Open Recommendations

Rec. A.1.d.1: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), to develop the policies and procedures needed to ensure that they retain supporting documentation for actual costs for the purpose of reconciling between billed costs and reimbursed amounts associated with Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment funds.

Rec. A.1.d.2: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller), to develop the policies and procedures needed to ensure that they retain supporting documentation for actual costs for the purpose of reconciling between billed costs and reimbursed amounts associated with Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment funds.

Rec. A.1.d.3: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller), to develop the policies and procedures needed to ensure that they retain supporting documentation for actual costs for the purpose of reconciling between billed costs and reimbursed amounts associated with Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment funds.

Rec. A.1.d.4: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources of the Marine Corps, to develop the policies and procedures needed to ensure that they retain supporting documentation for actual costs for the purpose of reconciling between billed costs and reimbursed amounts associated with Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment funds.

Rec. A.1.e: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, ensure that each Military Department's evidence of management reviews is maintained and readily available for reprogramming requests associated with Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment actions.

Rec. A.1.f: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, review the supporting documentation of the 12 reprogramming actions in our sample that total $1 billion in questioned costs, in coordination with the following officials, to determine whether the replenishment funds were used in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission, and take appropriate actions to resolve any costs that are not in support of the Ukraine Presidential DrawdownAuthority replenishment mission.

Rec. A.1.f.1: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, review the supporting documentation of the 12 reprogramming actions in our sample that total $1 billion in questioned costs, in coordination with the following officials, to determine whether the replenishment funds were used in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission, and take appropriate actions to resolve any costs that are not in support of the Ukraine Presidential DrawdownAuthority replenishment mission. The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) should review the seven reprogramming actions, totaling $483.3 million in questioned…

Rec. A.1.f.2: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, review the supporting documentation of the 12 reprogramming actions in our sample that total $1 billion in questioned costs, in coordination with the following officials, to determine whether the replenishment funds were used in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission, and take appropriate actions to resolve any costs that are not in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller) should review one reprogramming action, totaling $1 million in questioned…

Rec. A.1.f.3: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, review the supporting documentation of the 12 reprogramming actions in our sample that total $1 billion in questioned costs, in coordination with the following officials, to determine whether the replenishment funds were used in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission, and take appropriate actions to resolve any costs that are not in support of the Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority replenishment mission. The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller) should review the four reprogramming actions, totaling $535.5 million…

Rec. B.1.a: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, update the January 8, 2025 memorandum, "Update to the General Business Rules for Use of Drawdown Authority and Replacement of Items and Reimbursement for Services Provided Under Presidential Drawdown Authority," to:1. Establish a requirement for unobligated funds to be returned no later than 60 days before the period of availability expiration of the originating Defense?Wide Account or Military Department account, whichever is earlier, unless an exemption to policy is approved by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD. 2…

Rec. B.1.b: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, implement internal controls within ADVANA that monitor obligations and automatically send alerts to the Military Departments and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, based on the planned obligation date and targeted return date for excess unobligated funds.

Rec. B.1.c: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the following officials, to perform a comprehensive review to identify excess replenishment funding in an unexpired account that cannot be returned to the originating account. Upon identification, the Military Departments should evaluate whether the funds can be used to procure items from the Ukraine replenishment backlog and obtain approvals to use the excess funds consistent with the current General Business Rules. The Military Department officials should also design, document, and implement internal controls to ensure compliance with…

Rec. B.1.c.1: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), to perform a comprehensive review to identify excess replenishment funding in an unexpired account that cannot be returned to the originating account. Upon identification, the Military Departments should evaluate whether the funds can be used to procure items from the Ukraine replenishment backlog and obtain approvals to use the excess funds consistent with the current General Business Rules. The Military Department officials should also design, document, and…

Rec. B.1.c.2: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller), to perform a comprehensive review to identify excess replenishment funding in an unexpired account that cannot be returned to the originating account. Upon identification, the Military Departments should evaluate whether the funds can be used to procure items from the Ukraine replenishment backlog and obtain approvals to use the excess funds consistent with the current General Business Rules. The Military Department officials should also design, document, and…

Rec. B.1.c.3: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller), to perform a comprehensive review to identify excess replenishment funding in an unexpired account that cannot be returned to the originating account. Upon identification, the Military Departments should evaluate whether the funds can be used to procure items from the Ukraine replenishment backlog and obtain approvals to use the excess funds consistent with the current General Business Rules. The Military Department officials should also design, document…

Rec. B.1.c.4: The DoD OIG recommended that the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer, DoD, require the Military Departments, in coordination with the Assistant Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources of the Marine Corps, to perform a comprehensive review to identify excess replenishment funding in an unexpired account that cannot be returned to the originating account. Upon identification, the Military Departments should evaluate whether the funds can be used to procure items from the Ukraine replenishment backlog and obtain approvals to use the excess funds consistent with the current General Business Rules. The Military Department officials should also design…

We determined that the State of North Carolina paid out ERA1 funds in the amount of $803,160 in violation of the ERA1 statute because the funds were disbursed loan ineligible household. On August 12, 2025, Treasury's Bureau of the Fiscal Service issued an invoice for $803,160 to the State of North Carolina, establishing a debt to the Federal Government.

Develop and provide to State Safety Oversight (SSO) program audit participants a methodology-the steps the FTA Audit Team will take and the indicators the audit team will look at to determine whether or not the SSOA is in compliance with the regulation.

Develop and implement quality control procedures to address identified oversight gaps. The procedures should include a process to ensure findings specify suitable criteria, minimum documentation requirements, examples of model evidentiary documentation, and a requirement that the rationale for compliance and audit methodology decisions be included in the audit documentation.

Develop and implement a plan for how OTrak will accommodate future changes to the SSO audit structure, such as those anticipated as a result of the implementation of risk-based inspections.

Establish and implement supervisory review of OTrak data entries to identify un- or mis-recorded entries and improve the reliability of OTrak data.

Update OTrak to enable the complete text of findings and recommendations to be captured in database fields.

We recommend SSA include terms or conditions in all contracts that require that contractors identified as having significant security responsibilities complete role based security training before they perform their assigned duties and, at least, each fiscal year thereafter.

We recommend SSA implement data validation controls before it processes the role based privacy training assignments to prevent errors and avoid confusion between different components.

We recommend SSA develop and implement a process to send stakeholders routine reminders to update personnel information and periodically validate that all stakeholder information is accurate.