Federal Reports

The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Utah State Board of Education (Utah Education) implemented a system of internal control over calculating and reporting graduation rates sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that reported graduation rates were accurate and complete. We reviewed Utah Education’s system of internal control related to the calculating and reporting of the adjusted cohort graduation rate (ACGR). The audit period covered the ACGR for school year (SY) 2014–15, which included students who were first-time ninth graders in SY 2011–12. We found that Utah Education’s system of internal control did not provide reasonable assurance that reported graduation rates were accurate and complete during our audit period. Specifically, Utah Education did not have sufficient processes to ensure that (1) ACGR data received from the local educational agencies (LEAs) were accurate and complete, (2) students who the LEAs identified as graduates in the cohort met State graduation requirements, and (3) LEAs maintained adequate documentation for students removed from the cohort. Further, we found that Utah Education did not calculate its ACGR in accordance with Federal requirements. Utah Education’s methodology for calculating its ACGR (1) improperly included students as graduates who earned an alternative award and (2) did not include all students who should have been reported in the SY 2014−15 cohort.

Our audit objectives were to determine whether MiraCosta College (MiraCosta) completed verification of applicant data in accordance with Federal requirements and accurately reported verification results to Federal Student Aid (FSA). The audit covered award year 2016–2017 (July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017). We found that MiraCosta generally completed verification of applicant data in accordance with Federal requirements. Specifically, MiraCosta did not complete verification after a subsequent Institutional Student Information Record was received for 1 of the 60 students sampled. We also found that MiraCosta did not accurately report verification results to FSA. Specifically, for 10 of the 60 students sampled, MiraCosta did not accurately report new Central Processing System transaction numbers to the Common Origination and Disbursement System after MiraCosta completed verification.

Our audit objectives were to determine whether College of Southern Nevada completed verification of applicant data in accordance with Federal requirements and accurately reported verification results to Federal Student Aid (FSA). The audit covered award year 2016–2017 (July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017). We found that the College of Southern Nevada completed verification of applicant data in accordance with Federal requirements for all 60 students included in our sample. We also found that the College of Southern Nevada accurately reported verification results to FSA for 57 of the 60 students included in our sample. Although the school did not accurately report verification results for three students, the inaccurate reporting did not affect the amount of Title IV funds disbursed for the students.

The steps the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has taken to address terminated drug utilization in Medicare Part D were not entirely effective and, as a result, CMS continued to accept some prescription drug event (PDE) data for terminated drugs in calendar years (CYs) 2014 and 2015. Although CMS has made improvements to prevent terminated drug utilization in Part D, it accepted PDE data totaling $31.9 million in gross drug costs for 3,705 terminated drugs in CYs 2014 and 2015. CMS did not compare the information on termination dates in its quarterly Medicaid drug rebate files with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) file, did not investigate the discrepancies that existed between these two data sources, and did not update its system edits in a timely manner.

What We Looked AtThe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employs over 14,000 air traffic controllers to operate 314 air traffic control facilities nationwide. As inefficient facility scheduling can lead to staffing issues and increased overtime costs, in July 2016, FAA and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) agreed to implement a commercially available tool, Operational Planning and Scheduling (OPAS), to standardize scheduling practices at all air traffic facilities. In 2017, the House Appropriations Committee directed OIG to review FAA's progress in implementing a controller scheduling tool and determine whether it is benefiting air traffic managers. Accordingly, our audit objectives were to (1) determine FAA's progress in adopting and implementing a scheduling tool and (2) identify any challenges that will need to be addressed to realize potential benefits.What We FoundAfter 2 years, FAA's air traffic control facilities remain without a standardized scheduling tool. Upon reviewing recommendations from a joint FAA-NATCA workgroup, the Agency decided to use OPAS as a management-only tool, used by managers to create the basic watch schedule, and another system, Air Traffic Operational Management System (ATOMS), to capture the real-time work assignments of air traffic controllers. According to FAA officials, this requires the Agency to modify the scope of OPAS and develop its own daily scheduler, which has extended the project timeline. Thus, FAA remains several years away from deploying a scheduling tool. FAA also faces significant challenges before it can realize the benefits of such a tool. In the 8 years since OPAS was procured for testing purposes at a cost of $17 million, FAA has not established a finalized plan with the dates, system needs, potential risks, and costs of deployment. In addition, FAA's decision to partially implement OPAS and ATOMS increased the level of complexity, and the ATOMS scheduling capability has not been field tested. Training and deployment requirements may change over time. As a result, FAA does not know the final cost or how long it will take to deploy a scheduling tool for the controller workforce.Our RecommendationsWe made two recommendations to help FAA implement a standardized scheduling tool at its air traffic control facilities, and FAA concurred with both recommendations.