Federal Reports

In response to congressional requests and allegations made to the OIG’s Hotline, the Office of Special Reviews examined whether VA was properly implementing aspects of the VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017. This examination reviewed the operations of the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP) from June 2017 through December 2018. The OIG also reviewed operational changes implemented by new OAWP leadership as of August 2019. Specifically, the review focused on determining whether the OAWP exercised its legal authority appropriately; conducted adequate, thorough, and procedurally fair investigations; and protected whistleblowers from retaliation. The OIG examined whether VA employees were held accountable using the Act’s authorities and whether VA complied with other Act requirements, including timely and accurate reporting to Congress. The OIG identified significant deficiencies within each area of inquiry, including OAWP misinterpreting its statutory mandate. The OIG determined OAWP referred out matters it should have investigated to VA entities (without appropriately protecting whistleblowers’ identities). OAWP also investigated matters outside its authority. Former OAWP leaders made avoidable mistakes that distracted from the OAWP’s core mission and undermined the confidence of some whistleblowers, chilling reporting. A lack of clear written guidance for OAWP personnel contributed to the inaccuracy, perceived bias, and lack of thoroughness in investigations—causing some disciplinary officials to reduce proposed disciplinary sanctions. Insufficient safeguards put whistleblowers at risk of becoming the subject of retaliatory investigations, and in one troubling instance OAWP initiated an investigation that could itself be considered retaliatory. Other failures related to whistleblower protection training, congressional reporting, and disclosing routine uses of information. The OAWP’s current Assistant Secretary started implementing changes after taking office in January 2019. Given the magnitude of the challenges, significant enhancements are needed to fulfill the Act’s requirements and the office’s mission. VA concurred with the OIG’s 22 recommendations.

Seek link below for the full report, report summary, multimedia or any agency follow-up.

To determine whether the Social Security Administration (SSA) had effectively addressed known systems vulnerabilities.

In July 2014, the Postal Service and the American Postal Workers Union entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding custodial workhours. The MOU dictated that custodians receive additional compensation when certain facilities fail to use 90 percent of their calculated annual custodial workhours. These hours are based on facility size and designated cleaning frequencies. As of the end of fiscal year (FY) 2018, there were 8,955 facilities subject to this MOU, including processing and distribution centers, post offices, stations, and branches. Our objective was to assess compliance with the custodial workhour requirement to use 90 percent of calculated annual custodial workhours. The scope included custodial workhours for FYs 2015 through 2018 for the facilities subject to the MOU.

In FY 2018, the Postal Service delivered more than 140 billion letters and flats and 6 billion packages to more than 158 million delivery points. It made these deliveries on over 231,000 routes using more than 208,000 postal-owned delivery vehicles; however, letter and flat mail volume is declining even as package volume continues to grow due to the surge in ecommerce. Our objective was to assess the Postal Service Workload and Workforce Performance Indicators for Customer Service, City Delivery, and Vehicle Operations for fiscal years (FY) 2014 to 2018.

The Office of the Inspector General previously conducted an evaluation of Human Resources (Evaluation Report 2016-15445-05, issued September 26, 2017) to identify operational and cultural strengths and areas for improvement that could impact Human Resources’ organizational effectiveness. Our report identified several operational and cultural areas for improvement and included recommendations for addressing those areas. The objective of this follow-up review was to assess actions taken to address the concerns identified in our initial organizational effectiveness evaluation for one of Human Resources three departments – Employee Health. In summary, we determined actions have been taken to address the previously identified concerns.