a fundamental and essential resource for the EPA to carry out its mission.Managing Infrastructure Funding and Business Operations. The EPA must effectively oversee the funding and operation of America's water, wastewater, and other environmental infrastructure.Enforcing Environmental Laws and Regulations. Through enforcement, the EPA ensures that regulated entities are following environmental laws and will continue to do so, as enforcement actions effectively deter future noncompliance.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm of Harper, Rains, Knight & Company, P.A. (HRK) to audit the financial statements of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for fiscal years ended September 30, 2021 and 2020, and to report on EEOC's internal controls over financial reporting, and compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and other matters. The contract required that HRK conduct the audit in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS) contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) audit guidance, and U.S. Government Accountability Office/Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Financial Audit Manual.

What We Looked AtWe contracted with the independent public accounting firm KPMG, LLP to audit the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2021, and September 30, 2020. KPMG was also required to provide an opinion on those financial statements, report on internal control over financial reporting, and report on compliance with laws and other matters. The contract required the audit to be performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards, Office of Management and Budget audit guidance, and the Governmental Accountability Office’s and Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency’s Financial Audit Manual. We performed a quality control review of KPMG’s report dated November 9, 2021, and related documentation, and inquired of its representatives. What We FoundOur quality control review disclosed no instances in which KPMG did not comply, in all material respects, with U.S. generally accepted Government auditing standards. RecommendationsFAA concurred with KPMG’s three recommendations. We agree with KPMG’s recommendations and are not making any additional recommendations.

Pursuant to the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Office of Inspector General must issue an annual statement summarizing what the Inspector General considers the most serious management and performance challenges facing the Department of Homeland Security and assessing its progress addressing them.

This report details KPMG’s findings of its audit of financial statements from the Bureau of Trust Funds Administration for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.

What We Looked AtIn accordance with the Government Corporation Control Act of 1945, we audited the financial statements of the Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (GLS), a U.S. Government Corporation, as of and for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2021, and September 30, 2020. What We FoundIn our opinion, GLS’s financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, GLS’s financial position as of September 30, 2021, and September 30, 2020, and its operations and changes in cumulative results of operations, cash flows, budgetary resources and actual expenses, and changes in equity of the U.S. Government for the years then ended, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. We found no material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting based on the limited procedures we performed. We also found no reportable noncompliance for fiscal year 2021, with provisions of the applicable laws, regulations, and contracts we tested. RecommendationsWe are making no recommendations.  

Our objectives were to determine whether WPRFMC (1) claimed allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs under the financial assistance awards and (2) received the goods and services paid for by the awards.

Objective: To fulfill our responsibilities under the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act) and related legislation, we monitored Grant Thornton LLP’s audit of the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 financial statements to ensure the quality of the audit work performed was adequate.

This report communicates considerations for company management if it reinstates the annual physical exam requirement for locomotive engineers, which the company suspended in August 2021 in part because of the COVID-19 pandemic.Prior to the suspension, we found that about one-third of locomotive engineers did not meet the company’s self-imposed requirement to pass an annual physical exam. Company reports showed, however, that they had passed a triennial exam to meet related Federal Railroad Administration requirements. Several factors likely contributed to engineers not fulfilling the annual requirement, including that the company had not yet designated in policy a senior accountable official or developed processes to fully enforce it.We provided two considerations for management if the company reinstates the requirement, including adopting more rigorous processes to enforce it and designating in policy a senior accountable official to ensure supervisors enforce it.

Each year, OIG identifies what we believe are the most serious management and performance challenges facing SSA. We provide this information to Congress, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), SSA, and key decision makers.

The lack of board members continues to be the biggest risk to CSB operations.

In accordance with the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Federal Election Commission Office of Inspector General identifies the most serious management and performance challenges facing the Commission and provides a brief assessment of the Commission’s progress in addressing those challenges.

In accordance with the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, this report provides a summary of the top management and performance challenges facing the Commission, noting management’s progress in addressing these challenges.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) assessed whether the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Office of Electronic Health Record Modernization (OEHRM) effectively implemented the patient scheduling component of VA’s new electronic health record system at two sites in 2020. They were the Chalmers P. Wylie VA Ambulatory Care Center in Columbus, Ohio, and the Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center in Spokane, Washington.The new scheduling system is part of VA’s $10 billion electronic health record contract with Cerner and has the potential to transform VHA scheduling. However, the OIG found that VHA and OEHRM knew of but did not fully resolve significant limitations before and after implementing the system at the Columbus and Spokane facilities, leading to reduced effectiveness and increased risk of patient care delays.With limited guidance and inadequate training on how to respond to unresolved issues, schedulers developed work-arounds. VHA employees also worked with Cerner to try to correct issues using a ticketing process that was ineffectively managed; OEHRM did not assess Cerner’s compliance with contract terms for handling tickets.VA planned to implement the system at all (11) Veterans Integrated Service Network 20 facilities by December 2021. However, OEHRM paused future deployment in March 2021 to conduct a strategic review of the full electronic health record program.VA needs to ensure VHA and OEHRM take appropriate steps to resolve issues with the new scheduling system as soon as possible. The OIG issued eight recommendations: (1) improving training for scheduling, (2) better engaging schedulers in testing and improvements, (3) issuing guidance on measuring patient wait times, (4) tracking help tickets consistent with contract terms; (5) developing a strategy to promptly resolve identified issues, (6) developing oversight of schedulers’ accuracy, (7) evaluating patient care timeliness, and (8) providing guidance to consistently address system limitations.

VA manages about $10 billion each year in medical supplies and equipment inventory. In March 2019, VA directed the deployment of the Defense Department’s Defense Medical Logistics Standard Support (DMLSS) System to modernize and standardize Veterans Health Administration (VHA) supply chain management and replace up to 12 legacy systems. The deployment is expected to cost $2.2 billion over 15 years.The Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed VA’s oversight and coordination of the system’s implementation at the pilot site, the Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center in North Chicago, Illinois, to identify challenges that could affect future deployments.The OIG found operational gaps that should be addressed to prevent recurrence and delays at future sites. The system did not meet more than 40 percent of the high priority essential business requirements identified by Lovell staff when it deployed on August 4, 2020. Consequently, Lovell staff had to develop work-arounds to maintain day to day operations.Although VA’s acquisition framework policies outline a process to ensure the DMLSS system meets high priority requirements, the VA Logistics Redesign (VALOR) program manager did not follow the framework as required. The VALOR program office tasked with overseeing the effort also had a slow and unsteady start. The office was created in early 2019 to manage deployment of the DMLSS system but did not receive funding until January 2020. Additionally, VALOR did not effectively coordinate with key stakeholders early enough to minimize operational issues. VALOR also had six program managers since VA made the decision to adopt the DMLSS system.VA concurred with OIG recommendations and reported progress on the VALOR program office aligning the DMLSS deployment process with VA’s acquisition framework policy; better identifying unmet high priority business requirements and post deployment challenges; and obtaining adequate staffing and stable leadership.

We performed an audit of the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA) Internet perimeter. Our objective was to identify cybersecurity weaknesses in TVA’s Internet perimeter through penetration testing. In summary, we identified some vulnerabilities in TVA’s internet perimeter. Specifically, we (1) downloaded files related to TVA’s disposal of coal ash that were marked as confidential, (2) accessed a Web site related to river operations that used weak authentication, and (3) found TVA’s password complexity requirements on a TVA publicly available Web site. We recommended TVA ensure (1) documents related to TVA’s disposal of coal ash for public release are properly reviewed and TVA information classification markings removed, (2) Web sites follow TVA policy for authentication, and (3) removal of TVA’s password complexity rules from TVA’s publicly accessible Web sites. TVA management provided actions they plan to take or have taken to address each of our recommendations.

What We Looked AtWe queried and downloaded 75 single audit reports prepared by non-Federal auditors and submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse between July 1, 2021 and September 30, 2021, to identify significant findings related to programs directly funded by the Department of Transportation (DOT). What We FoundWe found that reports contained a range of findings that impacted DOT programs. The auditors reported significant noncompliance with Federal guidelines related to 16 grantees that require prompt action from DOT’s Operating Administrations (OA). The auditors also identified questioned costs totaling $9,236,974 for five grantees. Of this amount, $44,115 was related to COVID-19 formula grants for the Federal Aviation Administration’s CARES Act Airport Grant Agreement Program. RecommendationsWe recommend that DOT coordinate with the impacted OAs to develop a corrective action plan to resolve and close the findings identified in this report. We also recommend that DOT determine the allowability of the questioned transactions and recover $9,236,974, if applicable.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a national review of stat community care consults generated during the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic to evaluate consult processes. Patient involvement in care urgency disagreements and reporting of adverse events in community care were also reviewed. When the OIG identified deficiencies in processes, electronic health records (EHRs) of the patients at issue were further examined for potential negative outcomes. The OIG did not identify any negative care outcomes.For the 2,236 stat community care consults generated from March 20, 2020, through June 30, 2020, that were in an active, scheduled, or completed status, the OIG reviewed the community medical provider documentation contained in patients’ EHRs and determined the following:• Care was not provided within 24 hours for 379 (16.9 percent) consults.• Care was provided as requested for 2,049 consults (91.6 percent) irrespective of being within or outside of 24 hours.The OIG conducted an electronic survey regarding facility stat community care consult processes and identified:• Approximately 10 percent of facilities reported not processing stat consults in community care. Of these, almost three-fourths referenced difficulties meeting consult requirements, such as preauthorization of care, obtaining community provider medical documentation, and completing consults within 24 hours.• Of the facilities that responded, almost one-fourth indicated the chiefs of staff or designees changed the urgency statuses of consults from stat to routine without collaborating with the referring providers.The OIG made six recommendations to the Under Secretary for Health related to community care resources, facility practices, and VHA requirements that specifically focused on stat community care consults:• Retrieval of medical records and administrative closure• Urgency override process• Patient involvement in clinical decision-making regarding consult urgency status• Time frame for adjudicating clinical appeals• Adverse event–reporting processes

The Department of Homeland Security improved drug interdiction efforts with timely corrective actions in response to eight of our prior recommendations. Specifically, DHS improved maritime drug interdiction operations by enforcing and strengthening existing mechanisms to coordinate operations and improve oversight at the field and Department levels.

What We Looked AtAs part of its mission to prevent and reduce vehicle crashes, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Office of Safety Compliance (OVSC) sets Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) to improve traffic safety. FMVSS provide performance and regulatory requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicles and vehicle safety components, such as seatbelts. Given the importance to the traveling public that all vehicles and components meet Federal safety standards, we initiated this audit to assess NHTSA’s efforts to set and enforce FMVSS. What We FoundWhile NHTSA has established policies and procedures for evaluating FMVSS and safety-related motor vehicle standards, the Agency is limited in its ability to update, set, and enforce these standards in a timely manner. First, NHTSA has faced significant delays in processing rulemaking petitions to modify or set new FMVSS, which may put the Agency in noncompliance with Federal regulations. For example, the Agency did not respond within the required 120-day timeline to 87.5 percent of FMVSS petitions submitted between March 2016 and December 2020. Second, NHTSA lacks formal training and clear guidance for enforcing compliance with FMVSS. For example, NHTSA’s OVSC lacks documented standard procedures and training for reviewing contractors’ compliance test reports and has not implemented guidance for conducting compliance investigations. Third, NHTSA is not meeting requirements for ensuring imported vehicles meet FMVSS. NHTSA’s OVSC requires Registered Importers to submit conformity packages detailing safety modifications made to comply with FMVSS. However, NHTSA lacks a standard process for reviewing these packages, increasing the risk of unsafe vehicles operating on U.S. roads. Our RecommendationsNHTSA concurred with our six recommendations to strengthen its oversight of FMVSS to comply with Federal requirements. We consider recommendations 1 through 6 resolved but open pending completion of planned actions.

OIG audited the consolidated financial statements of Rural Development for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.

The Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act of 1982 (FMFIA), P.L. 97-255, as well as the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control, M-16-17 establish specific requirements for management control. Each executive agency must establish controls to reasonably ensure that: (1) obligations and costs are in compliance with applicable laws; (2) funds, property and other assets are safeguarded against waste, loss, unauthorized use, or misappropriation; and (3) revenues and expenditures applicable to agency operations are properly recorded and accounted for to permit the preparation of reliable accounts and financial and statistical reports, and to maintain accountability over the assets. FMFIA further requires the head of each executive agency, on the basis of an evaluation conducted in accordance with applicable guidelines, to prepare and submit a signed statement to the President and the Congress disclosing whether the agency’s system of internal accounting and administrative control fully complies with requirements established in FMFIA.

The OIG’s administrative investigation examined whether the deputy executive director of VA’s Office of Construction and Facilities Management (OCFM), during his tenure as acting executive director, failed to respond appropriately to a 2018 audit by the office’s Quality Assurance Service (QAS). The QAS audit found that an unsubstantiated assertion was used to justify a lease acquisition by OCFM’s Central Region Office. The audit was deemed a “special review,” for which the service lacks a governing policy. Consequently, there was no process to track the audit’s findings and recommendations, unlike routine compliance reviews. The deputy executive director took 11 months to respond to the audit and did so only to OCFM’s executive leadership, leaving some OCFM personnel with an impression that he had ignored it. Although the OIG did not find that the deputy executive director failed to respond to the audit, it determined that OCFM lacks a policy relating to special reviews and made a corresponding recommendation.The OIG also investigated whether the deputy executive director, while the acting executive director, falsely attested to the effectiveness of OCFM’s internal controls. The deputy executive director signed statements of assurance in 2019 per governing requirements, attesting that OCFM’s controls suffered from no material weaknesses. At a February 2020 meeting, he commented on concerns he had with OCFM’s controls and assessment process, which some attendees viewed as an admission of a past false statement. The deputy executive director’s interview responses, his contemporaneous statements, and an informal inquiry by his successor indicated that the February 2020 comments referred merely to nonmaterial weaknesses in OCFM’s controls and assessment process. Thus, the OIG did not substantiate that the deputy executive director made false statements.VA concurred with the OIG’s findings and its recommendation.

As required by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA), we reviewed the Agency’s information security program for fiscal year 2021 and reported the results to OMB.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted an inspection at the Southern Oregon Rehabilitation Center and Clinics in White City (facility) and Roseburg VA Health Care System (Roseburg) in Oregon to evaluate an allegation that a resident (resident 1) was admitted to the facility’s Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Program (MH RRTP) despite not meeting admission criteria, was later transported to Roseburg for admission but was instead discharged to the community. Additional allegations were received that a second resident did not meet admission criteria and another resident was injured in the shower area. The OIG later learned about other residents who may not have met admission criteria and who fell in the shower area.The OIG did not substantiate that resident 1 was inappropriately admitted to the MH RRTP but found the resident’s discharge was not coordinated. The OIG determined the resident’s transport to Roseburg did not comply with policy. Resident 1 was assessed, determined to not meet Roseburg admission criteria, and discharged to the community.The OIG found that four of five residents reviewed met admission criteria. The OIG was unable to determine if the fifth resident met admission criteria, but found the resident should have been reevaluated after a change in medical status prior to admission.The OIG substantiated a resident was injured after falling while getting out of the shower and learned about two additional residents who fell in the shower area in the preceding 10 months. The OIG determined that facility leaders were aware of the falls but missed an opportunity to implement solutions in a timely manner.The OIG made five recommendations to the Facility Director related to the discharge template, discharges during regular business hours, transport of residents with behavioral flags, conducting medical evaluations, and a review of falls in the shower area.

Audit report in which independent public accounting firm presented an unmodified opinion on the Denali Commission’s fiscal year 2021 financial statements.

The objective was to determine to what extent FEMA followed Federal and departmental procedures and guidelines for awarding COVID-19 contracts to vendors in unusual and urgent circumstances.

In accordance with the statutory requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) and standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury, we audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s (OCFO) compliance with the DATA Act for the third quarter of fiscal year 2020. The audit was statutorily mandated by Congress. Our objectives were to assess the (1) completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and quality of HUD OCFO’s fiscal year 2020, third quarter, financial and award data submitted for publication on USASpending.gov and (2) HUD’s implementation and use of the governmentwide financial data standards established by OMB and Treasury.HUD OCFO generally complied with the reporting requirements of the DATA Act. The information it submitted for inclusion on USASpending.gov for the third quarter, fiscal year 2020, was complete, accurate, timely, and in accordance with the governmentwide data standards established by OMB and Treasury. In addition, the overall quality of the summary-level and detailed data submitted for the indicated quarter scored 97.1 percent, a score of excellent, according to the DATA Act standards. However, we identified a few exceptions. Specifically, we determined that (1) award data reported in File C were not always reported in File D2 in a timely manner and (2) inaccuracies existed between the data reported and the source documentation for the business type, action type, and other data elements. The exceptions occurred because of (1) timing differences in processing issuances of the Indian Housing Loan Guarantee (IHLG) program loan guarantees and (2) potential errors in recording the information in HUD’s financial systems or errors caused by third-party sources. HUD OCFO later submitted the IHLG program award data. It also indicated having implemented procedures to correct timing differences. Further, HUD OCFO acknowledged potential data entry errors in the business type and action type data elements, however, we considered these errors immaterial. Although we identified a few exceptions, we concluded that HUD had implemented and used the governmentwide data standards to successfully submit the spending data to Treasury’s DATA Act Broker.We do not have any new recommendations as a result of this audit. We determined that HUD had satisfactorily addressed the reasons why program award data were not submitted in a timely manner. Also, the remaining exceptions related to potential errors in the business type, action type, and other data elements were immaterial or due to causes outside HUD’s control. Further, HUD has taken corrective actions that address all open recommendations from our prior audit, and these actions address remaining issues identified in the current year audit.

This audit report shows Kearney reported five findings and made nine recommendations, to which FCC management concurred.

The objectives of our audit were to assess the 1) completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and quality of the Department’s fiscal year 2020, fourth quarter financial and award data (Files A, B, C, D1, and D2) submitted for publication on USASpending.gov (submissions); and 2) Department’s implementation and use of the Government-wide financial data standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury).For objective 1, we determined the Department submitted data of an Excellent quality based on the applicable Quality Assessment Scorecard. However, the Department did not submit certain data completely, accurately, or timely. We also identified internal control deficiencies over the Department’s DATA Act submissions. For objective 2, we determined that the Department implemented and used the Government-wide financial data standards established by OMB and Treasury under the DATA Act.

The DATA Act requires the EPA to report accurate financial and award data on USAspending.gov.

In this audit, we assessed the completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and quality of the Agency's fiscal year 2020, fourth quarter data submission as well as the Agency's implementation and use of government-wide financial data standards.

The VA OIG contracted with the independent public accounting firm CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) to audit VA’s compliance under the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). CLA conducted this performance audit with data sampled from the fourth quarter of fiscal year (FY) 2020, in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. CLA primarily conducted its audit work during FY 2021, and the results of the audit are presented in the attached report. The VA OIG does not express an opinion on VA’s compliance under the DATA Act.

The Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) requires OIG to annually audit SBA’s financial data and adherence to government financial data standards. We contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm KPMG LLP to conduct the annual audit. KPMG found the agency’s reporting required under the DATA Act. SBA met the government-wide financial data standards, and the data submission was of higher quality than in previous years. The agency has made progress since the 2019 audit increasing the availability, accuracy, and usefulness of federal spending information.However, SBA did not submit certain data completely, accurately, or on time. In addition, SBA needs to improve the completeness and accuracy of DATA Act reporting.

The objectives of this performance audit were to assess the completeness, timeliness, quality, and accuracy of Fiscal Year 2021, First Quarter financial and award data submitted for publication on USAspending.gov in accordance with the DATA Act and to assess the Peace Corps’ compliance with use of the Government-wide financial data standards established by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of the Treasury. While the majority of the data submitted was of high quality, the agency failed to include required information in their submission, submitted inappropriate data, and misrepresented the level of budgetary resources used. These errors occurred because the agency continues to lack a comprehensive quality control program over the DATA Act submissions, including source systems and data.

The DATA Act requires the CSB to report accurate financial and award data on USAspending.gov.

OIG audited the financial statements of FCIC/RMA for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.

The Office of Inspector General contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm of Harper, Rains, Knight & Company, P.A. (HRK) to conduct a performance audit of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) compliance with the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). The contract required HRK to conduct the audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Audit of FY2020 Third Quarter Data Submitted Under the DATA Act

An independent evaluation of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) compliance with provisions of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act).

Audit report presenting an opinion on the Denali Commission’s compliance with the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) for the second quarter of fiscal year 2021.

The DOI’s FY 2021 first quarter data met CIGIE’s Federal Audit Executive Council’s “excellent” quality standard.