OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

 

 

 

Semiannual Report to Congress 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 

 

 

Federal Election Commission 

999 E Street, N.W., Suite 940 

Washington, DC 20463 

 

November 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................1 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION..................................................................7 

AUDIT.....................................................................................................................9 

AUDIT FOLLOW-UP.............................................................................................12 

HOTLINE COMPLAINT........................................................................................14 

ADDITIONAL OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

ACTIVITY...............................................................................................................16 

ECIE AND PCIE ACTIVITY...................................................................................20 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS...........................................................................22 

TABLE I - QUESTIONED COSTS.........................................................................23 

TABLE II - FUNDS PUT TO BETTER USE..........................................................24 

TABLE III - SUMMARY OF AUDIT REPORTS WITH 

 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OUTSTANDING 

 FOR MORE THAN SIX MONTHS.................................................25 

OIG STRATEGIC PLAN........................................................................................26 

CONTACTING THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR 

GENERAL..............................................................................................................27 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In accordance with the requirements of the Inspector General Act of 1978, 

as amended, I am pleased to submit the Federal Election Commission (FEC), 

Office of Inspector General (OIG) Semiannual Report to Congress covering the 

period April 1, 2003 through September 30, 2003. 

The OIG’s mission is to assist in protecting the Agency from fraud, waste, 

and abuse and to remain current on matters affecting the IG community. To 

accomplish this mission we have relied on audits and investigations conducted by 

the OIG staff in an effort to improve the accountability and performance of the 

Federal Election Commission. The Executive Summary recaps the major 

accomplishments regarding the operations and activities that are relevant to the 

Federal Election Commission, Office of Inspector General. 

During a previous reporting period, the Office of Inspector General 

initiated the audit entitled Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process – 

(OIG-02-03). The audit has continued into this reporting period. The purpose 

of the audit is to review how the Commission carries out its disclosure 

responsibilities and how the use of technology and controls to monitor and 

remedy reporting discrepancies can be improved. The objectives of the audit are 

to: 1) determine the extent, if any, of disclosure differences between candidate 

contributions reported by political committees and related committee 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 1
contributions reported received by candidates; and 2) determine whether an 

adequate process is in place to remedy reporting discrepancies. 

The agency’s public disclosure system is a comprehensive structure. IG 

staff members have been involved in various meetings and discussions pertaining 

to the entire public disclosure process during this reporting period. The auditors 

assigned to this project finalized the process description for the Data Coding and 

Entry Branch. A computer spreadsheet containing campaign finance data was 

created to compare differences between contributions reported received by 

candidates from Political Action Committee’s (PACs), and contributions reported 

by PACS given to candidates. 

The analysis of annual legislative recommendations relating to monthly 

filing by principle campaign committees has been documented and the 

information was summarized and included in the work papers. The OIG 

produced flowcharts to illustrate the processing and data entry functions of the 

disclosure process. The OIG also assembled and reviewed FEC information 

technology (IT) initiatives pertaining to the public disclosure of campaign related 

information. In addition, the OIG has researched and reviewed suggested 

Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) amendments pertaining to the 

comparison of political committee and candidate data. More information 

regarding this audit can be found on page 9, the section entitled Audit.

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 2
The OIG commenced a follow-up assessment on the audit entitled 

Agency Controls for Governing the Process for Procurement of 

Vendor Training Services (OIG-00-01). Although this audit originated in a 

prior reporting period, follow-up work was conducted during this period to 

determine whether corrective action had been taken by Management to address 

the outstanding audit findings and recommendations included in the original 

audit report. 

The OIG conducted this audit, which was released September 2000, to 

asses the effectiveness and efficiency of management controls governing the 

procedures for the procurement of training services from outside vendors. 

Management generally agreed with the findings and recommendations made in 

the report. However, four recommendations remain outstanding. An audit 

recommendation is resolved when agency management and the OIG reach an 

agreement on a firm plan of action to correct reported weaknesses. The OIG 

closes audit recommendations when it determines that corrective actions have 

been completed by the agency. For additional information see page 12, the Audit 

Follow-up section of this report. 

 The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the 

Inspector General may receive and investigate complaints or information 

concerning the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, 

rules or regulations, mismanagement, waste of funds or abuse of authority. The 

FEC/OIG hotline was originally established to enable direct and confidential 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 3
contact with the OIG. Employees and members of the public with information on 

fraud, waste, and abuse are encouraged to contact the Office of Inspector 

General. All information received, regardless of the method used, is handled in a 

prompt and professional manner. 

During the past reporting period the OIG received a hotline complaint 

from an individual against an agency employee. According to the OIG’s

Procedures for Processing Hotline Calls, a preliminary inquiry is conducted on 

allegations raised in a hotline complaint. If it is determined that a full 

investigation is necessary, the hotline complaint file is closed and a separate 

investigative file is opened to document the investigation conducted. 

Prior to the close of the previous reporting period, a preliminary inquiry 

was initiated as a result of the allegations made by the complainant. After 

completing the preliminary inquiry, and based on the information received and 

reviewed, the OIG concluded the allegation did not warrant opening an 

investigation. Therefore, the OIG considers the matter closed. Starting on page 

14, in the section entitled Hotline Complaint, more information can be found 

regarding this allegation. 

The following section is intended to provide an overview summarizing the 

general activities of the Office of Inspector General for the six (6) month period 

ending 09/30/03. The section entitled Additional Office of Inspector 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 4
General Activities, found on page 16, contains more detailed information 

pertaining to the additional activities of the OIG. 

• During this reporting period, the OIG has been preparing to meet the 

challenges associated with the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002. 

The Act requires OIGs to audit their agencies financial statements. The 

OIG plans to contract this function out and because the OIG has never 

hired a contractor to perform audit services for the office, an e-mail survey 

regarding audit costs was created and sent to the members of the 

Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE). The survey included 

questions regarding the cost of their offices’ most recent financial 

statement audit, or the amount budgeted for such an audit if an audit had 

not been done before. The IG office received responses from a number of 

OIGs. The results were summarized and sent, not only to the ECIE 

committee members who responded to the survey, but to the Office of 

Management and Budget who requested a copy of the results. 

• The OIG received and responded to an unsolicited, commercial SPAM email forwarded by FEC management. Due to the contents contained in the 

e-mail, management requested that the OIG examine the SPAM. The 

SPAM, allegedly sent on behalf of the Director of Contracts and Finance 

Allocations for the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing in Nigeria, 

requested information from the FEC employee to assist with investments 

in estates or land in the United States. The auditor assigned to this 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 5
project, researched the issue and provided information to management on 

how to handle the SPAM message. 

• The Inspector General, as a member of the ECIE, maintains active 

membership with the Council and its associated activities. During this 

time frame, the IG served on the ECIE awards panel. The awards panel is 

responsible for recommending awards for outstanding OIG employees to 

be presented at the annual October PCIE/ECIE awards ceremony held in 

Washington, DC. 

• The FEC Staff Director consulted with the Inspector General on an issue 

regarding appropriated funds. The OIG contacted the ECIE community to 

obtain feedback on the permissibility of using appropriated funds to 

subsidize the cost of a government sponsored employee moral and/or 

welfare activity. The OIG received several helpful responses. After further 

review, the information was summarized and transmitted to the Staff 

Director. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 6
THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

The Federal Election Commission is an independent, regulatory agency 

responsible for administering and implementing the Federal Election Campaign 

Act (FECA). The FEC is governed by a six member commission who are 

appointed for six year terms by the President of the United States, with the advice 

and consent of the Senate. The FECA likewise established the positions of Staff 

Director and General Counsel, who are appointed by the Commissioners. 

The Office of Inspector General remains dedicated to assisting the Federal 

Election Commission operate more efficiently and effectively by identifying ways 

to improve Agency programs and operations. We have received, and appreciate, 

the cooperation of the FEC’s management and employees. Without it, the work 

of this office as an agent dedicated to strengthening the management and 

integrity of FEC programs and operation, would be more difficult. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

 The Inspector General Act of 1978 (P.L. 100-504), as amended in 1988, 

states that the Inspector General is responsible for: 1) conducting and 

supervising audits and investigations relating to the Federal Election 

Commission’s programs and operations; 2) detecting and preventing fraud, 

waste, and abuse of agency programs and operations while providing leadership 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 7
and coordination; 3) recommending policies designed to promote economy, 

efficiency, and effectiveness of the establishment; and 4) keeping the 

Commissioners and Congress fully and currently informed about problems and 

deficiencies in FEC agency programs and operations, and the need for corrective 

action. 

Including the Inspector General, Lynne A. McFarland, the OIG staff 

consists of four employees. Two are auditors, and one is the Special Assistant to 

the Inspector General. The FEC’s IG is independent and subject only to the 

general supervision of the Commissioners of the Federal Election Commission. 

The Inspector General staff has demonstrated the ability to gather and evaluate 

factual evidence. The evidence can then be effectively used to provide the basis 

for recommending appropriate actions to improve agency operations. The OIG 

remains dedicated to assisting the FEC operate more efficiently and effectively 

and we are committed to maintaining a positive relationship with management 

officials. 

 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 8
AUDIT

TITLE: Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process 

ASSIGNMENT #: OIG – 02-03 

RELEASE DATE: In Progress 

PURPOSE: Our purpose for conducting the audit is to review how 

the Commission carries out its disclosure responsibilities and how the use of 

technology and controls to monitor and remedy reporting discrepancies can be 

improved. The two major objectives of the audit are to: 1) determine the extent, 

if any, of disclosure differences between candidate contributions reported by 

political committees and related committee contributions reported received by 

candidates; and 2) determine whether an adequate process is in place to remedy 

any reporting discrepancies. 

The OIG initiated this audit during a previous reporting period. The FEC 

public disclosure system is a comprehensive structure. IG staff members have 

been involved in various meetings and discussions in order to gain a better 

understanding of the entire public disclosure process. The auditors assigned to 

this project finalized the process description for the Data Coding and Entry 

Branch. A computer spreadsheet containing campaign finance data was created 

to compare differences between contributions reported received by candidates 

from PACs, and contributions reported by PACs given to candidates. When 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 9
differences were found several candidates were randomly selected to further 

investigate the cause(s) of the differences. 

The “E” index (Candidate Index of Supporting Documents) which is a 

detailed list of receipts and disbursements for the candidates, was reviewed to 

assist in determining the basis for the differences. Once the documents were 

examined, the pertinent information was summarized and documented in the 

work papers. The OIG assembled and reviewed FEC information technology (IT) 

initiatives as they pertain to public disclosure of campaign related information. 

To identify required reporting policies and schedules, the IG staff examined 

current FEC regulations and campaign finance guides. 

Further work involved in executing this audit included researching agency 

policies for guidance and/or instruction on the political committees’ recording 

and reporting of returned contributions by candidates. Federal regulations and 

FEC campaign guides regarding the legal and regulatory requirements for filing 

amended campaign finance disclosure reports were also reviewed and 

documented. 

The IG staff obtained a January 2003 reengineering study, done by an 

outside contractor. The study, which documents the processing of electronic and 

paper campaign disclosure reports by the Reports and Analysis Division, was 

reviewed and the pertinent information was documented and included in the 

audit work papers. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 10
To prepare for tracing sample transactions through the campaign 

disclosure process and database, the OIG obtained and reviewed disclosure 

process diagrams and charts. Sample campaign disclosure forms were also 

reviewed. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 11
AUDIT FOLLOW-UP

TITLE: Agency Controls Governing the Process for 

 Procurement of Vendor Training Services 

ASSIGNMENT #: OIG – 00-01 

RELEASE DATE: September, 2000 

 (audit report) 

WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://www.fec.gov/fecig/training.pdf 

PURPOSE: During the course of this reporting period, the OIG 

continued to monitor the status of the four outstanding recommendations 

contained in audit report. 

The IG’s office commenced a follow-up assessment to determine whether 

management had taken corrective action to address the outstanding audit 

findings and recommendations included in the original report. The audit had 

one major objective – to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of management 

controls governing the procedures for the procurement of training services from 

outside vendors. 

During a previous reporting period, management presented the OIG with 

draft procedures as it relates to the training audit. The OIG examined the 

information and provided management with several comments and suggestions 

pertaining to the draft procedures. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 12
Work associated with the follow-up included contacting the Personnel 

office to find out if they were close to releasing the final version of the training 

procedures that would result in the closure of the four outstanding audit 

recommendations. During the course of this reporting period, the Personnel 

Director departed the Federal Election Commission. Unfortunately, the final 

version of the training procedures was not released prior to the end of this 

reporting period. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 13
HOTLINE COMPLAINT

 The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, provides that the 

Inspector General may receive and investigate complaints or information 

concerning the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, 

rules or regulations, mismanagement, waste of funds or abuse of authority. 

The FEC/OIG hotline was originally established to enable direct and 

confidential contact with the OIG. Employees and members of the public with 

information on fraud, waste, and abuse are encouraged to contact the Office of 

Inspector General. This can be done by calling, visiting, e-mailing or sending 

information to our office via U.S. or interoffice mail. All information received, 

regardless of the method used, is handled in a prompt and professional manner. 

During the past reporting period the OIG received a hotline complaint 

from an individual submitting a complaint regarding an agency employee. 

According to the OIG’s Procedures for Processing Hotline Calls, a preliminary 

inquiry is conducted on any allegations reported to the OIG. If it is determined 

that a full investigation is necessary, the hotline complaint file is closed and a 

separate investigative file is opened to document the investigation conducted. 

As mentioned in the previous semiannual report, a preliminary inquiry 

was initiated as a result of the allegations made by the complainant. In order to 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 14
assess the credibility of the allegations, the OIG spoke with the division 

responsible for the FEC’s transit benefit program. The transit benefit program 

provides eligible Agency employees with Metrocheck transit passes to encourage 

the utilization of the mass transit system. The OIG obtained the transit subsidy 

eligibility list and performed a reconciliation of the Metrocheck distribution, 

which covered a seventeen (17) month period. This included a breakdown of the 

transit benefits purchased, distributed, and remaining at the end of each of the 

seventeen months. 

The Monthly Purchase Request memorandums, which document the 

FEC’s purchase of the transit benefit, were also obtained and reviewed. In an 

effort to identify any irregularities, the OIG created a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet 

to account for the Metrochecks purchased and distributed. 

After completing the preliminary inquiry, and based on the information 

received and reviewed, the OIG did not detect any irregularities that would 

substantiate the allegation. The OIG concluded the allegation did not warrant 

opening an investigation and closed the hotline file. 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 15
ADDITIONAL OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL ACTIVITY

All legislation, as compiled by the Commission’s Congressional Affairs 

Office, was reviewed by the Inspector General, as required by the Inspector 

General Act of 1978, as amended. The Inspector General reviews and comments, 

when appropriate, on all legislation provided by the PCIE/ECIE Legislative 

Committee. In addition, the Inspector General routinely reads all Commission 

agenda items and attends Finance Committee meetings. 

• On November 7, 2002, the President signed into Public Law 107-

289, The Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002. The Act 

requires numerous Federal entities to have their financial 

statements audited annually by the agency Inspector General. The 

OIG has been preparing to meet the requirements associated with 

the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002. During this 

reporting period, the IG office contacted several OIGs to request a 

copy of their “Statement of Work” used to procure an independent 

public accounting (IPA) firm. To further prepare for the financial 

statement audit, an e-mail survey regarding audit cost was created 

and sent to the members of the ECIE. The survey included 

questions regarding the cost of their offices most recent financial 

statement audit, or the amount budgeted for such an audit if one 

had not been previously done. The IG office received responses 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 16
from a number of OIGs. The results were summarized and sent to 

the ECIE members who responded to the survey. The Office of 

Management and Budget also requested a copy of the results. 

• The IG office received and responded to an unsolicited commercial 

SPAM e-mail forwarded to the OIG by FEC management. Due to 

the nature of the contents contained in the e-mail, management 

requested the OIG examine the SPAM. The SPAM, purported to be 

sent on behalf of the Director of Contracts and Finance Allocations 

from the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing in Nigeria, 

requested bank account information from the FEC employee to 

assist with investments in estates or land in the United States. The 

OIG researched the issue and provided information to management 

on how to handle the SPAM message.

• As a member of the ECIE, the Inspector General maintains active 

membership with the Council and its associated activities. During 

the course of this reporting period, the IG served on the ECIE 

awards panel. The awards panel is responsible for recommending 

awards for outstanding OIG employees to be presented at the 

annual PCIE/ECIE awards ceremony.

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 17

• The FEC Staff Director consulted with the IG on an issue regarding 

appropriated funds. The OIG contacted the ECIE community to 
obtain feedback on the permissibility of using appropriated funds to 

subsidize the cost of a government sponsored employee moral 

and/or welfare activity. The OIG received several helpful 

responses. After further review, the information was summarized 

and a memorandum outlining our observation of the circumstances 

was submitted to the Staff Director. 

• The OIG received a telephone inquiry from an individual who 

alleged a foreign organization was encouraging foreigners to 

contribute money to assist in a Presidential candidate’s campaign. 

The caller provided a Website address that contained information 

about the organization encouraging contributions. The OIG 

advised the caller that the matter was out of the scope of the OIG’s 

mission, but the information was forwarded to the appropriate FEC 

office for further review. 

• The OIG e-mail account received several inquiries during this time 

frame. One issue dealt with voter registration and another 

mentioned election fraud regarding electronic voting machines. 

After analyzing the information, the OIG forwarded both of the emails to the appropriate FEC division. In addition, the OIG also 

responded to other e-mails retrieved from the OIG’s e-mail account. 

The e-mails dealt with various issues such as whether or not the 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 18
FEC/OIG employs special agents, as well as questions and concerns 

regarding election fraud and voter registration.

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 19
ECIE AND PCIE ACTIVITY 

The Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency was established by 

Executive Order on May 11, 1992. It consists of Designated Federal Entity 

Inspectors General and representatives of the Office of Government Ethics, the 

Office of Special Counsel, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

The Commission’s Inspector General is a member of the ECIE and has 

provided input into a number of initiatives proposed by the Council and its 

associated activities. The ECIE serves as a forum for the exchange of views for 

the inspector general community. The ECIE identifies, reviews, and discusses 

issues that are of interest to the IG community. For the period April 1, 2003 

through September 30, 2003, the Inspector General (or staff) attended the 

following training, programs, seminars and/or conferences: 

• ECIE - Monthly Meetings

• ECIE – Liaison’s Meeting

• ECIE – Financial Statement Audit Network Meeting

• PCIE – Information Technology Roundtable Discussion

• PCIE/ECIE – Semiannual Reports Coordinators (SARC) Workgroup 

Meeting

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 20

• Association of Government Accountants – 52nd Annual Professional 

Development Conference: Managing Smarter for the Future 
• Mastercard – Government Charge Card Forum

• Federal Audit Executive Counsel (FAEC) Conference – IG Act – The 

Next 25 Years 

• Federal Audit Executive Council (FAEC) - Accelerated Financial 

Reporting Roundtable Discussion 

• Department of Treasury – The Treasury Accelerated Financial 

Reporting – Lessons Learned Seminar 

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) - Federal Information 

Security Management Act (FISMA) Meeting 

• Association of Government Accountants (AGA) Conference – What to 

expect from a CFO Audit – Complying with the Requirements of the 

Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 (Accountability Act) 

• Government Executive - 2003 Excellence in Government Conference 

• Ernst & Young – Workshop on Estimation Techniques used for 

Financial Statement Audits 

• General Accounting Office – Truth & Transparency: The Federal 

Government’s Financial Condition and Fiscal Outlook 

• Northern Virginia Chapter of Red Cross – First Aid Certification 

Training 

• Federal Election Commission – Administrative Liaison Meetings

• Federal Election Commission – Town Meeting on Emergency 

Planning

• Federal Election Commission – Emergency Evacuation Team Meeting

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 21
IG ACT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS PAGE 

Reporting requirements required by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended by 

the Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988 are listed below: 

Section 4(a)(2) Review of Legislation--------------------------------------------16 

Section 5(a)(1) Significant Problems, Abuses, and 

 Deficiencies-----------------------------------------------------None 

Section 5(a)(2) Recommendations with Respect to 

 Significant Problems, Abuses, and 

 Deficiencies-----------------------------------------------------None 

Section 5(a)(3) Recommendations Included in Previous 

Reports on Which Corrective Action Has 

 Not Been Completed-(Table III) -------------------------------25 

Section 5(a)(4) Matters Referred to Prosecutive 

 Authorities------------------------------------------------------None 

Section 5(a)(5) Summary of Instances Where Information 

 was Refused----------------------------------------------------None 

Section 5(a)(7) Summary of Significant Reports---------------------------------9 

Section 5(a)(8) Questioned and Unsupported Costs-(Table I)----------------23 

Section 5(a)(9) Recommendations that Funds be put 

 to Better Use (Table II)-----------------------------------------24 

Section 5(a)(10) Summary of Audit Reports issued before 

the start of the Reporting Period for which 

 no Management Decision has been made------------------N/A 

Section 5(a)(11) Significant revised Management Decisions----------------N/A 

Section 5(a)(12) Management Decisions with which the 

 Inspector General is in Disagreement---------------------None 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 22
TABLE I 

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS 

WITH QUESTIONED COSTS

 DOLLAR VALUE (in thousands)

QUESTIONED UNSUPPORTED 

NUMBER COSTS COSTS

A. For which no management 0 0 [0] 

 decision has been made by 

 commencement of the reporting 

 period 

B. Which were issued during the 0 0 [0] 

 reporting period 

Sub-Totals (A&B) 0 0 [0] 

C. For which a management 0 0 [0] 

 decision was made during 

 the reporting period 

(i) Dollar value of disallowed 0 0 [0] 

 costs 

(ii) Dollar value of costs 0 0 [0] 

 not disallowed 

D. For which no management 0 0 [0] 

 decision has been made by the 

 end of the reporting period 

E. Reports for which no management 0 0 [0] 

 decision was made within 

 six months of issuance 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 23
TABLE II 

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS WITH 

RECOMMENDATIONS THAT FUNDS BE PUT TO BETTER USE

 

 NUMBER DOLLAR VALUE 

 (in thousands) 

A. For which no management 0 0 

decision has been made by 

the commencement of the 

 reporting period 

B. Which were issued during 0 0 

the reporting period 

C. For which a management 0 0 

decision was made during 

the reporting period 

(i) dollar value of 0 0 

 recommendations 

were agreed to by

 management 

based on proposed 0 0 

 management action 

based on proposed 0 0 

 legislative action 

(ii) dollar value of 0 0 

 recommendations 

that were not agreed 

 to by management 

D. For which no management 0 0 

decision has been made by 

the end of the reporting period 

E. Reports for which no 0 0 

 management decision 

was made within six months 

 of issuance 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 24
TABLE III 

SUMMARY OF AUDIT REPORTS WITH CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 

OUTSTANDING FOR MORE THAN SIX MONTHS

Recommendations

 Report Issue

Report Title Number Date Number Closed Open

Agency Controls 00-01 09/00 7 3 4 

Governing the Process 

for Procurement of Vendor 

Training Services 

 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 25
FEC / OIG Strategic Plan

OIG Products: To provide products and

services that promote positive change in

FEC policies, programs, and operations.

OIG Process: To develop and implement

processes, policies, and procedures to ensure

the most effective and appropriate use of OIG

resources in support of our people and products.

Objective A: Deliver timely, high-quality

products and services that promote

positive change.

Strategy:

- establish common OIG standards for communicating

results;

- conduct quality assurance programs;

- solicit appropriate internal and external review and

comment;

- comply with applicable statutory guidelines and

standards;

- set realistic and appropriate milestones.

Objective B: Address priority issues and

concerns of the Commission, Congress,

and Management.

Strategy: Perform work that supports;

- Federal Election Commission and Congressional

priorities;

- National Performance Review objectives;

- Strategic Management Initiative efforts;

Focus OIG attention in the following areas of emphasis:

- managing change;

- resource allocation in relation to policy objectives;

- delivery of client service;

- causes of fraud and inefficiency; and,

- automation and communication.

OIG Staff:To maintain a skilled and motivated

work force in an environment that fosters

accountability, communications, teamwork, and

personal and professional growth.

Objective A: Maintain a dynamic strategic

planning process.

Strategy:

- periodically review and update the strategic plan to

address changing OIG and FEC priorities; and,

- identify factors that influence organizational change and

develop short and long term plans to address them.

Objective A: Attract and retain well-qualified,

diverse and motivated employees.

Strategy:

- develop and implement a comprehensive recruiting program

that attracts a broad population with the knowledge, skills,

abilities, and expertise necessary to make meaningful

contributions to the OIG;

- assess employee satisfaction and develop strategies to address

employee concerns;

- identify reasons for staff departures and develop plans to foster

greater staff retention; and,

- adhere to EEO principles and strive to maintain a diverse work

force.

Objective B: Plan and conduct costeffective work that address critical issues

and results in positive change.

Strategy:

- solicit FEC and Congressional input in planning OIG

activities;

- develop internal planning mechanisms to support FEC

goals and priorities;

- ensure that priorities of IG are effectively communicated;

and,

- identify specific targets for OIG review that are the most

cost-effective

Objective B: Provide training and developmental

opportunities to employees.

Strategy:

- assess training needs in relation not only to employee but also

office needs as well;

- ensure that Government Auditing Standards in relation to

training are adhered to; and,

- maintain a reporting system to ensure that educational

requirements are met.

Objective C: Follow-up and evaluate

results of OIG products and services to

assess their effectiveness in promoting

positive change.

Strategy:

- Identify, as appropriate, lessons learned to improve

timeliness and quality; and,

- conduct follow-up reviews to determine if intended

results have been achieved.

Objective D: Satisfy customers,

consistent with the independent nature of

the OIG.

Strategy:

- establish professional communication and interaction

with customers to promote the open exchange of ideas;

- incorporate customer feedback, as appropriate; and,

- be open to customer-generated solutions and

options.

Objective C: Identify customer needs and

provide products and services to meet

them.

Strategy:

- establish new customer feed back mechanisms;

- consider and evaluate customers feedback when

planning and developing products and services;

- respond to Congressional inquires and request for

briefing and testimony;

- promote open exchange of ideas and information through

outreach and through use of e-mail; and,

- receive, evaluate, and respond, as appropriate, to

information received through the OIG hotline and other

sources.

Objective D: Implement efficient, effective,

and consistent resolution and follow-up

procedures.

Strategy:

- ensure that IG follow-up procedures are followed and that

management is aware of their role in the process; and,

- establish common OIG standards for terminology, date

maintenance and communications.

Objective E: Establish a positive and

productive working environment.

Strategy:

- reengineer or streamline OIG procedures to achieve the

most effective use of resources; and,

- ensure that necessary technologies, evolving and

otherwise, are made available to staff as needed.

Objective C: Assess, recognize, and reward,

when possible, performance that contributes to

achieving the OIG mission.

Strategy:

- develop and articulate expectations for each employee's

performance, including contributions in meeting the mission &

goals of the OIG; and,

- ensure that rewards, when possible, are given in recognition of

exceptional employee performance.

Objective D: Create and maintain a working

environment that promotes teamwork and

effective communication.

Strategy:

- ensure that communications between employees is open; and,

- provide employees with the tools and incentives they need to

adequately perform their duties.

Performance Measures: Determine the

timeliness and quality of products and

services; their effectiveness in promoting

positive change; and, reach agreement

with management on at least 90% of

recommendations within six months of

the report issue date.

Performance Measures: An annual audit

plan is issued; strategic plan is periodically

reviewed; and, necessary technology is

provided to staff to enable them to most

efficiently perform their duties.

Performance Measures: All employees meet

the training requirements; all employees have

performance standards; and, all employees meet

the basic requirements for the position in which

they were hired to perform.

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 26 
 

April 1, 2003 – September 30, 2003 Page 27

CONTACTING THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

The success of the OIG mission to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse depends on 

the cooperation of FEC employees (and the public). There are several ways to 

report questionable activity. 

Call us at 202-694-1015 or toll-free 1-800-424-9530. A confidential or 

anonymous message can be left 24 hours a day/7 days a week. 

Write or visit us - we are located at: Federal Election Commission 

 Office of Inspector General

 999 E Street, N.W., Suite 940 

 Washington, DC 20463

Mail is opened by OIG staff members only. 

 You can also contact us by e-mail at: oig@fec.gov.

 Our Website address: http://www.fec.gov/fecig.htm.

Individuals may be subject to disciplinary or criminal action for knowingly 

making a false complaint or providing false information.