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
National Science Foundation
Management Notification Memo Regarding University of Wyoming Charging Indirect Costs to Participant Support
This management information report provides the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) perspective on challenges the U.S. Department of Education (Department) may face as it implements and oversees the Coronavirus, Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. In preparing this report, we reviewed recent audit work performed by OIG and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as well as OIG’s annual Management Challenges reports. We also reviewed challenges that the Department faced when administering education-related grant programs funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act), to include how the challenges were addressed andwhat lessons were noted as needing to be considered in the event that legislation providing a large yet temporary funding increase for new or existing programs (like the Recovery Act) was enacted in the future.We identified challenges related to grantee oversight and monitoring, student financial assistance oversight and monitoring, and data quality and reporting that the Department should consider as it implements and oversees the CARES Act.
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of portability in the Housing Choice Voucher Program based on a congressional inquiry from Senator Grassley’s office. Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD had adequate oversight of portability in the Housing Choice Voucher Program; specifically, to determine whether (1) HUD had adequate policies and procedures to identify and evaluate the impacts portability may have on public housing agencies’ Housing Choice Voucher Programs and (2) HUD’s financial information relating to portability set-aside and additional administrative fees was correctly calculated and distributed in accordance with its requirements.HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing generally had adequate oversight of portability in the Housing Choice Voucher Program; however, improvements could be made. Although HUD reviews public housing agencies’ programs, it did not specifically identify and evaluate the effects of portability. As a result, HUD could miss the opportunity to assess the impact of portability on public housing agencies’ programs and use the information to make decisions that could (1) assist public housing agencies experiencing difficulties with managing the portability component of the program and (2) result in programmatic or process improvements. In addition, HUD generally calculated portability set-aside funding for increased costs and special administrative fees for portability correctly with a few exceptions. As a result, HUD overpaid $115,335 in set-aside funding and $133,179 in special administrative fees. It also underpaid $35,189 in special administrative fees.We recommend that HUD (1) conduct an assessment of the impact of portability and determine whether technical assistance is necessary for certain public housing agencies, (2) pursue collection or recapture $248,514 for the overpayments and distribute $35,189 for the underpayments of set-aside funds and special administrative fees, and (3) review the calculations and distributions of funds for category 2b portability set-aside and special administrative fees for portability to ensure accuracy.
FHFA Completed Most of its Planned Ongoing Monitoring Activities for Fannie Mae and CSS for 2019; However, FHFA Failed to Follow its Requirements When it Changed Examination Plans for Non-Risk-Based Reasons and Failed to Obtain Deputy Director Approval
Babar Iqbal, a doctor from Los Angeles, California, and owner of Riverside Regional Surgery Center, pleaded guilty on June 10, 2020, in Superior Court of California, Riverside to several charges related to health care insurance fraud. As part of the scheme, Iqbal targeted patients whose insurance paid higher reimbursement amounts to providers who were considered out of network and performed services that were medically unnecessary. Iqbal also conspired with marketers to obtain fraudulent insurance policies for individuals who did not have health insurance. The marketers then referred these individuals to Iqbal at the Riverside Regional Surgery Center. In return, the marketers received a commission based on the reimbursement amount the insurance companies paid Iqbal. The Amtrak health insurance plan was fraudulently billed approximately $1,653,210 as a result of the scheme. Iqbal will be sentenced at a future date.
Joseph Kieffer, a marketer from Los Angeles, California, pleaded guilty on July 20, 2020, in U.S. District Court, Central District of California, to conspiracy to pay illegal renumerations related to a health care fraud scheme. Kieffer paid kickbacks to patients and to marketers for patient referrals for medically unnecessary compounded drugs. As part of the scheme, Fusion RX Compounding Pharmacy then billed health care providers for the compounded drugs at rates much higher than average medications. The owner of Fusion Rx Compounding Pharmacy was also charged for his role in the scheme. The Amtrak health insurance plan was fraudulently billed approximately $17,000 as a result of the scheme. Criminal judicial proceedings are pending.