Department of Health and Human Services 

OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

AWS ROHIBIT THE SE OF 

HHS GRANT FUNDS FOR 

LOBBYING, BUT LIMITED 

METHODS EXIST TO 

IDENTIFY NONCOMPLIANCE 

L P U

Daniel R. Levinson 

Inspector General 

July 2014 

OEI-07-12-00620 
 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: LAWS PROHIBIT THE USE OF HHS GRANT 

FUNDS FOR LOBBYING, BUT LIMITED METHODS EXIST TO IDENTIFY 

NONCOMPLIANCE 

OEI-07-12-00620 

WHY WE DID THIS STUDY 

This evaluation responded to a congressional request for the Office of Inspector General 

(OIG) to review grantees’ use of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) funds 

and awarding agencies’ implementation and oversight regarding the prohibitions on the 

use of grant funds for lobbying. 

HOW WE DID THIS STUDY 

This evaluation included 13 grantmaking agencies (awarding agencies) within HHS. We 

collected and reviewed departmental and awarding agency directives in place for fiscal 

years (FYs) 2011 and 2012. We conducted structured telephone interviews with each 

agency’s Chief Grants Management Officer and/or his or her designated staff. We asked 

about awarding agencies’ notifications to grantees of the prohibitions on the use of grant 

funds for lobbying. We also asked about awarding agencies’ mechanisms for identifying 

grantees that may have violated lobbying prohibitions and the mechanisms in place for 

reviewing allegations of lobbying. We conducted surveys with a sample of grantees from 

five awarding agencies regarding their awareness of the prohibitions. 

WHAT WE FOUND 

All awarding agencies reported using Federal and departmental sources of guidance 

regarding the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying. Through grant 

applications, notices of award, and/or training, all awarding agencies informed grantees 

of the prohibitions. For all sampled grant awards, grantees reported being aware of the 

lobbying prohibitions. However, limited methods exist to identify noncompliance. HHS 

awarding agencies found two instances of noncompliance in FYs 2011 and 2012. 

WHAT WE RECOMMEND 

We recommend that the Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources (ASFR) facilitate 

Departmentwide information sharing among awarding agencies about methods to identify 

the use of grant funds for prohibited lobbying activities. We also recommend that ASFR 

centralize on its Web site the guidance pertaining to the prohibitions on the use of grant 

funds for lobbying. ASFR concurred with our recommendations. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Objectives ....................................................................................................1 

Background..................................................................................................1 

Methodology................................................................................................8 

Findings......................................................................................................11
 

All HHS awarding agencies reported using Federal and 

departmental guidance on the prohibitions on the use of grant 

funds for lobbying..........................................................................11
 

Through grant applications, notices of award, and/or training, all 

HHS awarding agencies informed their respective grantees
 

of the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying ............12 

For all sampled grant awards, grantees reported being aware of 

the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying; a few 

grantees suggested the need for more guidance .............................13 

Limited methods exist to identify noncompliance with 

prohibitions on lobbying; HHS awarding agencies found two 

instances of noncompliance in FYs 2011 and 2012 .......................14 

Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................17 

Agency Comments and Office of Inspector General Response .................18 

Appendixes ................................................................................................19 

A: Point Estimates and Confidence Intervals for Grantee
 

Surveys...........................................................................................19 

B: Agency Comments ...................................................................20 

Acknowledgments......................................................................................21 
 

 

OBJECTIVES 

To determine: 

1.	 the policies, procedures, and guidance that awarding agencies within 

the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had in place 

regarding the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying 

activities; 

2.	 the extent to which awarding agencies informed grantees of these 

prohibitions; 

3.	 the extent to which grantees were aware of the prohibitions; and 

4.	 the extent to which awarding agencies monitored grantees for 

compliance with the prohibitions and identified instances of 

noncompliance. 

BACKGROUND 

This evaluation responded to a congressional request for the Office of 

Inspector General (OIG) to review grantees’ use of HHS funds and 

awarding agencies’ implementation and oversight regarding the 

prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying activities. 

HHS Grants 

HHS is the largest grantmaking agency in the Federal Government. In 

fiscal year (FY) 2012, HHS operating divisions and staff divisions 

awarded nearly $347 billion in grants. (We refer to grantmaking operating 

divisions and staff divisions collectively as awarding agencies.) Table 1 

shows the number and dollar amount of grants that awarding agencies 

made in FY 2012. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

1 
 

 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1: FY 2012 Grant Awards by Awarding Agency 

Awarding Agency Number of 

Awards 

Percentage 

of Awards 

Dollar Amount 

of Awards 

Percentage of 

Dollar Amount 

Administration for Children and 

Families (ACF) 8,097 10% $47,908,116,593 14% 

Administration for Community 

Living (ACL) 1,470 2% $1,461,721,177 <1% 

Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality (AHRQ) 641 <1% $138,004,180 <1% 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) 4,654 6% $4,993,308,851 1% 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services (CMS)* 1,472 2% $256,600,245,678 74% 

Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) 462 <1% $114,070,061 <1% 

Health Resources and Services 

Administration (HRSA) 5,759 7% $7,544,435,173 2% 

Indian Health Service (IHS) 1,009 1% $2,328,004,693 <1% 

National Institutes of Health (NIH) 54,674 67% $22,244,072,528 6% 

Office of the Secretary** 607 <1% $462,607,574 <1% 

Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration 

(SAMHSA) 

2,909 4% $3,187,756,086 <1%

 Total 81,754 100% $346,982,342,594 100% 

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100 percent because of rounding. 

*Includes approximately $254 billion of grants to States from Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. 

**Includes staff divisions, such as the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness 

and Response (ASPR), and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. 

Source: Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System. Accessed on May 14, 2013 at http://taggs.hhs.gov. 

Within the Office of the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Financial 

Resources (ASFR) serves as the lead official for grants. Within ASFR, the 

Office of Grants and Acquisition Policy and Accountability (OGAPA) 

provides Departmentwide leadership and management in the areas of 

grants and acquisition management through policy development, data 

systems operations and analysis, performance measurement, oversight and 

workforce training, development, and certification. OGAPA: 

 develops departmental regulatory guidance, policies, and 

performance standards; 

 provides technical assistance to awarding agencies; 

 evaluates effectiveness of the grants programs and processes; 

 maintains and reports departmental grant award information; and 

 conducts special departmental initiatives related to grants.1 

1

 HHS, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources Functional Statement. 

Accessed at http://www.hhs.gov/asfr/about/orginfo/ 

asrtfunctions.html#AMT_Off_Grants_Acquisition on July 9, 2012. 
 

 

 

Additionally, individual awarding agencies maintain staff dedicated to 

grants administration. 

Federal Laws and Regulations Regarding Lobbying 

Prohibitions 

Federal laws address general restrictions on direct and indirect lobbying.2 

Direct lobbying occurs when an individual or a group directly contacts 

legislators either in person or by means of written or oral communication 

to support or oppose some legislative matter. Indirect or “grassroots” 

lobbying occurs when an individual or group contacts third parties and 

urges them to contact their legislators to support or oppose some 

legislative matter. In addition to the restrictions on direct or indirect 

lobbying, there are lobbying-related appropriations restrictions on 

publicity or propaganda.3

 Finally, Federal regulations require grantees to 

make certifications about their lobbying activities in certain 

circumstances.4 Further details of each of these legal provisions are 

described below. 

Federal Laws. There are two codified Federal laws that pertain to the 

prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying. First, 

18 U.S.C. § 1913 prohibits the use of Federal funds to lobby unless 

expressly authorized by law.5 It provides that no Federal appropriations 

may be used directly or indirectly 

to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, a 

jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, 

adopt, or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation, 

law, ratification, policy or appropriation, whether before 

or after the introduction of any bill, measure, or resolution 

proposing such legislation, law ratification, policy or 

appropriation. . . . 

Second, 31 U.S.C. § 1352 prohibits recipients of Federal grants from using 

Federal appropriations to influence Federal officials in connection with the 

grant award process (e.g., awarding or extending a grant). 

2

 18 U.S.C. § 1913; 31 U.S.C. § 1352; and see, e.g., Departments of Labor, HHS, and 

Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012, P.L. No. 112-74, Div. F, 

Title V, § 503. 

3

 See, e.g., Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2012, P.L. No. 112-74, Div. F, Title V, § 503(a). 

4

 45 CFR pt. 93. 

5

 We understand that although there are differing interpretations of the scope of the 

2002 amendments to 18 U.S.C. § 1913, the Department considers the provision to 

continue to apply only to executive agencies and not to have been affirmatively extended 

to grantees, contractors, or other recipients of funds from agencies. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

Annual Appropriations Acts. Appropriations acts authorize Federal 

agencies to incur obligations and make payments for specified purposes.6 

HHS programs and activities are generally funded through a number of 

appropriations. For many years, the annual HHS fiscal year 

appropriations act stated: “No part of any appropriation contained in this 

Act shall be used to pay the salary or expenses of any grant or contract 

recipient, or agent acting for such recipient, related to any activity 

designed to influence legislation or appropriations pending before the 

Congress or any State legislature.” 7 The FY 2012 Labor, HHS, and 

Education Appropriations Act (hereafter in this report referred to as 

FY 2012 HHS Appropriation) broadened the scope of these appropriation 

restrictions and prohibits the use of Federal funds to grantees, or their 

agents 

related to any activity designed to influence the enactment 

of legislation, appropriation, regulation, administrative 

action or Executive order proposed or pending before the 

Congress or any State government, State legislature or local 

legislature or legislative body other than for normal and 

recognized executive-legislative relationships or 

participation by an agency or officer of a State, local or 

tribal government in policymaking and administrative 

processes within the executive branch of that government.8 

The FY 2012 HHS Appropriation also broadened the restrictions to 

include any activity to advocate or promote any requirement or restriction 

on any legal consumer product.9 

The Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations Act provides funding for 

many HHS programs, but not all of them. For example, the Interior and 

Environment Appropriations Act appropriates funds for IHS, the National 

Institute of Environmental Health and Sciences within NIH, and the 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry within CDC. Funds 

appropriated in this Act are unavailable “for any activity or the publication 

or distribution of literature that in any way tends to promote public support 

6

 Government Accountability Office (GAO), Principles of Federal Appropriations Law, 

GAO-04-261SP, Appropriations Law 3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 2–5, 2004.
 7

 E.g., P.L. No. 111-117, Div. D, Title V, § 503(b) (Dec. 16, 2009). 8

 P.L. No. 112-74, Div. F, Title V, § 503(b) (Dec. 23, 2011). 

9

 P.L. No. 112-74, Div. F, Title V, § 503(c) (Dec. 23, 2011). 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

or opposition to any legislative proposal on which Congressional action is 

not complete. . . .”10 

In addition, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 

Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act provides 

appropriations for FDA.11 Unlike funds from the general HHS 

appropriations, funds appropriated in this Act do not have any 

appropriation-specific lobbying restrictions. All other lobbying 

restrictions generally still apply to FDA appropriations. 

Governmentwide restrictions on lobbying are also included in an annual 

appropriations act.12 These restrictions apply to funds specifically 

appropriated in the particular appropriation act as well as “any other Act.” 

Federal Regulations. On the basis of 31 U.S.C. § 1352, Federal 

regulations at 45 CFR pt. 93 require an applicant for a grant exceeding 

$100,000 to certify that no federally appropriated funds have been or will 

be paid to any Federal official in connection with the making, extending, 

continuing, renewing, amending, or modifying of a Federal grant. After 

the award of a grant, if a grantee uses nonappropriated funds to influence 

the grant-awarding process or in a way that materially affects the accuracy 

of the information provided in the certification, the grantee must submit 

Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” 

Federal regulations at 45 CFR pts. 74 and 92 establish uniform 

administrative requirements governing HHS grants to (1) institutions of 

higher education, hospitals, and other nonprofit organizations and (2) to 

State, local, and tribal governments, respectively. Federal regulations 

(45 CFR §§ 74.27 and 92.22) incorporate by reference the Federal cost 

principles in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars that 

10 P.L. No. 111-88, Div. A, Title IV, § 402 (Oct. 30, 2009), and P.L. No. 112-74, Div. E, 

Title IV, § 402 (Dec. 23, 2011). 

11 See P.L. No. 111-80, Title VI (Oct. 21, 2009); P.L. No. 112-55, Div. A, Title VI
 

(Nov. 18, 2011). 

12 See P.L. No. 111-117, Div. C, Title VII, § 717 (Dec. 16, 2009), and P.L. No. 112-74, 

Div. C, Title VII, §§ 716 and 719 (Dec. 23, 2011). 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

restrict the use of Federal grant funds for costs incurred as a result of 

prohibited lobbying activities. 13 

HHS Guidance Regarding Lobbying Prohibitions 

The HHS Grants Policy Directives (GPD) and the Awarding Agency 

Grants Administration Manual (AAGAM) are HHS internal policies 

applicable to awarding agencies, but not to grantees.14 The HHS Grants 

Policy Statement (GPS) describes the general terms and conditions of 

HHS discretionary grant awards and is applicable to most grantees.15 

Grants Policy Directives. The GPD provides guidance on 

grants-management issues to affected program offices at all organizational 

levels within the Department and is the highest level of departmental 

grants-policy issuance within the Department. With respect to the 

prohibitions of using grant funds for lobbying activities, the GPD 

references 45 CFR pt. 93 and the OMB circulars.16 

AAGAM. The AAGAM implements the GPD by providing detailed 

guidance to awarding agency staff involved in grants administration. With 

respect to the prohibitions on using grant funds for lobbying, the AAGAM 

references 18 U.S.C § 1913, 31 U.S.C. § 1352, appropriations act 

language, and the applicable Federal cost principles in the OMB 

circulars.17 In addition, the AAGAM requires that each award include 

general terms and conditions that address the post-award requirements of 

applicable public policies, including those related to lobbying.18 

GPS. The GPS describes general terms and conditions that are included in 

all HHS discretionary grant awards unless there are statutory, regulatory, 

or award-specific requirements to the contrary. The GPS refers to the 

lobbying limitations in 31 U.S.C. § 1352, which prohibit grantees from 

13 OMB Circulars A-21 (regarding educational institutions); A-87 (regarding State, local, 

and tribal governments); and A-122 (regarding nonprofit organizations). The lobbying
 

provisions in these three circulars are codified at 2 CFR pt. 220, App. A, § 28;
 

2 CFR pt. 225, App. B, §§ 24(a) and (b); and 2 CFR pt. 230, App. B, § 25(a) 1–5, 

respectively. These requirements have been superseded and streamlined by OMB 

guidance that will largely become effective for all Federal awards or funding increments 

provided on or after December 26, 2014 (78 Fed. Reg. 78590 (Dec. 26, 2013)). The new 

lobbying provision is at 2 CFR § 200.450. 

14 Ch. 1.01.101-2 of the AAGAM states that the AAGAM must be used by any awarding
 

agency that is not developing and maintaining its own grants administration manual.
 

Currently, NIH is the only awarding agency with its own grants administration manual 

and therefore does not use the AAGAM. HHS departmental grants guidance is being 

updated to become a new Grants Policy and Administration Manual. 15 In 1998, NIH issued the first version of its own NIH Grants Policy Statement 

(NIHGPS). Therefore, the HHS GPS does not apply to NIH.
 16 HHS, GPD, 1.01H.2 and H.3.
 17 HHS, AAGAM, ch. 6.99.101-2.B.7, and Attachment 1.
 18 HHS, AAGAM, ch. 2.04.104D-3.A.5.c(9). 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

6 
 

 

 

 

influencing Federal officials in connection with the grant awards. The 

GPS describes the implementing regulations at 45 CFR pt. 93 that state 

that applicants for grants with total costs expected to exceed $100,000 are 

required to certify that they (1) have not made, and will not make, such a 

prohibited payment (i.e., for lobbying activities); (2) will be responsible 

for reporting the use of nonappropriated funds for such purposes; and 

(3) will include these requirements in consortium agreements, other 

subawards, and contracts under grants that exceed $100,000 and will 

obtain necessary certifications from those consortium participants and 

contractors.19 In addition, the GPS states that lobbying is generally an 

unallowable cost, includes general restrictive language found in HHS 

appropriations, and references the Federal cost principles in the OMB 

circulars.20 

Awarding Agency Guidance Regarding Lobbying Prohibitions 

Awarding agencies may publish their own guidance to grantees in various 

formats. For example, NIH publishes its own GPS, which contains the 

policy requirements that serve as the terms and conditions of NIH grant 

awards. CDC maintains a list of “Additional Requirements” (delineated 

by number) that may apply to a funding opportunity.21 Additional 

Requirement 12 addresses the prohibition of using CDC funds to engage 

in any lobbying activity. 

Awarding Agency Staff Roles and Responsibilities 

The GPD outlines the primary responsibilities of the awarding agency 

staff involved in the award and management of HHS grants.22 

Chief Grants Management Officer (CGMO). Each awarding agency head 

must designate an individual to serve as the official responsible for the 

business and nonprogrammatic management aspects of the awarding 

agency’s grants. The CGMO is the appointing authority for additional 

grants management officers (GMOs) within the awarding agency. 

GMO. A GMO is responsible for all Federal business management 

matters associated with the review, negotiation, award, and administration 

of the grants to which he/she is assigned. GMOs also interpret 

grants-administration policies and provisions and are responsible for 

maintaining the official grant files for individual grant awards. The GPS 

19 HHS GPS, p. I-15. Accessed online on September 24, 2012; link has since changed to
 

http://www.hhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/aboutog/hhsgps107.pdf. 20 Ibid., II-35.
 21 CDC, Additional Requirements. Accessed at 

http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/additional_req.shtm on September 17, 2012.
 

There were 32 additional requirements as of that date.
 22 HHS, GPD, 1.04. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

7 
 

 

 

 

 

advises grantees to seek advance understanding with their respective 

GMOs on any activities directly related to the performance of the grant 

that might otherwise be considered lobbying activities.23 

Related Report 

In 2013, GAO issued a report regarding CDC’s Communities Putting 

Prevention to Work (CPPW) cooperative agreement program.24 GAO 

reviewed CDC policies on lobbying and reviewed activities by CPPW 

award recipients. CDC used funding-opportunity announcements and 

meetings with CPPW award recipients to educate them on lobbying 

policies. The report described two CPPW award recipients that were 

suspected of conducting prohibited activities. One of the two recipients 

was found to be conducting activities that constituted lobbying under 

CDC’s policy. 

METHODOLOGY 

This evaluation examined 13 awarding agencies.25 We relied on three data 

sources for this evaluation: (1) awarding agency documents and data, 

(2) structured interviews with CGMOs, and (3) surveys of grantees. 

Awarding Agency Data Request 

We asked awarding agencies to provide us with departmental and/or 

awarding agency guidance regarding prohibitions on the use of grant funds 

for lobbying during FYs 2011 and 2012. We requested the standard 

language that each awarding agency used to describe lobbying restrictions 

in FY 2012 applications and notices of grant awards. Lastly, we requested 

the number and description of documented instances of noncompliance 

with the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying activities 

identified in FYs 2011 and 2012. 

Structured Interviews With CGMOs 

We conducted structured telephone interviews with CGMOs from 

13 awarding agencies.26 We asked about awarding agencies’ notifications 

to grantees of the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying. We 

also asked about awarding agencies’ mechanisms for identifying grantees 

that may have violated lobbying prohibitions. 

23 HHS GPS, p. II-35. (See footnote 19 for URL.) 24 GAO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Lobbying Policies and Monitoring 

for Program to Reduce Obesity and Tobacco Use, GAO-13-477R, April 30, 2013. 25 The 13 awarding agencies consisted of 10 operating divisions (ACF, ACL, AHRQ, 

CDC, CMS, FDA, HRSA, IHS, NIH, and SAMHSA) and 3 staff divisions in the Office 

of the Secretary (the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, ASPR, and the Office 

of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology). 

26 CGMOs have oversight responsibility for GMOs; therefore, CGMOs should have 

knowledge of awarding-agency enforcement actions. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

8 
 

 

 

Grantee Surveys 

In FY 2012, the top five awarding agencies for numbers of grants awarded 

were ACF, CDC, HRSA, NIH, and SAMHSA. These awarding agencies 

awarded 94 percent of the total number of HHS grant awards.27 ASFR 

provided us with data (e.g., grantee name, award number) for each grant 

award in the universe of FY 2012 grant awards from each of these five 

awarding agencies. Because NIH awarded more than two-thirds of 

FY 2012 HHS grants, we selected a stratified random sample of 150 grant 

awards: 110 grant awards from NIH and 40 grant awards from the 

remaining 4 awarding agencies. The population and sample sizes are 

shown in Table 2. 

Table 2: Number of Grant Awards in Population and Sample 

by Stratum 

Stratum Awarding 

Agency 

Population 

Size Sample Size 

1 NIH 50,445 110 

2 

ACF 6,909 

40 

CDC 3,867 

HRSA 5,679 

SAMHSA 2,535

 Total 69,435 150 

Source: Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System report created on 

December 5, 2012. 

We surveyed grantee administrative staff (e.g., institutional grants officer) 

representing each grant award. We asked about their awareness of the 

prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying and the sources from 

which they derived this knowledge. We asked respondents to describe 

how their organizations ensured that grant funds were not used for 

prohibited lobbying. We also asked whether grantee organizations were 

contacted by awarding agencies regarding concerns about the potential use 

of grant funds for lobbying. Finally, we asked whether the respondents 

wanted further information about the lobbying prohibitions. Overall, our 

survey had a 97-percent response rate. Weighted response rates for 

individual survey questions ranged from 88 percent to 97 percent. 

Analysis 

We reviewed the departmental and awarding agency guidance and the 

standard language included in grant applications and notices of grant 

27 CMS awarded about 74 percent of HHS FY 2012 grant dollars, most of which was for 

Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program grants to States. However, CMS 

awarded only about 2 percent of the number of HHS FY 2012 grant awards; therefore, we 

did not include CMS in our population. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

9 
 

 

award to identify the guidance that awarding agencies used. We compared 

the guidance that awarding agencies reported being in effect in FY 2011 

with that in effect in FY 2012 to determine whether changes were made as 

a result of the enactment of section 503 of the FY 2012 HHS 

Appropriation. In addition, we reviewed language from FY 2012 grant 

applications and notices of award to see if it reflected the enactment of 

section 503. We supplemented that analysis with the interview responses 

from CGMOs regarding how they informed grantees of the lobbying 

prohibitions. We also used the interview responses to determine how 

awarding agencies monitored grantees for compliance with the 

prohibitions. 

We analyzed the responses to our survey of grantees to determine grantee 

awareness of the lobbying prohibitions and to assess grantees’ needs for 

additional information on this topic. We also analyzed these survey 

responses to determine the methods that grantees used to ensure that grant 

funds were not used for prohibited lobbying. 

Scope 

The period of our review encompassed FYs 2011 and 2012. We 

determined the extent to which grantees in five awarding agencies—ACF, 

CDC, HRSA, NIH, and SAMHSA—were aware of lobbying prohibitions, 

but we did not make comparisons among awarding agencies or between 

NIH and the other four awarding agencies. Grantee survey responses are 

self-reported; we did not verify their accuracy. We did not examine 

expenditures to identify grantees that may have violated lobbying 

prohibitions. 

Standards 

This study was conducted in accordance with the Quality Standards for 

Inspection and Evaluation issued by the Council of the Inspectors General 

on Integrity and Efficiency. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

10 
 

FINDINGS 

All HHS awarding agencies reported using Federal and 

departmental guidance on the prohibitions on the use 

of grant funds for lobbying 

Each of the 13 awarding agencies we reviewed reported using 1 or more 

sources of Federal and/or departmental guidance on the topic of lobbying. 

Federal sources included 45 CFR pt. 93, OMB circulars, and annual 

appropriations acts. Departmental sources included the GPD, AAGAM, 

and GPS. Two awarding agencies published their own guidance with 

respect to lobbying prohibitions. All but one awarding agency subject to 

the language in section 503 of the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation informed 

grantees that restrictions on lobbying with Federal funds appropriated 

under this specific Act had been broadened. 

Two awarding agencies supplemented Federal and 

departmental guidance with their own guidance 

Two awarding agencies (CDC and NIH) published guidance to grantees 

regarding the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying. CDC 

published Additional Requirement 12, in effect in FY 2011 and updated in 

June 2012, which describes activities that do and do not constitute 

lobbying and addresses the prohibition on using CDC funds to engage in 

lobbying. For example, Additional Requirement 12 states that it is 

permissible for grantees to use CDC funds to conduct community outreach 

services, but cautions grantees “to be careful not to give the appearance 

that CDC funds are being used to carry out activities in a manner that is 

prohibited under Federal law.” In July 2012, CDC distributed a six-page 

guidance document to grantees entitled Anti-Lobbying Restrictions for 

CDC Grantees. CDC intended this document to provide an overview of 

lobbying restrictions, along with examples of allowable and prohibited 

activities. 

On May 24, 2013, NIH published a reminder to grantees that all 

NIH-funded awards are subject to a prohibition on using Federal funds for 

lobbying. The reminder referenced the relevant NIHGPS chapter and 

section 503 of the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation. 

All but one awarding agency informed grantees of the 

language in the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation 

Most commonly, awarding agencies informed grantees of broadened 

lobbying restrictions in the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation by including the 

language from section 503 in the agencies’ terms and conditions of award. 

A few awarding agencies disseminated this information in additional 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

11 
 

 

ways. For example, NIH released a notice dated January 20, 2012, 

entitled Notice of Legislative Mandates in Effect for FY 2012, that 

provided information on the statutory provisions that limit the use of NIH 

grant funds. AHRQ sent an email to staff and published an article in its 

employee newsletter regarding Federal laws on lobbying prohibitions and 

section 503 of the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation. 

ACF grant officials reported that they did not inform grantees specifically 

about section 503 of the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation. However, the 

standard language in ACF’s notices of award informs grantees that any 

applicable statutory or regulatory requirements directly apply to the award. 

IHS and FDA have separate appropriations acts; therefore, their grantees 

are not subject to the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation. 

Through grant applications, notices of award, and/or

training, all HHS awarding agencies informed their 

respective grantees of the prohibitions on the use of

grant funds for lobbying 

Most commonly, awarding agencies used the assurance and certification 

language in grant applications28 and terms and conditions in notices of 

award as information sources for grantees about the prohibitions on the 

use of grant funds for lobbying. For example, the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Health and ASPR included the language from section 503 of 

the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation in its entirety on notices of award. Four 

awarding agencies included information on lobbying prohibitions in their 

funding-opportunity announcements or requests for applications. 

More than half of awarding agencies included lobbying 

information in grantee training 

Eight of the thirteen awarding agencies reported that lobbying is a topic 

covered during grantee training. For example, the Office of the National 

Coordinator for Health Information Technology reported that lobbying is 

addressed in grantee training entitled “Staying Inside the Lines With 

Federal Funding.” For its Center for Tobacco Products grants, FDA 

approached each grantee individually to provide training on this topic. 

Two awarding agencies—the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health 

and CMS—told us that they had received specific inquiries from grantees 

regarding lobbying and that they had provided technical assistance in 

response. 

28 Grant applications include documents such as Public Health Service 398 and Standard 

Form 424. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

For all sampled grant awards, grantees reported being 

aware of the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for 

lobbying; a few grantees suggested the need for more 

guidance 

For all grant awards in our sample, all grantees responded that they were 

aware of the lobbying prohibitions.29 For these awards, grantees reported 

various sources that informed them of the prohibitions and described 

methods by which their organizations ensured that Federal grant funds are 

not used for prohibited lobbying activities. Only 3 percent of awards were 

associated with grantees that wanted to receive further information about 

the lobbying prohibitions. 

For grant awards, grantees reported becoming informed of the 

prohibitions through grant applications, awarding agency 

Web sites, and notices of award 

For 71 percent of grant awards, grantees reported receiving information 

about the prohibitions on the use grant funds for lobbying from grant 

applications or through reading funding-opportunity announcements. 

Additionally, 69 percent of awards were associated with grantees that 

reported receiving information about the prohibitions through agency 

Web sites, and 67 percent were associated with grantees that had received 

information by notices of award. Other sources included Web sites 

(e.g., www.grants.gov, www.grantsolutions.gov), training and technical 

assistance (e.g., Web seminars, grantee orientation sessions), and awarding 

agency printed materials. 

For all the sampled grant awards, no grantees reported that they sought 

awarding agency clarification regarding the lobbying prohibitions, nor 

were they contacted by awarding agencies regarding concerns about 

potential prohibited lobbying activities. Furthermore, for all grant awards 

in our sample, no grantees reported that they had contacted awarding 

agencies with concerns about potential lobbying activities by either their 

own organizations or those of subgrantees.30 

29 Although for all grant awards in our sample, grantees reported awareness of the 

lobbying prohibitions and we can be confident that the percentage in the population is 

large and possibly 100 percent, we cannot be certain—because of sampling error—that 

100 percent of the population was aware of the prohibitions. We are at least 95 percent 

confident that the population percentage is greater than 94.5 percent. 30 No grant awards in our sample were associated with grantees that sought clarification 

of guidance from awarding agencies, were contacted by awarding agencies, or contacted 

awarding agencies with concerns. Although we can be confident that the percentage in 

the population is small and possibly none, we cannot be certain—because of sampling 

error—that none of the awards in the population were associated with such grantees. We 

are at least 95 percent confident that the population percentage is less than 5.5 percent. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

13 
 

For grant awards, grantees described two main methods used 

to ensure that grant funds are not used for prohibited lobbying 

activities 

First, for 66 percent of awards, grantees stated that they review 

expenditures or conduct internal audits to ensure that grant funds are not 

used for lobbying. For example, for one sampled award, the grantee 

explained that grantee officials review expenditures to determine whether 

they are allowable. In addition, the grantee’s accounting system contains 

certain edits that do not allow the accounting code for lobbying costs to be 

used against federally funded awards. 

Second, for 55 percent of awards, grantees pointed to internal policy 

communicated to grantee staff as a means to ensure that grant funds are 

not used for prohibited lobbying activities. For example, for one sampled 

award, the grantee stated that it has a policy requiring advance clearance 

prior to making appointments or establishing lobbying contacts with any 

local, State, or Federal elected officials. In comparison, for 5 percent of 

awards, grantees responded that their organizations do not engage in any 

lobbying activities whatsoever, regardless of the funding source for those 

activities. 

Few awards were associated with grantees that indicated a 

desire for further guidance 

Three percent of awards were associated with grantees that wanted to 

receive further information about the prohibitions on the use of grant 

funds for lobbying. For two sampled awards, grantees suggested that Web 

site links to reference materials would be helpful and one grantee 

suggested a “one-pager” on the topic written in plain language without 

legal jargon. The respondent stated that such a document would be useful 

to provide to subgrantees. Finally, for one sampled award, one grantee 

noted the continuing need for future updates as guidance changes in this 

area. 

Limited methods exist to identify noncompliance with 

prohibitions on lobbying; HHS awarding agencies 

found two instances of noncompliance in FYs 2011 

and 2012 

When signing grant applications, grantees certify that they are generally 

prohibited from using Federal funds for lobbying the executive or 

legislative branches of the Federal Government in connection with a 

specific grant. However, this is only a self-certification. Awarding 

agencies have limited abilities to uncover potential noncompliance. In 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

14 
 

FYs 2011 and 2012, awarding agencies identified two instances of 

prohibited lobbying activities. 

Awarding agencies described limited methods to identify 

lobbying activities prior to award and after award 

When we asked CGMOs about the ways in which lobbying activities are 

identified prior to award, they told us that there is limited information that 

would reveal such activities. One method that awarding agencies may use 

to identify potential lobbying activities is reviewing budgets. For 

example, CMS grant officials told us that they look closely at planned 

expenditures for offsite meetings and follow up on areas about which they 

have questions. 

After a grant is awarded, there are more sources of information that could 

reveal a grantee’s prohibited lobbying activities. CGMOs reported that, 

through reviewing expenditures, conducting site visits, or conducting 

conference calls, they could identify instances in which grant funds were 

used for lobbying. External sources of information are also important. 

Two awarding agencies mentioned that lobbying activities could be 

detected during an annual financial audit, and four awarding agencies 

mentioned whistleblowers or media reports. One CGMO said that a 

whistleblower or media contact would be the primary source of identifying 

a possible violation. 

Awarding agencies identified two instances of noncompliance 

in FYs 2011 and 2012 

Two awarding agencies each identified one instance of noncompliance 

with the use of grant funds for lobbying activities during FYs 2011 and 

2012. In FY 2011, a CDC project officer identified one grantee that had 

conducted activities related to a planned press event regarding a local 

smoke-free ordinance. In response, CDC sent the grantee a letter 

indicating that it was noncompliant with CDC’s Additional 

Requirement 12, which addresses the lobbying prohibitions. CDC 

disallowed all costs ($247.79) associated with the activities and required 

the grantee to repay or offset those costs with non-Federal funds. In 

addition, CDC required the grantee and its contractors to attend training 

related to the antilobbying requirement. 

In FY 2012, HRSA officials initiated a review of one grantee’s 

expenditures following HRSA staff concerns that the grantee might have 

overcharged the grant for personnel and numerous new projects. During 

their review of over $58 million of expenditures spanning 3 FYs, HRSA 

staff discovered expenditures for a July 2010 trip to Washington, D.C. 

The itinerary detailed the purchase of dinner and drinks for several 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

15 
 

 

legislative staff members, which raised concerns as to whether grant funds 

were used for lobbying. In May 2012, HRSA submitted a draft report to 

the grantee that identified these expenditures, as well as over $2 million in 

other unsupported and unallowable expenditures. In response to followup 

documentation submitted by the grantee, HRSA issued a letter to the 

grantee in March 2013 requesting a refund of the unsupported and 

unallowable costs and allowing the grantee a final opportunity to submit 

additional documentation for the unsupported costs. In May 2013, the 

grantee submitted additional documentation. HRSA completed its review 

of the documentation in December 2013, continuing to disallow $5,258.94 

($3,005.11 in direct expenditures and $2,253.83 in indirect costs) because 

the expenditures (e.g., lodging, meals) were made for the purposes of 

lobbying. HRSA requested a refund of these costs. The grantee filed an 

appeal of HRSA’s decision. As of May 2014, the appeal is pending with 

the Departmental Appeals Board. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

16 
 

 

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Our results show that all awarding agencies reported using Federal and 

departmental sources of guidance regarding the prohibitions on the use of 

grant funds for lobbying. All awarding agencies informed their respective 

grantees of the prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying through 

grant applications, notices of award, and/or training. 

Although the level of grantee awareness of lobbying prohibitions was high 

and identified noncompliance (i.e., the identified use of grant funds for 

prohibited lobbying activities) was low, we note that limited methods exist 

for awarding agencies to identify prohibited lobbying activities. Our data 

collection showed that awarding agencies look to ASFR to keep them 

informed of any changes to Federal and departmental guidance on this 

topic, such as the April 2012 Action Transmittal regarding the 

implementation of language in the FY 2012 HHS Appropriation. 

We recommend that ASFR: 

Facilitate Departmentwide information sharing about methods 

to identify uses of grant funds for prohibited lobbying 

activities 

Awarding agency CGMOs reported limited methods to identify the use of 

grant funds for prohibited lobbying activities, stating that third-party 

reports are a primary source of this information. Given the difficulty of 

identifying violations, whenever violations are identified ASFR should 

share this information with HHS awarding agencies. ASFR could 

consider using its established Program Integrity Coordinating Council as 

the forum for information sharing. 

Centralize on its Web site the guidance pertaining to the 

prohibitions on the use of grant funds for lobbying 

On its Division of Grants Web site, ASFR highlights specific grants-policy 

topics (e.g., audits, objective grant review). ASFR should add lobbying as 

one of these topics. This would serve as a central reference point for 

guidance at the Federal and department levels. In addition, ASFR should 

include links to any evaluation reports regarding grantee lobbying. ASFR 

should also include information about how individuals can report activities 

that might constitute federally prohibited lobbying activities. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

17 
 

AGENCY COMMENTS AND OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

RESPONSE 

ASFR concurred with both of the recommendations. To address our first 

recommendation, ASFR stated that it will work with awarding agencies to 

determine the best use of resources to share information on methods to 

identify grant funds used for prohibited lobbying activities. To address our 

second recommendation, ASFR stated that it will work with awarding 

agencies and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs to 

ensure that the Division of Grants Web site captures relevant lobbying 

guidance, links to any existing evaluation reports regarding grantee 

lobbying, and recommends a method of reporting activities that might 

constitute federally prohibited lobbying activities. 

For the full text of ASFR’s comments, see Appendix B. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

18 
 

 

APPENDIX A 

Point Estimates and Confidence Intervals for Grantee Surveys 

We calculated confidence intervals for key data points for responses to our 

survey of grantees. The sample sizes, point estimates, and 95-percent 

confidence intervals are given for the each of the following: 

Data Point Description Sample 

Size Point Estimate 95-Percent Confidence Interval 

Awards associated with grantees 

responding that they were aware of the 

prohibitions on the use of Federal grant 

funds for lobbying 

146 100.0% 94.5%–100.0% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they would like to receive 

further information about lobbying 

prohibitions 

145 2.8% 1.0%–7.3% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they received information 

about lobbying prohibitions via grant 

applications or by reading 

funding-opportunity announcements 

137 70.8% 62.6%–77.9% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they received information 

about lobbying prohibitions from 

awarding agency Web sites 

132 69.5% 61.4%–76.5% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they received information 

about lobbying prohibitions from notices 

of award 

133 66.9% 58.3%–74.4% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they sought clarification 

from awarding agencies regarding the 

prohibitions on the use of grant funds 

for lobbying activities 

146 0.0% 0.0%–5.5% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that awarding agencies 

contacted them regarding concerns 

about the potential use of grant funds 

for lobbying activities 

146 0.0% 0.0%–5.5% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they had contacted 

awarding agencies regarding concerns 

about the potential use of grant funds 

for lobbying activities 

146 0.0% 0.0%–5.5% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they review expenditures 

or conduct internal audits to ensure that 

grant funds are not used for lobbying 

140 65.6% 57.3%–73.0% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that internal policy is a means 

of ensuring that grant funds are not 

used for prohibited lobbying activities 

140 54.8% 46.6%–62.8% 

Awards associated with grantees 

reporting that they do not engage in any 

lobbying activities, regardless of the 

funding source for those activities 

140 5.1% 2.4%–10.2% 

Source: OIG analysis of grantee surveys, 2013. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

19 
APPENDIX B 

Agency Comments 

llLt';\J( I ~lloNT Ul' Ill AU II & HI. f'v1,.\ 'I SI'I<VH I.S 

MAY 2 2014 

TO: 

FROM: 

Daniel R. Levinson 

Inspector General 

Ellen G. Murray 

Assistant Secretary fltt' Finan~:ial Resources and Chief financial Onicer 

SUB.JECT: 	 HHS Comments on OIG Draft Report: Laws Prohibit the Uye o,(HJIS Grant 

FunJsfor J,obhying, hut Limited Methods Ex:isf to Identify Noncompliance, OEI07-12-00620 

The Department of Health and Human St!rvices' (HHS's) Oftice of the Assistant Secretary for 

Financial Resources (ASfR) apprt!ciates the opportunity to review and comment on the Office of 

Inspector General's drafl. report: Laws J'rohibit the Use of1!l!S Granr Funds for Lobbying, but 

Limited lv!ethods E-...:is/10 Jdent(fY Noncompliance. OEI-07-12-00620. 

ASFR values Jcpartmentwide inlormation sharing and is committed to ensuring that guidance to 

HHS's awarding agencies related to the prohibition and identification of the use of HHS grant 

funds for lobbying activities is eiTectively disseminated and incorporated into grants 

administration practices. As the report states, all HHS awarding agencies usc federal and 

departmental sources of guidance regarding the prohibition on the use of grant ±i.mds for 

lobbying, and employ numerous methods to inform grantees through grant applications. notices 

of award, and/or training. 

ASFR concurs with the OIG that additional information sharing between ASFR and the 

awarding agencies regarding methods to identify uses of grant funds for prohibited lobbying 

activities is appropriate and warranted. ASfR \Viii work with the awarding agencies to 

determine the most efl'ective and efficient use ofresources to accomplish this coordination and 

information sharing. We will provide the OTG with an update on these efforts as they progress. 

ASFR also agrees that it should centralize federal and depaitmental guidance pertaining to the 

prohibitions on the use of grants funds for lobbying on its Division ofGrants website. ASFR 

will work with the awarding agencies and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Af'Cairs 

to ensure the site captures relevant lobbying guidance, links to any existing evaluation reports 

regarding gnmtee lobbying activities, and a recommended method of reporting potential 

violations offederal laws on prohibited lobbying activities. We will provide the OTG with an 

update on these cff(ll1s as they progress. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07 -12-00620) 

20 
 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This report was prepared under the direction of Brian T. Whitley, Regional 

Inspector General in the Kansas City regional office. 

Tricia Fields served as the team leader for this study. Other Office of 

Evaluation and Inspections staff from the Kansas City regional office who 

conducted the study include Dennis Tharp. Central office staff who 

provided support include Heather Barton, Althea Hosein, Christine Moritz, 

and Talisha Searcy. 

Laws Prohibit the Use of HHS Grant Funds for Lobbying, but Limited Methods Exist To Identify Noncompliance 

(OEI-07-12-00620) 

21 
Office of Inspector General

http://oig.hhs.gov 

The mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as 

amended, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS) programs, as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those 

programs. This statutory mission is carried out through a nationwide network of audits, 

investigations, and inspections conducted by the following operating components: 

Office of Audit Services 

The Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides auditing services for HHS, either by conducting 

audits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits 

examine the performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying 

out their respective responsibilities and are intended to provide independent assessments of 

HHS programs and operations. These assessments help reduce waste, abuse, and 

mismanagement and promote economy and efficiency throughout HHS. 

Office of Evaluation and Inspections 

The Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts national evaluations to provide 

HHS, Congress, and the public with timely, useful, and reliable information on significant 

issues. These evaluations focus on preventing fraud, waste, or abuse and promoting 

economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of departmental programs. To promote impact, OEI 

reports also present practical recommendations for improving program operations. 

Office of Investigations 

The Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations 

of fraud and misconduct related to HHS programs, operations, and beneficiaries. With 

investigators working in all 50 States and the District of Columbia, OI utilizes its resources 

by actively coordinating with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local 

law enforcement authorities. The investigative efforts of OI often lead to criminal 

convictions, administrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties. 

Office of Counsel to the Inspector General 

The Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to 

OIG, rendering advice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all 

legal support for OIG’s internal operations. OCIG represents OIG in all civil and 

administrative fraud and abuse cases involving HHS programs, including False Claims Act, 

program exclusion, and civil monetary penalty cases. In connection with these cases, OCIG 

also negotiates and monitors corporate integrity agreements. OCIG renders advisory 

opinions, issues compliance program guidance, publishes fraud alerts, and provides other 

guidance to the health care industry concerning the anti-kickback statute and other OIG 

enforcement authorities.