Federal Reports

As of March 31, 2021, HUD had disbursed $3.4 billion and obligated $7.4 billion of its $12.4 billion in CARES Act funds. Meanwhile, HUD has more than $1.6 billion in CARES Act funds unobligated. These funds have various expiration dates. For example, HUD has until September 30, 2021, to obligate $28 million of the remaining management and administration CARES Act funds and until September 30, 2022, to obligate more than $1.3 billion of the remaining Office of Community Planning and Development’s CARES Act funds. If HUD is unable to obligate funds properly before its appropriations expire, it may have balances canceled and returned to the General Fund when the expired account(s) closes.HUD tracks all CARES Act funding in its financial systems using disaster emergency fund codes (DEFC) “N” and “O” assigned by the Office of Management and Budget and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. HUD incorporates these DEFCs into the fund code for each program, which allows HUD to track the status of each program’s CARES Act funds. Regarding the CARES Act requirement for preventing duplication of benefits, the Act does not specify a structure for meeting this requirement. According to HUD, it passed on the responsibility to prevent the duplication of benefits to Community Development Block Grant-CARES Act grantees.HUD’s reporting process generally supports CARES Act reporting requirements, which are outlined in Section 15011 of the CARES Act. By leveraging existing reporting mechanisms, HUD has established a process to meet portions of its Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) quarterly reporting requirement on behalf of covered recipients. However, HUD’s process does not support reporting quarterly on the estimated number of jobs created or retained or on subrecipient data, as required for covered recipients in the CARES Act. Further, unclear reporting requirements and the required reporting schedule pose challenges to HUD’s quarterly reporting to the PRAC.As of March 31, 2021, HUD’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) had undertaken 26 reviews related to the CARES Act, of which one report offers a recommendation on CARES Act-related accounting. HUD OIG has published two other reports highlighting the need for customer service-related improvements. HUD OIG has several ongoing reviews and continues to perform oversight work related to the CARES Act.

We audited $137.7 million of costs billed to the Tennessee Valley Authority by Framatome Inc. under Contract No. 8786 to determine if costs billed to TVA were in compliance with contract's terms. We determined the costs billed by Framatome Inc. generally complied with the contract except for $80,862.(Summary Only)

Both the Burbank, CA, Main Office and Downtown Station sites are in the California 3 District of the WestPac Area. OIG data analytics identified these two sites as having large retail floor stamp inventory count shortages from October 1, 2019 through January 31, 2021. Retail associates who work at window services do not have a stamp stock inventory assigned and instead work from a shared retail floor stamp inventory. The objective of this audit was to determine whether the Burbank Main Office and Downtown Station properly accounted for stamps, money orders, and cash.

Why OIG Did This Audit The National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) use of “other transactions” (OTs), which are special award instruments that are generally not subject to Federal laws and regulations that apply to traditional award instruments, increased by $314 million from 2016 to 2019. The Federal Government generally uses OTs for high-risk, high-reward research and development projects. Although OTs are subject to fewer restrictions than contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements, they must be awarded and administered in a way that ensures proper stewardship of Federal funds.From October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2019 (audit period), the NIH National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) awarded $84.3 million in Federal funds under 29 OTs.Our objective was to determine whether NHLBI complied with applicable Federal requirements for awarding and administering OTs.How OIG Did This AuditOur audit covered a judgmental sample of 12 OTs totaling $71.9 million that NHLBI awarded and administered during the audit period.Our audit procedures focused on whether NHLBI documentation for the sampled OTs provided evidence of compliance with Federal requirements. This audit is responsive to a U.S. Office of Special Counsel complaint referral.

Ryan Kane, a resident of Pennsylvania, was sentenced in U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, to time served, three years supervised release, and a $100 special assessment for his part in an Amtrak ticket fraud scheme. As part of his sentence, Kane was ordered to pay $124,544 in restitution; $35,000 of which is owed solely by Kane and $89,544 of which is owed jointly with co-conspirator Christian Newby. As a condition of his release, Kane was sentenced to 12 months of home detention with electronic monitoring. Kane previously pleaded guilty to theft of government funds after our investigation found that he participated in a scheme to defraud Amtrak and others by using stolen credit card information from more than 10 credit cards to purchase Amtrak tickets online.

The OIG investigated allegations that a Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) superintendent and one of the superintendent’s coworkers influenced the award of a subcontract on a BIE contract to a business owned by a family member of the superintendent. We also investigated allegations that the superintendent instructed other BIE employees to perform work for the family member’s business while on duty.We found no evidence the superintendent directly influenced the award of the contract because we found no evidence that the prime contractor had substantive contact with the superintendent before selecting subcontractors. We did find, however, that the superintendent’s coworker included the family member’s company on a list of recommended subcontractors sent to the prime contractor, which violated standing guidance. This failure may have contributed to an appearance of improper influence.We confirmed that BIE employees assisted subcontractors with tasks at the project site but did not find evidence that, in allowing this, the superintendent’s position was misused to benefit the family member’s business.