Federal Reports

What We Looked AtThe Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act) directed the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to commission the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to evaluate the methodology and data it uses to identify carriers that are not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles, and develop a corrective action plan in response. The FAST Act also directed our office to assess FMCSA's plan and its responses to our prior recommendations, as well as those from NAS and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Accordingly, our audit objectives were to (1) assess the extent to which FMCSA's corrective action plan addresses the NAS recommendations and relevant OIG and GAO recommendations and (2) identify challenges FMCSA may face when implementing the corrective action plan.What We FoundWhile FMCSA's corrective action plan addresses motor carrier safety interventions, it lacks implementation details for improving transparency and its assessment of carrier safety rankings. For example, in response to recommendations from NAS and GAO, the Agency is testing an Item Response Theory (IRT) statistical model to gauge how it prioritizes motor carrier safety interventions. Regarding the NAS recommendation on collecting more accurate and diverse types of data, FMCSA determined that much of the data either do not exist. As a result, FMCSA no longer plans to collect additional data. Similarly, the plan describes putting datasets on a publicly available website but does not discuss making them user-friendly, or outline costs and implementation steps--hindering FMCSA's efforts to make its data, safety measures, and rankings more transparent. Finally, the complexity of the IRT model may make implementation and public outreach difficult.Our RecommendationsWe made two recommendations to improve the corrective action plan FMCSA developed in response to the NAS study. FMCSA partially concurred with both recommendations. We consider the recommendations resolved but open pending completion of planned actions.

In accordance with our Annual Performance Plan Fiscal Year 2019, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a performance audit of USCP interactions with individuals with disabilities. OIG objectives were to determine whether the Department (1) established policies, procedures, and training designed to prepare sworn employees for interacting with individuals with disabilities during screening and arrest and (2) complied with laws, regulations, and guidance in place for screening and arresting individuals with disabilities. After a July 2019 meeting with stakeholders, OIG refined the objectives to include identifying (1) challenges, if any, officers faced while interacting with individuals with disabilities, and (2) whether the Department leveraged best practices information from knowledgeable sources. Our scope included policies, procedures, practices, and training as of August 2019, and data collected during the three previous fiscal years - FY 2016 through FY 2018.

In accordance with our Annual Performance Plan Fiscal Year 2019. the Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted an analysis of the United States Capitol Police (USCP or the Department) wireless network and devices. OIG objectives were to determine if the Department (1) established adequate policies and procedures for the wireless network and devices, (2) established effective controls that would ensure the integrity of the wireless network and devices, and (3) complied with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance. Our scope included controls, processes, and operations from October 1, 2018, through June 30, 2019.

What We Looked AtWe performed a quality control review (QCR) on the single audit that KPMG LLP performed for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's (MBTA) fiscal year that ended June 30, 2018. During this period, MBTA expended approximately $353 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) grant programs. KPMG determined that DOT's major programs were the Federal Transit Cluster, the Highway Planning and Construction Cluster, and the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery grants program.Our QCR objectives were to determine (1) whether the audit work complied with the Single Audit Act of 1984, as amended, and the Office of Management and Budget's Uniform Guidance, and the extent to which we could rely on the auditors' work on DOT's major programs; and (2) whether MBTA's reporting package complied with the reporting requirements of the Uniform Guidance.What We FoundKPMG's audit work complied with the requirements of the Single Audit Act, the Uniform Guidance, and DOT's major programs. We found nothing to indicate that KPMG's opinion on each of DOT's major programs was inappropriate or unreliable. We did not identify any deficiencies in MBTA's reporting package that required correction and resubmission.

Our objective was to determine the effectiveness of the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) controls to account for and monitor court-ordered restitutions.