Federal Reports

What We Looked AtTwo fatal crashes involving Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft in 2018 and 2019 drew widespread attention to the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) oversight and certification practices, including the Agency's process for establishing pilot training requirements for the aircraft. The Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and its Subcommittee on Aviation requested that we review domestic and international pilot training standards related to commercial passenger aircraft. Our audit objectives were to (1) evaluate FAA's process for establishing pilot training requirements for U.S. and foreign air carriers operating U.S.-certificated large passenger aircraft and (2) review international civil aviation authorities' requirements for air carrier pilot training regarding the use of flight deck automation. We focused on FAA's role in setting training requirements as the certificating authority for Boeing aircraft and its efforts to enhance upset prevention and recovery training.What We FoundWhile each country is responsible for setting its own pilot training requirements, FAA has the opportunity to inform other countries' requirements through increased transparency and oversight. For example, FAA provides aircraft-specific guidance to air carriers and other organizations when developing training programs. However, the guidance does not clearly state the level of experience FAA assumed pilots would have--which is significant given that the skills and average experience of pilots can vary between countries. In addition, FAA has worked with international civil aviation authorities to provide guidance on air carrier pilots' use of flight deck automation. This includes conducting outreach and training internationally on specific flight scenarios and leading an ongoing international working group to develop new international standards and guidance on pilots' use of automation. Nevertheless, our survey of international civil aviation authorities found that countries' requirements regarding the use of flight deck automation varied.Our RecommendationsFAA concurred with our four recommendations to enhance the Agency's transparency and oversight to better inform international pilot training requirements and proposed appropriate planned actions and completion dates.

To view the report, please click on the link below

The audit objectives were to determine whether program funds were managed in accordance with the ARC and Federal grant requirements

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted an inspection to examine oversight of a provider who engaged in sexual misconduct toward patients and practiced acupuncture without credentials or privileges. The OIG also reviewed leaders’ awareness and response to these issues. Current and former facility leaders gave conflicting information about their responsibility for the provider’s supervision and failed to complete the provider’s professional practice evaluations.Former facility leaders did not act upon awareness of patient complaints about the provider’s sexual misconduct. A facility leader removed the provider from patient care after learning of similar complaints at the provider’s previous employer but did not summarily suspend the provider. Following the provider’s termination, former facility leaders did not timely report the provider to state licensing boards. The provider also performed sensitive exams without a chaperone and former facility leaders did not address the provider’s refusal to use chaperones.The Veterans Integrated Service Network Director (VISN) initiated an Administrative Investigation Board (AIB) to determine if facility leaders addressed patient complaints. However, not all complaints were reviewed. Following awareness that the provider performed acupuncture without credentials and privileges, former facility leaders failed to ensure quality management reviews. The OIG identified the provider performed acupuncture on at least five patients and was unable to determine how needles were accessed, raising concerns about bloodborne pathogen exposure. Reviews were not conducted to identify if the provider performed acupuncture on patients. The VISN commenced a review identifying 48 patients. As a result, the VISN initiated testing patients for bloodborne diseases and facilitated the institutional disclosure process.The OIG made one recommendation to the VISN Director to ensure closure of AIB actions.The OIG made four recommendations to the Facility Director related to oversight, quality management actions, training, and reporting providers to state licensing boards.

We reviewed the actions FSIS took relating to COVID-19 to ensure the continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments, including to ensure the health and safety of FSIS inspectors and how FSIS spent the $33 million in CARES Act funding.