Federal Reports

What We Looked AtThe Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA) gave airlines the freedom to determine which markets to serve and what fares to charge. However, it also raised concerns that communities with relatively low traffic levels might lose service entirely if carriers shifted their operations to larger, potentially more lucrative markets. Through the Essential Air Service (EAS) Program, the Department of Transportation (DOT) determines the requirements for each eligible community and subsidizes air carriers when necessary. In 2018, Congress directed our office to determine whether DOT was providing sufficient oversight of the unsubsidized air carriers providing basic essential air service. Accordingly, our objectives were to evaluate whether DOT (1) appropriately relied on unsubsidized air carriers for small communities and (2) conducted oversight of the services provided by those air carriers. What We FoundDOT appropriately relied on unsubsidized air carriers in accordance with its policy. Specifically, if an air carrier proposed to provide air service without a subsidy and the Department determined the carrier could reliably do so, DOT relied on the carrier’s service as proposed. Federal law does not require DOT to consider community views when it relies on unsubsidized carriers, and the Department did not prescribe specific content for their proposals. We also found that DOT conducted limited oversight of the EAS communities served by unsubsidized carriers. Federal law requires eligible communities to be provided with basic essential air service and air carriers to file a 90-day notice of their intent to end, suspend, or reduce such service. While unsubsidized carriers typically met the minimum departure criteria for their communities, officials in seven of the nine communities we reviewed were unaware that they could petition Department when issues arose. DOT also did not conduct required periodic reviews of the designated levels of service in unsubsidized communities, which limited its awareness of their essential air service needs. Our RecommendationsWe made two recommendations to improve DOT’s oversight of EAS communities served by unsubsidized carriers. The Department concurred with recommendation 1 and partially concurred with recommendation 2, which we consider to be open and unresolved pending a decision from DOT.

In 2020, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) processed about 1.2 million disability compensation claims and paid more than $90.8 billion in total benefits to veterans. About five million veterans were receiving these benefits as of December 31. To ensure claims decisions are accurate and consistent so veterans receive the benefits to which they are entitled, VBA established a multifaceted quality assurance program.The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed the quality assurance program and identified a systemic weakness in oversight and accountability. In the quality assurance program, Compensation Service conducts reviews that identify deficiencies in the disability compensation benefits claims process, and the Office of Field Operations has oversight responsibility for ensuring regional office employees and supervisors follow quality assurance procedures and take action to correct deficiencies identified during quality assurance reviews. The OIG found that while VBA’s quality assurance program routinely identified claims-processing deficiencies and communicated results to internal and external stakeholders, the Office of Field Operations did not ensure that regional office employees took adequate corrective actions to address the deficiencies identified.Until VBA senior leaders ensure improvements are made, veterans are at risk of not receiving the benefits they deserve. The OIG recommended the acting under secretary for benefits develop and implement a written plan to strengthen oversight of the quality assurance program and monitor the plan to ensure identified deficiencies are adequately addressed.

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted an inspection in response to allegations related to ophthalmology resident supervision and quality of care by an attending ophthalmologist (subject ophthalmologist) at the Oklahoma City VA Health Care System in Oklahoma.The OIG substantiated that the subject ophthalmologist failed to provide adequate resident supervision and entered inaccurate documentation related to supervision for a single patient case. The ophthalmology residents were unable to reach the subject ophthalmologist when the patient experienced a complication during an eye injection procedure. The residents reached another attending ophthalmologist who examined the patient and assisted the residents.The subject ophthalmologist was assigned to supervise residents in the clinic and did not arrange a hand-off for attending coverage when away from the clinic.The OIG found that a note in the patient’s electronic health record that documented supervision by the subject ophthalmologist was incorrect because the subject ophthalmologist did not directly participate in and was not present during the care of the patient. The subject ophthalmologist used a standard template and acknowledged the note was incorrect due to a failure to read and edit the note before signing it.Aside from the single patient case, the OIG did not identify other failures to supervise residents or inaccurate documentation of resident supervision by the subject ophthalmologist.The subject ophthalmologist, aside from the single patient case, provided and documented proper patient care. A review of 20 patients performed by an external ophthalmologist and the OIG determined the subject ophthalmologist provided acceptable quality of care and appropriate documentation.The OIG made three recommendations to the Facility Director related to documentation of resident supervision and the hand-off process for attending ophthalmologist coverage.

The Office of Inspector General evaluated the Agency’s fiscal year 2020 compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act

The NASA Office of Inspector General reviewed the Agency’s cybersecurity readiness.

BACKGROUNDThe Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ProgramThe Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 established the TANF program to help families progress from welfare to self-sufficiency. Under TANF, the Federal government provides States $16.6 billion in annual block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish the TANF program’s four purposes. States have broad flexibility in how they spend their TANF and MOE funds. At the Federal level, ACF’s Office of Family Assistance administers the TANF program and provides oversight for compliance with Federal requirements. Federal Requirements States may use Federal TANF funds for expenditures that are reasonably calculated to accomplish the purposes of the TANF program or for which the State was authorized to use funds under prior law (45 CFR § 263.11). TANF and MOE expenditures must be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the performance of the TANF program and be adequately documented (45 CFR §§ 75.403(a) and (g)). States must also submit quarterly reports of TANF data and financial information to ACF using the ACF-196R (Social Security Act § 411 and 45 CFR § 265.3). States’ quarterly ACF-196R reports must be complete and accurate and filed by the due date. States must maintain records to adequately support any report (45 CFR § 265.7). States’ financial management systems must be sufficient to permit the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. The financial management system must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program; maintain records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally-funded activities; and have effective control over, and accountability for, all funds, property, and other assets (45 CFR § 75.302). New York’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program Expenditures In New York, the State agency administers the TANF program and delegates local social services districts (local districts) to operate their local program. For FY 2016, ACF awarded the State agency $2.7billion in Federal TANF funds and the State agency reported a total of $5.3 billion in TANF and MOE expenditures on its ACF-196R reports. These expenditures included $4.8 billion in total assistance payments and support expenditures for TANF-eligible families and individuals and $558 million transferred to two other ACF-funded programs—the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) and the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) programs. The State agency obtained total TANF and MOE expenditures from local districts and TANF-funded State programs and reported these amounts on its ACF-196R reports. Local districts were responsible for collecting and maintaining supporting documentation for assistance payments and support services reported as TANF and MOE expenditures and submitted monthly summary reports of these expenditures to the State agency. On a quarterly basis, the State agency used summary reports submitted by the local districts to the State agency’s claims reporting system, gathered data from several schedules in these summary reports, and used a preset formula to calculate totals for both TANF and MOE expenditures. The State agency then combined these totals with monthly or quarterly expenditure totals from TANF-funded State programs, including program administrative expenditures, and reported its total quarterly TANF and MOE expenditure amounts to ACF on the ACF-196R. OBJECTIVEOur objective was to determine whether the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (the State agency) ensured that its TANF and MOE expenditures reported to ACF met Federal requirements.

Our audit covered 21,537 claims for which Franciscan (located in University Place, Washington) received Medicare reimbursement of $101.5 million for hospice services provided from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2017. We reviewed a random sample of 100 claims. We evaluated compliance with selected Medicare billing requirements and submitted these sampled claims and the associated medical records to an independent medical review contractor to determine whether the services met coverage, medical necessity, and coding requirements.

A commissioned study by MITRE that identifies gaps in federal data sources and how we can close them to improve the quality of the information we provide to the public.

As part of our annual audit plan, we performed an audit of costs billed to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) by Siemens Energy, Inc. (Siemens) under Contract No. 10092. This contract was a long-term service agreement for the Ackerman Combined Cycle Plant located in Ackerman, Mississippi. Under the contract, Siemens was to provide program management services; scheduled outage services; and supply any program parts, nonprogram parts, miscellaneous hardware, or services as requested by TVA. Our audit objective was to determine if the costs were billed to TVA in accordance with the contract's terms. The audit scope included $68,055,969 in costs TVA paid to Siemens from April 14, 2015, through February 29, 2020.In summary, we determined Siemens overbilled TVA $201,829 due to ineligible and unsupported time and material costs. Specifically, we found Siemens billed TVA, (1) $124,501 for ineligible per diem costs, (2) $30,523 in unsupported tool costs, (3) $18,342 for ineligible noncraft labor costs, (4) an estimated $17,425 for ineligible craft labor costs, and (5) $11,038 in other ineligible costs. In addition, we identified $500,580 in costs billed to and paid by TVA under Contract No. 10092 that should have been billed under another contract TVA has with Siemens. We also identified opportunities to improve contract administration by TVA. Specifically, we found (1) the contract limits TVA's ability to control cost, and (2) TVA did not maintain adequate documentation to support credits taken by TVA.(Summary Only)

I am pleased to submit the Amtrak Office of Inspector General (OIG) Semiannual Report to the United States Congress for the six months ending March 31, 2021. One year ago, we were in the very early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, a time when Amtrak’s ridership and revenue plunged to record lows. Since then, the company has received more than $3.7 billion in federal funding dedicated to addressing pandemic-related requirements, restoring long distance service, and recalling employees that were furloughed in 2020.During this time, we made our own adjustments, which included transitioning to full-time telework to better protect our employees and balancing our oversight mission requirements against the company’s urgent needs to address significant challenges associated with the pandemic. We refocused our efforts on providing oversight of pandemic-related funding, how executive decisions were impacting company operations, advising the company and our other stakeholders on the most significant management challenges the company will face in the coming years, and pursuing dozens of investigations ranging from policy violations to significant criminal activity.We also decided to move up our bi-annual report on the most significant management challenges facing the company. We found the challenge of responding to the pandemic superseded and permeated the company’s ability to address all other challenges, and that it would need to adapt and develop a strategy to position itself to become a transportation mode of choice in a rapidly changing economy. Additionally, we identified opportunities in safety, security, financial management, and other areas where the company has made progress, but significant work remains on improving its effectiveness and efficiency.

We determined DHS law enforcement components did not consistently collect DNA from arrestees as required. Of the five DHS law enforcement components we reviewed that are subject to these DNA collection requirements, only Secret Service consistently collected DNA from arrestees. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Federal Protective Service inconsistently collected DNA, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) collected no DNA. DHS did not adequately oversee its law enforcement components to ensure they properly implemented DNA collection. Based on our analysis, we project the DHS law enforcement components we audited did not collect DNA for about 212,646, or 88 percent, of the 241,753 arrestees from fiscal years 2018 and 2019. Without all DHS arrestees’ DNA samples in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s criminal database, law enforcement likely missed opportunities to receive investigative leads based on DNA matches. Additionally, DHS did not benefit from a unity of effort, such as sharing and leveraging processes, data collection, and best practices across components. We recommended DHS oversee and guide its law enforcement components to ensure they comply with collection requirements. DHS concurred with all four of our recommend.

We determined that before July 12, 2018, migrant parents did not consistently have the opportunity to reunify with their children before removal. Although DHS and ICE have claimed that parents removed without their children chose to leave them behind, there was no policy or standard process requiring ICE officers to ascertain, document, or honor parents’ decisions regarding their children. As a result, from the time the Government began increasing criminal prosecutions in July 2017, ICE removed at least 348 separated parents without documenting whether those parents wanted to leave their children in the United States. In fact, ICE removed some parents without their children despite having evidence the parents wanted to bring their children back to their home country. In addition, we found that some ICE records purportedly documenting migrant parents’ decisions to leave their children in the United States were significantly flawed. We made two recommendation that will ensure ICE documents separated migrant parents’ decisions regarding their minor children upon removal from the United States, and develops a process to share information with Government officials to contact parents for whom ICE lacks documentation on reunification preferences. ICE concurred with our recommendations.

Payment Integrity Information Act Compliance Report for Fiscal Year 2020

This audit report shows LEC noted that the FCC was in compliance for eight of its ten programs that were identified as susceptible to significant improper payments and reported a scope limitation for the USF-LL Program.

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) fiscal year 2020 compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) and other Office of Management and Budget guidance.  PIIA was enacted to prevent and reduce improper payments and requires each agency’s inspector general to perform an annual review of the agency’s compliance with PIIA.  Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD complied with PIIA reporting and improper payments reduction requirements according to guidance from the OMB.HUD did not fully comply with PIIA reporting and improper payments reduction requirements for fiscal year 2020.  Of the six requirements, HUD did not comply with one requirement, and one requirement was not applicable.  Specifically, HUD did not use a comprehensive sampling and estimation methodology for publishing an improper payments estimate for three of four reported programs.  Due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, HUD did not test the complete payment cycle, to include payments issued by State, local, or other agencies, which was not made clear in its reporting of improper payments estimates.  Instead, HUD was limited to the extent that the documentation and information were readily available to it without burdening the direct recipients of funds.  As a result, HUD’s programs were vulnerable to the adverse effects of improper payments, and HUD will likely continue to miss opportunities to prevent, identify, reduce, and recover improper payments unless it fully complies with PIIA reporting and reduction requirements.  However, we recognize that HUD is making progress in being fully compliant with PIIA and acknowledge its plan to execute a comprehensive sampling and estimation methodology in the coming year.We recommend that HUD use a comprehensive sampling and estimation methodology for all reported programs and disclose in its reporting any limitations imposed or encountered.

Improved review methods when considering the allowability of costs for grant funds will aid the EPA in identifying estimated improper payments.

In accordance with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget, we reviewed the “Payment Integrity” section in the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Agency Financial Report (AFR) for fiscal year (FY) 2020. Our objective was to determine whether the Department met the requirements of the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) and accurately and completely reported on improper payments in its AFR and accompanying materials.We found that the Department did not comply with PIIA reporting requirements for FY 2020 because it was unable to provide evidence that risk assessments were performed on three new programs.We were accordingly unable to verify the Department’s representations and the accuracy of the information published in the AFR and so were required to report a finding of noncompliance pursuant to relevant inspection standards.

The objectives of our audit were to: 1. Review the payment integrity section of the fiscal year (FY) 2020 Agency Financial Report (AFR) to determine whether the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is in compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA). 2. Evaluate the Department’s (a) risk assessment methodology, (b) improper payment rate estimates, (c) sampling and estimation plans, (d) corrective action plans, and (e) efforts to prevent and reduce improper payments.The Department did not comply with the PIIA because it did not meet two of the six compliance requirements, as described in Finding 1. Specifically, the Department did not demonstrate improvement in reducing improper payments in the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) program. In addition, the Department reported improper payment rates that exceed 10 percent for the Temporary Emergency Impact Aid for Displaced Students (Emergency Impact Aid) and Immediate Aid to Restart School Operations (Restart) programs.

The purpose of this report is to share with the U.S. Department of Education (Department) observations made by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) concerning institutions of higher education (IHE) that ceased to provide educational instruction in all programs of study (closed) and received or had access to coronavirus response and relief aid through the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF). We found that 17 IHEs that closed on or before December 31, 2020, applied for and were awarded a total of $4,912,675 of HEERF grants by OPE. Of these 17 IHEs, 14 drew down HEERF funds and 3 did not draw down any of their awards. Of the 14 IHEs that drew down their HEERF awards, 8 made drawdowns after the IHE closure date listed in the Postsecondary Education Participants System (PEPS). The total of these post-closure drawdowns was $1,261,329. In addition, 1 of the 14 closed IHEs that drew down funds made a draw of $364,715 one day before closing.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) must review the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS's) compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA, P.L. No. 116-117) and related applicable improper payment guidance. Ernst & Young (EY), LLP, under its contract with the HHS OIG, audited the fiscal year (FY) 2020 HHS improper payment information reported in the Agency Financial Report (AFR) to determine compliance with PIIA and related guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

This report recaps OIG achievements in FY2020, in core mission as well as organizational improvements. It contains a spotlight on our CARES Act work and highlights key statistical impacts from OIG.

The Medicare hospice benefit allows providers to claim Medicare reimbursement for hospice services provided to individuals with a life expectancy of 6 months or less who have elected hospice care. Previous OIG audits and evaluations found that Medicare inappropriately paid for hospice services that did not meet certain Medicare requirements.Our objective was to determine whether hospice services provided by Alive Hospice, Inc. (Alive), complied with Medicare requirements.

The Medicare hospice benefit allows providers to claim Medicare reimbursement for hospice services provided to individuals with a life expectancy of 6 months or less who have elected hospice care. Previous OIG audits and evaluations found that Medicare inappropriately paid for hospice services that did not meet certain Medicare requirements.Our objective was to determine whether hospice services provided by Ambercare Hospice, Inc. (Ambercare), complied with Medicare requirements.

A decline in the EPA's enforcement activities may expose the public and the environment to undetected harmful pollutants.

This report presents the results of our self-initiated audit of Voyager Card Transactions – Chino, CA, Post Office. The Chino, CA, Post Office is in the California 4 District of the WestPac Area. This audit was designed to provide U.S. Postal Service management with timely information on potential financial control risks at Postal Service locations.

For our final report on FY 2020 improper payment reporting, our review objective was to determine the Department’s compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA). To determine FY 2020 compliance, we reviewed the “Payment Integrity” section of the Department’s FY 2020 Agency Financial Report (AFR), accompanying materials to the AFR, and other improper payment-related documentation. We also assessed the Department’s efforts related to preventing and reducing improper payments. Based on our review, we concluded that the Department did not comply with all criteria and therefore is not compliant under PIIA. We did not identify any actions needed to further improve prevention and reduction of improper payments. However, we made recommendations related to improving the Department’s annual risk assessment process.

Our objective was to determine mailer compliance with Negotiated Service Agreement (NSA) provisions and evaluate the U.S. Postal Service’s oversight of NSA Contract [redacted]. We selected this NSA based on the mailer’s fiscal year (FY) 2019 volume and revenue.

Safety, health, and attrition issues may compromise NEIC’s ability to support the EPA’s civil and criminal enforcement efforts.

Correctional and detention facilities present unique challenges in preventing and controlling the spread of COVID-19. When compared to the general population, a disproportionate number of COVID-19 outbreaks and deaths occur in jails, prisons, and detention facilities across the country. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has noted that the confined nature of correctional and detention facilities, combined with their congregate environments, heightens the potential for COVID-19 to spread once introduced into a facility. Individuals typically eat, sleep, and participate in activities in close proximity to one another in these facilities, which can include custody, housing, healthcare, food service, education, recreation, and workplace components in a single physical setting. Considering the increased risk presented by these congregate settings, several Offices of Inspectors General published reports on how federal agencies handled the COVID-19 pandemic in correctional and detention environments. This insights reports summarizes the work completed by OIGs related to the steps federal agencies have taken to prevent the spread and mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on their staff and the individuals housed in federal correctional and detention facilities. Common issues identified include challenges of physical layout, capacity, staffing, guidance, consistency in mitigation efforts across facility types, and safe transport of inmates and detainees.

This report presents the results of the required audit of the Small Business Administration’s (SBA’s) compliance with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019. We contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm KPMG LLP to conduct a performance audit, as required by the Act. The objectives of the engagement were to review the payment integrity section of SBA’s Fiscal Year 2020 Agency Financial Report to determine whether the agency was in compliance with the Act. KPMG also evaluated the agency’s accuracy and completeness of reporting and performance in preventing and reducing improper payments.The independent auditors’ report presents KPMG’s findings on the agency’s improper payment reporting required under the Act. KPMG reported that SBA is compliant with four of the six reporting requirements in the Act. However, SBA is not compliant with the Act because the Disaster Direct Loan Program reported an improper payments rate that exceeded the 10 percent threshold for compliance and did not demonstrate improvements as evidenced by not meeting its planned FY 2020 improper payments target reduction. In addition, KPMG found the agency needs to improve the completeness and accuracy of improper payment reporting. The agency also needs to improve controls to prevent and reduce improper payments.

Our objective for this report was to assess the extent to which the company is accurately and transparently using, accounting for, and reporting on funds it was provided through the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021.We found that the company remained a good steward of the $1 billion in funding Congress provided as part of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021 (Relief Act) and is, in general, accurately using and accounting for these funds. We identified two opportunities where the company can be more transparent in its communications and reporting on its planned spending and adherence to congressional directives related to employee furloughs.

Our objective was to assess the U.S. Postal Service’s social media and digital channel security posture. We also assessed whether policies are in place to protect the integrity of the Postal Service’s official social media and digital channel presence.

We determined that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Border Patrol headquarters officials were only aware of a few of the 83 CBP employees’ cases of social media misconduct. CBP and Border Patrol senior officials only responded to one of those cases, upon direction from DHS. In contrast, the senior Office of Field Operations (OFO) headquarters leader issued guidance to remind OFO employees of acceptable use of social media. With regard to the posts media outlets published in July 2019, we found no evidence that senior CBP headquarters or field leaders were aware of them until they were made public by the media. We also found some senior leaders questioned the legality or the application of CBP policies, which may undermine CBP’s ability to enforce the policies. We made two recommendations to help reduce the incidence of social media misconduct. First, we recommended the Commissioner ensures CBP uniformly applies social media misconduct policies, and establishes social media training for new recruits and annual refresher training for all employees. CBP concurred with all recommendations.

To read this report, visit the Pandemic Response Accountability website:https://www.pandemicoversight.gov/oversight/our-publications-reports/ke…

The VA Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) Office of Investigations was contacted by the Facility Director in June 2018 who reported concerns related to the suspicious deaths of nine patients from profound hypoglycemia (low blood sugar). A criminal investigation was initiated. The OIG Office of Healthcare Inspections immediately commenced a parallel healthcare inspection. Healthcare inspectors finalized their evaluation after OIG investigators completed the criminal case.On July 14, 2020, Reta Mays, a former nursing assistant, pled guilty to seven counts of second degree murder and one count of assault with the intent to commit murder by deliberately administering insulin to eight patients.The OIG found that the facility had serious clinical and administrative failures, including hiring and medication security practices, communication of clinical information, and patient safety deficiencies that contributed to Ms. Mays’s criminal actions not being identified and stopped earlier.The OIG made three recommendations to the Under Secretary for Health related to adjudicator follow-up of unreturned background investigation documentation, rescue medication security and management, and mortality data analyses. Two recommendations were made to the Veterans Integrated Service Network Director to conduct management reviews of the care of patients discussed in this report and a broader evaluation of patients who may have been harmed in other ways by Ms. Mays’s actions. Ten recommendations were made to the Facility Director related to the Pharmacy Service’s inventory accountability, endocrinology consults, clinical communication expectations, clinical documentation reviews, clinical care-related reporting expectations, patient safety event training, interdisciplinary mortality workgroup activities, oversight and reporting, and a culture of safety.

The EPA and states can reduce the volume of trash, including plastics, in U.S. waterways by evaluating barriers to implementing the Clean Water Act and developing strategies to overcome those barriers.

We investigated allegations that a National Park Service (NPS) supervisor took Government property for personal use and misused her official position. The NPS subsequently notified us that one of the supervisor’s subordinate employees also took Government computer equipment for personal use.We found that the NPS supervisor and two subordinate employees took Government property for personal use. We also found that the NPS supervisor misused two subordinates’ official time by directing them to perform work on her personal property for her personal benefit. Lastly, we found that park officials did not ensure that the subordinate employees received mandatory property disposal training.The NPS supervisor admitted guilt of felony theft and was accepted into a diversion program that, if successfully completed, would lead to dismissal of a felony theft charge. Based on that charge and an interim report of our findings, the NPS subsequently issued the supervisor a 14 calendar-day suspension without pay. She paid the NPS $3,964 in restitution.

The National Park Service (NPS) provided $12.7 million to the Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office (PRSHPO) in fiscal year (FY) 2019 for the repair and restoration of historic sites damaged in 2017 by Hurricanes Irma and Maria. The PRSHPO received a considerably smaller amount in prior FYs—approximately $1.3 million combined for FYs 2017 and 2018. Due to the significant increase in funding in FY 2019, the NPS requested that we conduct a financial audit of the PRSHPO’s accounting system to ensure that it could properly account for the increased funding.Our audit found deficiencies in how labor expenses were recorded, tracked, and reported. We also found that the PRSHPO did not have a policy or procedures as an internal control for ensuring compliance with Federal statutes, relevant regulations, and terms and conditions of a Federal award as required by the Code of Federal Regulations.We make five recommendations to help the PRSHPO improve its accounting system. In response to our draft report, the NPS and the PRSHPO concurred with our findings and recommendations.

A prior OIG audit found that Medicare paid providers that had billed for medically unnecessary laboratory tests. Our preliminary review of Medicare claims identified providers that billed for direct-measurement, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol tests (direct LDL tests) and lipid panels (a blood test that reports four measures of lipids, including LDL cholesterol) for the same beneficiary on the same date of service; some of these providers billed the direct LDL test every time they billed the lipid panel. These claims were at risk of noncompliance with Medicare requirements because, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), billing for a direct LDL test in addition to a lipid panel, while sometimes medically necessary, should happen with only limited frequency.Our objective was to determine whether payments made to providers for direct LDL tests that were billed in addition to lipid panels for the same beneficiary on the same date of service complied with Medicare requirements.Our audit covered Medicare Part B payments of about $35 million for direct LDL tests that were billed in addition to lipid panels for the same beneficiary on the same date of service and that had dates of service from 2015 through 2019 (audit period).

The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) dismissed discrimination complaints in accordance with applicable policies and procedures. Specifically, we determined whether (1) complaints initially dismissed as a result of the March 2018 revision to OCR’s Case Processing Manual (CPM) have been reopened and reviewed and (2) the revised complaint dismissal process was conducted as provided in OCR’s November 2018 revision to the CPM. We were unable to determine whether complaints that were dismissed because of the March 2018 CPM revisions have been reopened and reviewed. We found that OCR needs to improve its tracking related to the reopening of complaints previously dismissed under Section 108(t) of the March 2018 CPM. We found no indication that complaints were not being dismissed in accordance with revisions made to the November 2018 CPM. We also found that complaints dismissed because of the March 2018 CPM revisions were generally dismissed in accordance with policy. However, we did find that some complaints dismissed under Section 108(t) did not always meet the criteria for dismissal, some complaints that did meet the criteria for a dismissal under Section 108(t) were not always dismissed, and case files did not always contain required documentation. In addition, we found that several of the complaints dismissed were already in an active resolution phase and/or an investigation had been completed.

For our evaluation of USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) operations, the objectives were to (1) assess PTAB’s processes; (2) identify risk areas within PTAB; and (3) identify any internal and external challenges PTAB faces, and the significance and impacts of these challenges. We contracted with The MITRE Corporation (MITRE)—an independent firm—to perform this evaluation. Our office oversaw the progress of this evaluation to ensure that MITRE performed the evaluation in accordance with the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency’s Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation (December 2020) and contract terms. However, MITRE is solely responsible for the attached report and conclusions expressed in it.

We investigated allegations that an oil and gas production company claimed improper allowances for offshore Federal mineral leases in the Pacific Ocean. The company submitted royalty refund requests to the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) for previously unclaimed oil and gas transportation allowances and gas processing allowances. The royalty refund requests raised suspicion at ONRR because the company had not claimed such allowances previously and because the royalty refund requests covered the regulatory maximum allowable period of 6 years.We found the company’s royalty refund requests were incorrect and poorly documented; however, we found no evidence the company intended to deceive or defraud ONRR. We found the company submitted claims on incorrect forms, improperly designated expenses associated with a pipeline it owned, and failed to provide ONRR with source documents that fully supported its royalty refund requests.We also found that the company owes unpaid mineral royalties to ONRR. The company reduced current Federal mineral royalty payments submitted to ONRR in an attempt to recoup funds included in its prior requests in anticipation that ONRR would eventually approve its claims for payment. As of April 2021, ONRR had denied the company’s royalty refund requests pending further review, and ONRR is continuing to work with the company to either approve the refund claims or recover any unpaid Federal mineral royalties.

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 March 31, 2021.

In this semiannual report, we discuss both the major accomplishments and activities of OIG from October 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, as well as its goals and future plans.

Our objective was to determine whether the Social Security Administration (SSA) met all requirements of the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 Agency Financial Report (AFR) and accompanying materials. In addition, we evaluated the Agency’s efforts to prevent and reduce improper payments.

DHS did not comply with Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) in fiscal year 2020 because it did not achieve and report an improper payment rate of less than 10 percent for 2 of 12 programs reported in its FY 2020 Agency Financial Report. DHS complied with Executive Order 13520 by properly compiling and making available to the public its FY 2020 Quarterly High-Dollar Overpayment reports. We made two recommendations to DHS to follow Office of Management and Budget requirements and ensure the Federal Emergency Management Agency continues its remediation process to reduce improper payments. DHS concurred with both recommendations.