Federal Reports

Objective: To determine whether the Social Security Administration’s controls identified Disability Insurance beneficiaries and Supplemental Security Income recipients who also received Illinois or Texas workers’ compensation benefits.

HUD did not comply with PIIA because it did not report improper and unknown payment estimates for the Office of Public and Indian Housing’s Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (PIH-TBRA) program and the Office of Multifamily Housing Programs’ Project-Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) program, HUD’s largest rental assistance programs. This noncompliance is significant because this is the seventh consecutive year in which HUD has been unable to produce PIH-TBRA and PBRA improper and unknown payment estimates, and that deficiency has contributed to HUD’s noncompliance with improper payment laws for 11 consecutive years. For several years, we have reported that HUD was unable to test for improper payments in these programs because the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) was unsuccessful in working with the Offices of Public and Indian Housing, Multifamily Housing Programs, and the Chief Information Officer to securely collect program files needed to test payments. This year, OCFO reported that HUD was again unable to complete improper payment testing because it was delayed in implementing a secure platform designed to collect supporting data and documentation and also because of limited staffing resources with technical knowledge of the payment cycles. The lack of proper planning and coordination from leadership in HUD’s program and support offices has prevented HUD from addressing the root causes behind the failure to comply with improper payment laws. The audit follows HUD OIG’s “Management Alert: Action Is Needed From HUD Leadership To Resolve Systemic Challenges With Improper Payments,” issued January 23, 2024, urging HUD leadership to take immediate action to resolve systemic challenges with improper payments.

OIG's Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2023, through March 31, 2024

FEC OIG's Semiannual Report to Congress October 1, 2023 - March 31, 2024

Land use agreements are contracts that permit operators to use specific Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) reservoir property for a specific purpose and for a limited amount of time, subject to management and control retained by TVA. Reservoir land use agreements are typically for commercial recreational operations such as campgrounds and marinas. We performed an audit of TVA’s commercial reservoir land use agreements due to reputational risks associated with the potential inconsistent treatment of operators within the program. Our audit objective was to determine if TVA is managing commercial reservoir land use agreements appropriately and in accordance with applicable regulations, policies, and procedures. Our audit scope included commercial reservoir land use agreements (1) in place as of October 1, 2023, and (2) invoiced from October 1, 2021, through September 30, 2023. During this period, TVA had 169 reservoir land use agreements with total billings of approximately $3.6 million.We determined TVA had (1) accurately invoiced most periodic and all minimum rental payments according to payment terms and (2) obtained required certificates of insurance from operators. However, TVA could improve its management of commercial land use agreements by enforcing requirements for (1) operators to submit documentation of gross revenues, which is necessary for verification of rental payments due to TVA; (2) Natural Resources personnel to confirm all security assurances; and (3) campground operators to submit updated annual operating plans.

The Office of the Inspector General evaluated whether TVA’s quality management process for the Colbert Combustion Turbine expansion project was accomplished in a manner to achieve compliance with quality objectives and acceptance criteria. We determine quality management was accomplished by the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction contractor in a manner to achieve compliance with quality objectives and acceptance criteria. However, due to previously identified Original Equipment Manufacturer related risks, we found TVA’s oversight of the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s equipment during fabrication could have been improved.