DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT OIG AUTHORIZATION

DRAFT REPORT

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 0

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From 

the Sales of Emergency Housing Units

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Office of Inspector General 

OIG-08-23 February 2008
 

Office of Inspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Washington, DC 20528

February 5, 2008 

Preface 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) was established by 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment to the Inspector General 

Act of 1978. This is one of a series of audit, inspection, and special reports prepared as part of our 

oversight responsibility to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness within the department. 

This report addresses the strengths and weaknesses of the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency’s (FEMA) use of proceeds from the sales of emergency housing units. It is based on 

interviews with employees and officials of relevant agencies and institutions, direct observations, 

and analyses of applicable documents. 

The recommendations herein have been developed according to the best knowledge available to our 

office, and have been discussed in draft with those responsible for implementation. It is our hope 

that this report will result in more effective, efficient, and economical operations. We express our 

appreciation to all of those who contributed to the preparation of this report. 

 

 

Richard L. Skinner 

Inspector General
Table of Contents/Abbreviations 

 

 Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................1 

 Background......................................................................................................................................2 

 Results of Review ............................................................................................................................5 

 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................8 

 Management Comments and OIG Analysis ....................................................................................9 

Appendices 

 Appendix A: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology................................................................11 

 Appendix B: Management Comments to the Draft Report ....................................................13 

 Appendix C: Major Contributors to This Report....................................................................17 

 Appendix D: Report Distribution............................................................................................18 

Abbreviations 

 DHS Department of Homeland Security 

 EHU Emergency Housing Unit 

 FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 

 FY Fiscal Year 

 GSA General Services Administration 

 IFMIS Integrated Financial Management Information System 

 OIG Office of Inspector General 
OIG 

Department of Homeland Security

Office of Inspector General 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 1

Executive Summary 

Starting in fiscal year 2005, and continuing through early 2007, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) officials used funds received from 

the sale of used travel trailers and mobile homes to partially finance the 

operations of a dozen Emergency Housing Unit (EHU) sites in seven states. 

However, more than $13.5 million of the sales proceeds were expended for 

ineligible purchases. This occurred because FEMA program officials failed to 

ensure that the EHU expenditures met General Services Administration 

(GSA) regulations on the use of sales proceeds. 

Proceeds from the sale of government property are restricted-use funds that 

can be used for the purchase of a select group of replacement type items 

within a specified time. GSA regulations specify conditions that must be met 

in order to participate in the program, and if not met, an agency must return 

proceeds to the United States Treasury. 

FEMA officials used approximately one half of the sales proceeds, or about 

$13.5 million, on ineligible expenditures including (1) contracts to support 

and equip storage sites, (2) replenishment of purchase card accounts, and 

(3) travel expenses. These purchases generally represented operating 

expenses of the EHU sites, but were ineligible expenditures under GSA 

regulations. Because of the unbudgeted nature of these funds and the need for 

better oversight and control, unnecessary and uneconomical purchases were 

made. 

FEMA requested this review in early 2007 and FEMA’s Disaster Finance 

Center initiated its own detailed review concurrently. The Disaster Finance 

Center review, completed in June 2007, concluded that most of the sales 

proceeds were used for ineligible purposes or not used within prescribed 

timeframes. The Disaster Finance Center recommended that appropriate fund 

account adjustments be made and that improperly used funds be returned to 

the U.S. Treasury. We concur with the Disaster Finance Center 

recommendations and make additional recommendations to prevent misuse in 

the future. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 2 

Background 

In the aftermath of the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, FEMA purchased more than 

230,0001 travel trailers and mobile homes at a cost of about $2.9 billion to temporarily 

shelter displaced disaster victims. As these victims have vacated temporary housing 

over time, FEMA moved the used trailers and mobile homes to EHU sites for 

cleaning, repair, refurbishing, and an assessment of each unit to determine whether to 

retain it for future use, or to sell the unit through the GSA. As shown below, during 

fiscal years (FYs) 2005 and 2006, and the first 7 months of 2007, FEMA received 

more than $43 million in proceeds from GSA, mostly from the sale of emergency 

housing units. 

GSA transferred sales proceeds to FEMA where the funds were placed in the Disaster 

Relief Fund Account 5011SR, GSA Sales and Returns - Emergency Housing Units. 

The Disaster Finance Center recorded the receipt of sales proceeds from GSA in a 

suspense account and distributed them to the 5011SR account based on the program 

office’s certification and approval. The Logistics Management Directorate2 managed 

the emergency housing program and determined what housing units were to be sold 

and what replacement items were to be purchased. Correspondence between the 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the Office of Chief Counsel, and the Logistics 

Management Directorate addressed program expenditures and the need to limit 

purchases to qualifying replacement “like items.” Documentation we reviewed 

indicated that these offices understood the GSA restrictions on the use of sales 

proceeds and the requirement to return the proceeds of unused funds to Treasury. 

Applicable Laws and Regulations 

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act, 

42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) and applicable sections of the Federal Management Regulation 

dealing with the exchange/sale authority, allow FEMA to use proceeds from the sale 

of trailers and mobile homes, but only for certain types of expenditures. While 

proceeds from the sale of government property generally must be returned to the 

Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, there are two exceptions that apply to the sale of 

FEMA-owned travel trailers and mobile homes. 

Proceeds to FEMA From GSA Sales 

Year Amount

2005 $25,973,295 

2006 11,352,116 

2007 6,018,208 

Total $43,343,6199 

 1 FEMA was unable to provide an accurate count and dollar value; this is an estimate.

2 Formerly the Response Division/Logistics Branch, now the Logistics Management Directorate since the FEMA 

reorganization of March 2007. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 3 

The Stafford Act allows the sale of FEMA-owned housing units to the occupants of 

those units when the occupants lack permanent housing. In such cases, the proceeds 

from the sales are to be deposited in the appropriate Disaster Relief Fund account. 

However, this particular exception does not apply to the funds in question in this 

report. 

Housing units that are not sold to occupants or re-used can be made available to 

governmental or voluntary organizations for housing disaster victims or can be sold. 

Units that are sold on the open market could be sold by FEMA, but the sale must be 

conducted according to Federal Management Regulations, promulgated by GSA. As a 

matter of general practice, FEMA housing units are sold to the general public through 

auctions conducted by GSA with FEMA retaining the proceeds under the 

exchange/sale authority specified in the regulations. Under this authority, a federal 

agency may sell “personal property,” i.e., property other than “real property,” and use 

the funds received for the acquisition of similar personal property. 

The exchange/sale authority provides that an agency can expend sales receipts only 

when all of the following conditions are met: 

1. The property exchanged or sold is similar to the property acquired. “Similar” 

property is defined as items that are identical, or designed and constructed for 

the same purpose, or constitute parts or containers for similar end items, or fall 

within a single Federal Supply Classification group of property; 

2. The property exchanged or sold is not surplus, and the agency has a continuing 

need for that type of property; 

3. The number of items acquired must equal the number of items exchanged or 

sold, with certain exceptions allowed; 

4. The property exchanged or sold was not acquired for the principal purpose of 

being exchanged or sold; and 

5. Proper documentation is maintained. 

Proceeds from sales not meeting the above criteria must be deposited as miscellaneous 

receipts in the Treasury. In addition, funds not appropriately expended for eligible 

items by the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the property was 

sold are forfeited and must also be turned over to the Treasury. 

GSA regulations allow certain other expenses to be reimbursed from exchange/sale 

funds, including costs for the care and handling of the property being sold prior to 

being turned over to the buyer. In our draft report, we allowed that certain indirect 

costs could be considered as eligible expenses under the GSA regulations. However, 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 4 

the GSA regulations are somewhat ambiguous, and thus subject to interpretation. 

FEMA has decided that the EHU-related expenditures should be budgeted for as part 

of EHU site operation costs, rather than funded by exchange/sale proceeds. We agree 

with this decision. 

Based on GSA regulations, the following items are eligible for purchase or 

reimbursement using the 5011SR account funds generated as a result of sales of 

FEMA-owned travel trailers and mobile homes: 

1. Any property that can be considered as identical, such as another travel trailer 

or mobile home. 

2. Any property that meets the similarity test by being a member of the same 

Federal Supply Classification Group. Under the same Federal Supply 

Classification Group 23 as “house trailers” are passenger motor vehicles, 

trucks and truck tractors, all complete trailers, and motorcycles, motor scooters 

and bicycles. 

The use of 5011SR account funds for any other purposes would be the equivalent of 

charging expenditures to the wrong appropriation. Federal statute (31 U.S.C. 1301(a)) 

requires that “Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the 

appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law.” Charging authorized 

items to the wrong federal funds source or charging unauthorized items to any federal 

funds source is therefore prohibited. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 5 

Results of Review

Contrary to GSA exchange/sale authority regulations, FEMA used trailer and mobile 

home sales proceeds to purchase ineligible items. Instead of using the proceeds 

(recorded in the 5011SR account) to replace housing or to procure similar items, the 

money was spent for items such as improvements to leased property, funding EHU site 

operations, and purchasing automotive and office supplies. The Logistics 

Management Directorate awarded $23.4 million in contracts, of which $12.2 million 

went for services or items not allowed for by GSA’s exchange/sale authority. In 

addition, $1.3 million in credit card purchases were inappropriately paid for using 

proceeds from the sale of trailers and mobile homes. FEMA officials need to account 

for all of these ineligible items, de-obligate and re-obligate monies so these 

expenditures are funded with appropriate sources, and return to the Treasury all 

exchange sales authority receipts that have not been appropriately expended in the 

allowable period of time. FEMA also needs to establish controls and provide 

oversight regarding the use of sales proceeds to ensure that only eligible items are 

procured and that such eligible procurements are necessary. 

How the Situation Arose 

Even allowing for the hectic situation that ensued in the aftermath of the 2004 and 

2005 hurricanes, FEMA officials at all levels did not take appropriate action to ensure 

that proceeds from the sale of trailers and mobile homes were properly used. 

Inadequate management control over the exchange/sale function gave rise to the use of 

these funds for ineligible purposes. 

Prior to 2004, FEMA did not extensively use GSA’s exchange/sale authority. In 2004, 

FEMA purchased about 24,000 travel trailers to shelter the victims of hurricanes 

Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne. As these travel trailers were being vacated and 

returned to FEMA, Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma struck. 

The immediate task facing FEMA’s Logistics Management Directorate in 2005 was to 

establish the EHU storage sites to store, clean, and refurbish the thousands of travel 

trailers that were returned after being used by victims of the 2004 Florida hurricanes. 

As the 2005 hurricanes struck, FEMA placed orders for more than 200,000 trailers and 

mobile homes, and needed EHU sites to stage them until the transitional housing 

locations could be established to accommodate the displaced victims. Within 2 

months after Katrina, FEMA had established 12 EHU sites in 7 states. It was in this 

environment that tens of millions of dollars of unbudgeted funds were streaming into 

FEMA from GSA. While funds were recorded by the Disaster Finance Center and 

made available to the Logistics Management Directorate, the subsequent use of the 

funds received little oversight from FEMA management. 

The Direct Disaster Relief Funds associated with the 2004 and 2005 hurricanes 

covered the initial expenses of the EHU sites. Those funds were limited to eligible 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 6 

expenses directly linked to assisting disaster victims in the particular states where the 

disasters were declared, and were only available while the disaster declaration was in 

force. By the end of 2005, disaster operations were winding-down and disaster relief 

funds were no longer available to cover expenses of storing units for possible future 

disasters. 

The unplanned expense of leasing and preparing the 12 sites left Logistics with a FY 

2006 budget shortfall. In October 2005, Logistics Management Directorate officials in 

FEMA headquarters requested additional funds to cover the unanticipated costs of the 

EHU sites for the remainder of FY 2006. This request was elevated to FEMA’s acting 

Director of Operations who, in November 2005, established a strategic oversight 

steering group consisting of membership from the Logistics Management Directorate, 

the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Procurement Officer, the Facilities Management 

Branch, and other program offices, in coordination with appropriate field elements. 

While the group was to provide centralized funding and procurement management for 

the EHU sites, it never met, the acting Director of Operations left the agency, and the 

issue was not addressed by his successor. 

With mounting EHU site costs, inability to access the disaster relief funds, and an 

insufficient budget, the logistics officials began funding the EHU site operations with 

5011SR account funds. Instead of using the 5011SR account funds to acquire 

replacement “like” items, the Logistics Management Directorate broadened its 

interpretation of the GSA definition requiring the acquisition of “like” replacement 

items to include almost all the costs of operating the EHU sites. 

During the course of our review, FEMA drafted a policy paper, “Disposal of 

Temporary Housing Units,” which, in part, re-stated the law and applicable 

regulations dealing with the exchange/sale authority. However, FEMA has yet to 

issue implementing guidance and procedures dealing with the management of such 

proceeds. 

 

Ineligible Expenditures

Between October 2004 and March 2007, EHU officials used about $23.4 million in 

5011SR account funds to pay for contract services and purchases. Fifteen contracts 

totaling $11.2 million were let for eligible items such as motor vehicles and trailers of 

various types. However, as described below, $12.2 million was used for contracts not 

eligible for such funding. 

• Thirty service contracts totaling $4,100,666 were awarded for such things as 

tree-removal, guard services, and temporary labor services. 

• Thirty-two contracts with expenditures totaling $2,922,656 were awarded to 

provide tools or equipment, such as automotive supplies, metal fabrication, and 

sign-making equipment. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 7 

• Two contracts totaling $69,710 were awarded for office equipment. 

• Fourteen contracts totaling $1,724,646 were awarded for EHU site preparation 

and site improvements. 

• Fourteen contracts totaling $617,856 were awarded to provide water and 

electrical services to EHU. 

• Three contracts totaling $8,227 were for travel-related services. 

• Six contracts totaling $714,178 were for travel trailers and mobile home parts 

and equipment to include tires, fire extinguishers, and mattresses, items that are 

not technically eligible for the use of 5011SR account funds. The Logistics 

Management Directorate might have been able to obtain a waiver from GSA 

for the purchase of these items had they requested one. 

• Eight contracts provided miscellaneous items and services such as permits, 

fees, and package delivery services. Contract payments totaling $2,062,032 

were ineligible for a variety of reasons. 

In addition, proceeds in the 5011SR account funded 15 credit cards. These cards were 

used to charge more than $1.3 million in purchases during the period under review. 

We were able to obtain records accounting for approximately 75% of the spending and 

determined that almost none of the purchases were eligible for funding with 

exchange/sale authority funds. Among the ineligible credit card purchases we 

identified were more than $100,000 in purchases for crushed rock at the Frostburg, 

Maryland EHU site; $20,560 for FEMA and DHS decals and banners; $9,000 for 10 

global positioning navigation devices; and $7,098 for a “shrink-wrap” machine that 

was sent to FEMA’s Caribbean Division in Puerto Rico. 

Logistics Management Directorate officials spent $16,127 for travel voucher 

reimbursements during the period under review. Exchange/sale authority funds were 

used for local travel expenses and for travel of headquarters officials to field offices 

and field office officials’ travel to headquarters. Funds were also used for trainingrelated expenses. None of these expenditures met the criteria for eligible uses of 

exchange/sale authority funds. 

In total, and as summarized below, $13.5 million of the sales proceeds were used for 

ineligible expenditures. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 8 

Eligible Ineligible Total 

Expenses Expenditures Expenditures 

Contracts Funded $11.2 million $12.2 million $23.4 million 

Credit Cards Funded <$25,000 $1.3 million $1.3 million

Travel Funded 0 $16,000 $16,000 

Totals $11.2 million $13.5 million $24.7 million 

Other Questionable Expenditures 

In addition to the items that were ineligible under GSA regulations, FEMA logistics 

officials purchased several eligible items that were excessive in that they contained 

unnecessary, expensive features. For example, logistics officials purchased six sport 

utility vehicles with luxury packages that included navigation systems, leather seats, 

DVD video players, and high-end stereos. FEMA did not purchase these vehicles 

“off-the-lot” but rather placed an order that specified the options package. Passenger 

cars and light trucks are classified in the same Federal Supply Classification category 

as travel trailers, and thus could be considered eligible, under certain circumstances. 

However, logistics officials could have purchased standard models that would have 

been more appropriate for the purposes for which they were intended. Instead of 

buying standard models for about $36,860 each, logistics officials ordered fully 

equipped models costing $49,248 each. 

Since fieldwork began on this review, formaldehyde was detected in some of the 

FEMA travel trailers, and the sales of those units have been halted. This situation will 

result in increased inventories of returned units, and until this issue is resolved, FEMA 

will incur transportation, storage, security, and other expenses on the stored units. 

Conclusions and Recommendations 

FEMA officials did not implement an appropriate system of controls over the 

exchange/sale authority funds generated by the sales of travel trailers and mobile 

homes or establish an adequate and effective budgetary process for the Logistics 

Management Directorate’s EHU sites. Logistics officials spent exchange/sale funds 

on a wide range of equipment and expenditures for the EHU sites. More than half of 

the expenditures they made were for ineligible items. In total, logistics officials used 

contracts and credit cards to expend more than $13.5 million in 5011SR account funds 

on items and services not eligible for purchase with such exchange/sale authority 

funds. All of these inappropriate expenditures must now be de-obligated and reobligated using appropriate funding. The Disaster Finance Center at Mount Weather, 

Virginia, has already started this process. The transaction dates of all of these 5011SR 

account funds will need to be determined and all of the sales receipts that have passed 

the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which they were generated will 

need to be deposited in the Treasury miscellaneous receipts account. At the end of FY 

2007, all of the funds that were received in FY 2006 must be returned to the Treasury. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 9 

In addition, FEMA officials need to take appropriate steps to prevent the misuse of 

such funds in the future. Since expenditures of these exchange/sale authority funds 

were halted in January 2007, GSA has auctioned thousands of additional travel trailers 

and mobile homes generating millions of dollars in available revenue and thousands of 

travel trailers and mobile homes are in the system and could be sold in the future. 

FEMA officials need to develop and implement an adequate system of controls over 

the planning for and use of the exchange/sale authority funds that will be available for 

future use. In addition, FEMA should develop and issue policies and standard 

operating procedures governing the use of 5011SR account funds. 

The conclusions in this report are consistent with those of the Disaster Finance Center 

team that also reviewed the expenditures made under this program. Although we have 

not seen the Disaster Finance Center’s final report3 and recommendations, the initial 

draft indicates they will be similar to the recommendations we offer below. 

We recommend that the Administrator, FEMA: 

1. De-obligate all ineligible expenditures for contracts, purchase cards, and 

travel–related expenses made with 5011SR account funds, and re-obligate the 

expenditures using appropriate fund sources. 

2. Return all exchange/sale authority funds to the Treasury that are proceeds for 

property sold in fiscal year 2006, or earlier. 

3. Establish a system to track all remaining exchange/sale authority funds and all 

future receipts so they can be returned to the Treasury at the end of the fiscal 

year following the fiscal year in which the property was sold if the funds are 

not properly used within prescribed time frames. 

4. Issue a written directive governing FEMA’s use of exchange/sale authority 

funds to only be used to reimburse for eligible items and only after an 

appropriate review of each expenditure. 

5. Direct that any actions that are not clearly allowable be undertaken only after a 

waiver or “deviation” has been reviewed and approved by GSA officials. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

As indicated in the management responses to our October 2007 draft report, (see Appendix B) 

FEMA has concurred with each of the five OIG recommendations and has agreed to notify 

OIG concerning the agency’s actions taken or planned to implement the recommendations by 

February 11, 2008. We consider all of the recommendations resolved because of the proposed 

 3 At the time of our review, the Disaster Finance Center had not issued their report, but did provide a draft to our office. 
Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 10 

steps to implement them, and will close recommendations as corrective actions are 

implemented. 

FEMA also provided technical comments that suggested language changes to more clearly 

present the issues. We appreciate this assistance, and have taken into consideration each of 

the technical comments. 
Appendix A 

Objectives, Scope and Methodology 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 11 

This review was conducted in response to a request from the FEMA Deputy 

Administrator. In keeping with that request, the objectives of our review were 

to determine what exchange/sale authority funds were available to the EHU 

unit, what expenditures were made with such funds, and which expenditures 

were and were not eligible for using such funds. We also sought to determine 

why funds might have been used incorrectly, what steps need to be taken to 

provide corrective action for past ineligible expenditures, and how to prevent 

inappropriate uses of exchange/sale authority funds in the future. 

The scope of our review included all expenditures of Account 5011SR - GSA 

Sales and Returns - Emergency Housing Units made during fiscal years 2005, 

2006, and 2007. The records and expenditures we reviewed were through 

March 8, 2007. A “freeze” on the use of 5011SR account funds was in place 

by that date and the only expenditures that were made after March 8, 2007, 

were to pay vendors whose payments from prior obligations were overdue. 

Those few post-March 8, 2007, expenditures are not within the scope of our 

review. 

We reviewed Disaster Finance Center files for each of the contracts funded 

with 5011SR account funds during the applicable time frame. Expenditures 

for the contracts reviewed totaled $23,370,519. 

We also reviewed all available supporting documentation for the $1,311,848 

that funded government purchase cards that were used for EHU expenditures. 

We were able to obtain records showing the details of $976,848 in 

expenditures under 12 of 15 purchase card accounts. FEMA was unable to 

provide the records for three purchase card accounts. One individual 

responsible for one of the purchase card accounts totaling $300,000 told us 

that in the immediate aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, he was not 

able to maintain an expenditure log due to operational demands. 

We obtained and reviewed the travel vouchers totaling $8,555 of the $16,127 

in travel expenses. The remaining travel vouchers could not be located. 

We interviewed responsible officials from pertinent FEMA offices including 

the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and its Disaster Finance Center, the 

Logistics Management Directorate and its Emergency Housing Unit, and the 

Office of the Chief Counsel concerning the appropriate uses of exchange/sale 

authority funds and the uses that were made of such funds by the EHU. We 

also interviewed GSA officials concerning the purposes and applicable rules 

and regulations of the exchange/sale authority program. 

We conducted fieldwork in Washington, D.C. and at the Disaster Finance 

Center, Mt. Weather, Virginia. We conducted our review from May 2007 to 
Appendix A 

Objectives, Scope and Methodology 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 12 

August 2007 under the authority of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 

amended, and according to Generally Accepted Government Auditing 

Standards for performance audits. However, the analysis of 5011SR account 

funds expenditures was based on data contained in the FEMA Integrated 

Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) database. Our review did 

not include a test of the validity and reliability of the IFMIS data nor an 

evaluation of the effectiveness of controls over the system that produced the 

relied-upon data. 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to This Report 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 13 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to this Report 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 14 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to this Report 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 15 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to this Report 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 16 
Appendix C 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 17 

Gina Smith, Director, Disaster Assistance, Operations & Logistics Division 

Don Norman, Senior Auditor 

John Meenan, Senior Auditor 
Appendix D 

Report Distribution

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 18 

Department of Homeland Security

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

Deputy Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretary 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

FEMA OIG Liaison 

Chief Privacy Officer 

Office of Management and Budget

Chief, Homeland Security Branch

DHS OIG Budget Examiner

Congress

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as appropriate
Appendix C 

Report Distribution 

Review of FEMA’s Use of Proceeds From the Sales of Emergency Housing Units 

Page 0 

Additional Information and Copies 

To obtain additional copies of this report, call the Office of Inspector General

(OIG) at (202) 254-4199, fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web 

site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG Hotline

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind of 

criminal or noncriminal misconduct relative to department programs or 

operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

• Fax the complaint directly to us at (202) 254-4292; 

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, Attention: 

Office of Investigations - Hotline, 245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

The OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.