Office of Inspector General

Semiannual Report to Congress

October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, N.W., Suite 940

Washington, DC 20463

May 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------- 1 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION -------------------------------------- 7 

AUDITS------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 

HOTLINE COMPLAINTS ------------------------------------------------------- 18 

INVESTIGATIONS ----------------------------------------------------------------19 

ADDITIONAL OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

ACTIVITY -------------------------------------------------------------------------20 

ECIE AND PCIE ACTIVITY ---------------------------------------------- 25 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ---------------------------------------------- 27 

TABLE I - QUESTIONED COSTS ------------------------------------- 28 

TABLE II - FUNDS PUT TO BETTER USE ---------------------------- 29 

TABLE III - SUMMARY OF AUDIT REPORTS WITH 

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OUTSTANDING 

FOR MORE THAN SIX MONTHS ------------------- 30 

CONTACTING THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR 

GENERAL ------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On behalf of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Office of Inspector 

General (OIG), this Semiannual Report to Congress is submitted in accordance 

with the requirements of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. The 

major activities and accomplishments of the FEC OIG are summarized in 

this Executive Summary. This report covers the period of October 1, 2004 

through March 31, 2005. 

The Office of Inspector General is responsible for conducting, 

supervising, and coordinating audits, investigations, and inspections. Our 

emphasis on improving communication with management and focusing our 

work on important issues remains vital – we are committed to protecting the 

Commission against fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. 

The OIG follows the standards contained in the Quality Standards for 

Federal Offices of Inspector General, published by the President’s Council on 

Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) and the Executive Council on Integrity and 

Efficiency (ECIE). The audits are conducted in accordance with the 

Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO). Our investigations comply with the Quality Standards for 

Investigations, which has been developed by the PCIE and ECIE. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 1 
In an effort to improve financial management, and under the 

requirements of The Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, financial 

statements must be audited annually by the agency’s Office of Inspector 

General. To comply with the requirements outlined in the Act, the FEC OIG, 

in conjunction with independent contract auditors - Clifton Gunderson (CG) 

LLP, completed the first audit of the FEC’s 2004 financial statements. 

Throughout the course of the audit, the OIG coordinated and 

participated in weekly audit status meetings with management and the 

auditors. In addition, the OIG reviewed the notices of findings and 

recommendations (NFRs) prepared by the contract auditors. The NFRs are 

written communication from the auditors to management that provide details 

on preliminary weaknesses found, and allows management the opportunity to 

respond to those issues. The OIG also prepared the Inspector General 

Statement on the Federal Election Commission’s Management and 

Performance Challenges, a document that was included in the FEC’s 

Performance and Accountability Report (PAR). 

The results of the audit were detailed in three reports: 1) report on 

compliance with laws and regulations; 2) report on internal control; and 3) 

the opinion on the financial statements. The FEC received an unqualified 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 2 
opinion on the financial statements. The auditor’s report on internal controls 

contained both reportable conditions and material weaknesses - a total of 42 

audit recommendations were included in the report that must be addressed 

by management. The OIG commends the FEC for the noteworthy 

accomplishment of receiving an unqualified opinion but recognizes that a 

tremendous amount of effort by FEC management, staff, and consultants was 

necessary to achieve the unqualified opinion. The OIG and the auditors 

intend to work with management throughout the follow-up audit process to 

ensure the weaknesses and audit recommendations are addressed 

satisfactorily. 

The final audit report was completed and released December, 2004. 

For additional information regarding the Audit of the FEC’s Fiscal Year 2004 

Financial Statements - OIG-04-01, see the Audit section of this report, which 

starts on page 10. 

Audit work continued on the Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure 

Process – OIG – 02-03. The primary objectives of this audit are 1) to 

determine the extent, if any, of disclosure differences between candidate 

contributions reported by political committees and related political committee 

contributions reported received by candidates; and 2) to determine whether 

an adequate process is in place to remedy any reporting discrepancies. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 3 
To accomplish these objectives, the OIG assessed current election cycle 

data for randomly selected samples to determine whether candidates 

continued to have reporting variances in more current cycles. The OIG 

retrieved and sampled campaign summary report data captured in the 

agency’s database for election cycles 2001/02 and 2003/04. The OIG also 

compared the political action committees’ (PAC) reported disbursements to 

candidate reported receipts for each election cycle. 

Various tables of summary campaign data for Senate and House 

candidates were examined. This review will assess reporting variances 

between PAC disbursements and candidate committee receipts in more 

current election cycles. For additional details as it pertains to the Audit of 

the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process, see page 15. 

An additional responsibility of the Office of Inspector General is to 

receive and investigate complaints from Commission employees, the public, 

and other sources concerning possible violations of laws, rules or regulations, 

mismanagement, waste of funds, and abuse of authority. Individuals may 

disclose information or make complaints to the OIG through various channels 

(see page 31). The OIG protects the legal rights of complainants and does not 

disclose their identity without prior consent. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 4 
During this reporting period, the OIG received a number of allegations. 

Significant investigative work has been conducted on these issues. Two 

hotline complaints were closed by the OIG – one was incorporated into the 

annual work plan and the other was referred to another Federal agency. For 

more details, see the section entitled Hotline Complaints starting on page 18. 

In addition to conducting audits, investigations, and reviews, the OIG 

engages in a variety of additional assignments. The following items highlight 

the other activities of the OIG and are described in greater detail in the 

section entitled Additional Office of Inspector General Activity beginning on 

page 20. 

• A peer review of the Federal Election Commission, OIG was 

conducted by the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), 

Office of Inspector General. The objectives of the peer review 

program is to foster quality audits by the OIG through an 

independent assessment of the effectiveness of the internal 

control system in providing reasonable assurance that 

applicable audit standards and requirements are being followed. 

An unqualified opinion was issued on the OIG’s system of audit 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 5 
quality control – the OIG was found to be in compliance with the 

quality standards established by the PCIE (see page 20). 

• As stated in the previous semiannual report, the OIG 

commenced a peer review of the Federal Housing Finance Board 

(FHFB), Office of Inspector General. The peer review was 

completed during this reporting period and the report was 

forwarded to the FHFB Inspector General (see page 21). 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 6 
THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

In 1975, Congress created the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to 

administer and enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). The 

duties of the FEC, an independent regulatory agency, is to disclose campaign 

finance information; enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and 

prohibitions on contributions; and oversee the public funding of Presidential 

elections. 

The Commission is made up of six members, who are appointed by the 

President and confirmed by the Senate. Each member serves a six-year term, 

and two seats are subject to appointment every two years. By law, no more 

than three Commissioners can be members of the same political party, and at 

least four votes are required for any official Commission action. The 

Chairmanship of the Commission rotates among the members each year, 

with no member serving as Chairman more than once during his or her term. 

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 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 7 
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 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. 

The mission of the OIG is to be an independent, objective voice that 

aids the Commission by promoting positive change, accountability and 

integrity. An inventory of suggested audits and investigations that we 

receive from a variety of sources is maintained. The most important 

challenges on which to focus our work are identified and the final step is to 

plan and conduct audits and investigations that address those challenges. 

The OIG follows the standards contained in the Quality Standards for 

Federal Offices of Inspector General, published by the President’s Council on 

Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) and the Executive Council on Integrity and 

Efficiency (ECIE), and GAO’s Yellow Book. Our investigations comply with 

the Quality Standards for Investigations, which has been developed by the 

PCIE and ECIE. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 8 
The Office of Inspector General staff, including the Inspector General, 

consists of four (4) full time employees; two auditors, and one special 

assistant to the Inspector General. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 9 
AUDITS

TITLE: Audit of the FEC’s Fiscal Year 2004 Financial 

Statements 

ASSIGNMENT #: OIG – 04-01 

RELEASE DATE: December, 2004 

WEBSITE ADDRESS: http://www.fec.gov/fecig/financial04.pdf 

PURPOSE: In an effort to improve financial management, and 

under the requirements of The Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, 

financial statements must be audited annually by the agency’s Office of 

Inspector General. To comply with the requirements outlined in the Act, the 

FEC OIG, in conjunction with independent contract auditors - Clifton 

Gunderson (CG) LLP, completed the first audit of the FEC’s 2004 Financial 

Statements. 

Throughout the course of the audit, the OIG coordinated and 

participated in weekly audit status meetings with management and the 

auditors. In addition, the OIG reviewed the notices of findings and 

recommendations (NFRs) prepared by the independent contract auditors. 

The NFRs are written communication from the auditors to management 

which provides details on preliminary weaknesses found, and allows 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 10 
management the opportunity to respond to those issues. The OIG also 

prepared the Inspector General Statement on the Federal Election 

Commission’s Management and Performance Challenges, a document that 

was included in the FEC’s Performance and Accountability Report (PAR). 

In connection with the OIG’s contract with CG-LLP, the OIG reviewed 

CG-LLP’s reports and related documentation and inquired of its 

representatives. Specifically, we performed the following: 1) reviewed CGLLP’s approach and planning of the audit; 2) evaluated the qualifications and 

independence of the auditors; 3) monitored the work of the auditors 

throughout the audit; 4) examined audit documents and audit reports to 

ensure compliance with Government Auditing Standards and OMB Bulletin 

No. 01-02; and 5) performed other procedures we deemed necessary. 

The auditors audited the balance sheet of the FEC as of September 30, 

2004, and the related statements of net cost, changes in net posting 

budgetary resources, financing and custodial activity for the year then ended. 

The audit included an examination, on a test basis, of evidence supporting 

the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The audit also 

included assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates 

made by management, as well as evaluating the overall principal statements’ 

presentation. The results of the audit were detailed in three reports: 1) 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 11 
report on compliance with laws and regulations; 2) report on internal control; 

and 3) the opinion on the financial statements. 

FEC management is responsible for complying with laws and 

regulations applicable to the agency. To obtain reasonable assurance about 

whether FEC’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, the 

auditors performed tests of compliance with certain provisions of laws and 

regulations, non-compliance with which could have a direct and material 

effect on the determination of financial statement amounts, and certain laws 

and regulations specified in OMB Bulletin No. 01-02, such as the AntiDeficiency Act and the Prompt Payment Act. The results of the tests of 

compliance with laws and disclosed no instances of non-compliance. 

The auditors obtained an understanding of the FEC’s internal control; 

determined whether internal controls had been placed in operation; assessed 

control risk; and performed tests of controls in order to determine auditing 

procedures for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial 

statements. The auditors limited their internal control testing to those 

controls necessary to achieve the objectives described in OMB Bulletin No. 

01-02 and consequently the auditors did not provide an opinion on internal 

controls. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 12 
Internal control as it relates to the financial statements, is a process 

designed to provide reasonable assurance of the following: 1) transactions 

are properly recorded, processed, and summarized to permit preparation of 

the financial statements and assets are safeguarded against loss from 

unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition; 2) transactions are executed in 

accordance with laws governing the use of budget authority and other laws 

and regulations that could have a direct and material effect on the financial 

statements and other laws and regulations identified by OMB; and 3) 

transactions and other data that support reported performance measures are 

properly recorded, processed, and summarized to permit the preparation of 

performance information in accordance with criteria stated by management. 

The auditors issued an unqualified opinion on the FEC’s financial 

statements. The auditor’s report on internal controls contained both 

reportable conditions and material weaknesses - a total of 42 audit 

recommendations were included in the report that must be addressed by 

management. 

The final audit report was completed and released December, 2004. 

An electronic version of the report was also created and forwarded to the 

FEC’s Webmaster for posting on the OIG’s home page - the OIG and the 

auditors intend to work with management throughout the follow-up audit 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 13 
process to ensure the weaknesses and audit recommendations are addressed 

satisfactorily. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 14
AUDITS

TITLE: Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process 

ASSIGNMENT #: OIG – 02-03 

RELEASE DATE: In Progress 

PURPOSE: This audit has two primary objectives 1) to 

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) to determine whether 

an adequate process is in place to remedy any reporting discrepancies. 

To accomplish these objectives, the OIG assessed current election cycle 

data for randomly selected samples to determine whether candidates 

continued to have reporting variances in more current cycles. The OIG 

retrieved and sampled campaign summary report data captured in the 

agency’s database for election cycles 2001/02 and 2003/04. The OIG also 

compared the political action committees’ (PAC) reported disbursements to 

candidate reported receipts for each election cycle. To initiate the random 

selection and review of additional disclosure data, various tables of summary 

campaign data for Senate and House candidates were examined. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 15 
The Commission’s website was examined to determine whether or not 

the agency provides adequate instructions to patrons utilizing the electronic 

disclosure system. Adequate instructions will allow patrons to effectively and 

efficiently use the resources made available on the website. The purpose of 

this examination was to ensure that the inexperienced customer knows that 

the database reflects a complicated flow of campaign money. 

The Reports Analysis Division’s Review and Referral Procedures, as 

well as various training materials, were analyzed to determine whether 

policies are in place that include reconciliation of campaign data between 

reporting entities. The OIG also assessed the Reports Analysis Division’s 

Policies & Procedures Operating Manual to determine which types of 

campaign reporting issues are given high priority or consideration during the 

review and referral process. Completion of this assessment will give the OIG 

a clearer understanding of what aspects of campaign finance reporting are 

considered significant to the Commission. 

The auditor contacted the Information Technology (IT) division to 

obtain information regarding the final conversion to the new disclosure 

database and client server system capabilities as they relate to the 

comparison of political committees and candidates. The implementation of 

the client server environment is just one of the processes in place to resolve 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 16 
campaign data reporting issues. A request was submitted to the IT division 

to provide all campaign transactions that met specific criteria. The OIG 

reviewed the results of the data query and computed the average number of 

checks returned by candidates during the two most recent election cycles. A 

select number of those returned checks were then traced back to the PAC 

reports to evaluate the effect of the returned checks on the disclosure process. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 17 
HOTLINE COMPLAINTS

The Office of Inspector General observed an increase in the number of 

allegations received on our hotline. Hotline complaints can be received many 

different ways. Several individuals made contact with the OIG about matters 

relating to allegations of fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement of FEC 

programs and/or operations. 

The OIG’s Procedures for Processing Hotline Calls states that a 

preliminary inquiry must be conducted on all allegations. If the OIG 

determines that a full investigation is necessary, then the hotline complaint 

file is closed and a separate investigative file is opened. 

As of this reporting period, the OIG has seven (7) hotline complaints in 

various stages. One complaint is currently open; four complaints are 

pending; and two complaints are in progress. The OIG closed two hotline 

complaints during this reporting period. The subject of one of the complaints 

was incorporated into the OIG’s annual work plan. The other complaint was 

referred to another OIG. The complainant was informed of this decision and 

provided the appropriate contact information. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 18 
INVESTIGATIONS

As of the end of this reporting period, the OIG has one investigation 

open (OIG-04-02). This investigation originated as a hotline complaint 

however, after the initial review of the allegation the OIG decided an 

investigation was warranted. 

The OIG briefed management on the results of the OIG’s 

administrative investigation and issued a written report to management. 

The OIG has decided to keep the investigation open pending management’s 

60 day notification to the OIG on the status of the issue. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 19 
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 the Finance Committee meetings. 

• The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) OIG conducted a peer 

review of the Federal Election Commission OIG. A peer review is 

required to be conducted by an independent office according to the 

Government Auditing Standards. The PCIE/ECIE has a process in 

place that ensures each IG office is reviewed according to the 

standards. The purpose of the review is to ensure that a system of 

quality controls relating to the conduct of audits is in place and being 

followed. The FEC OIG was found to be in compliance with the quality 

standards established by the PCIE and an unqualified opinion was 

issued. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 20 
• The peer review of the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB) OIG, 

commenced prior to the end of the previous reporting period, was 

completed during this reporting period. An opening conference was 

conducted with the FHFB OIG to discuss the objectives and scope of 

the peer review. The FEC OIG examined the FHFB’s Audit Quality 

Assurance Program and completed the appropriate checklist entitled 

Assessment of Internal Quality Assurance Program. FHFB 

professional staff members were interviewed to assess the level of 

understanding and compliance with the quality control policies and 

procedures. The FEC OIG conducted an exit conference with the 

FHFB OIG – the final report was prepared and forwarded to the FHFB 

Inspector General. 

• The OIG received a request from the U.S. Senate Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor and Pensions requesting assistance in 

obtaining information relating to agency programs and initiatives to 

combat obesity. The Committee is compiling information on each 

program or initiative – the information requested included the agency 

name, program/initiative title, and office responsible for oversight. 

Management also received this request and had replied that the FEC 

has no programs in place to combat obesity – the OIG concurred with 

that reply. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 21 
• The PCIE Legislation Committee has been working on legislative 

proposals to enhance the independence of Inspectors General and 

eliminate barriers to IG functionality. The Legislation Committee 

prepared a survey designed to collect information in support of the 

legislative proposals. The survey included topics such as the 

establishment of an IG council, term of office removal for cause 

provisions, enhancements to IG authority, and personnel flexibilities. 

The IG provided her response and these proposals have been presented 

for consideration to staff members from both the House and Senate. 

The results of the survey will be shared with the IG Community. 

• The Department of Energy (DOE) OIG contacted the FEC OIG in an 

effort to examine options for improving their tracking/monitoring 

system for performance measures. The DOE was interested in 

learning 1) how our group tracks/monitors the level of completion 

(status of compliance) of the measures established, and 2) the 

performance measures that our group has established. The OIG 

prepared a response to this inquiry. 

• On behalf of the PCIE Audit Committee, the OIG completed a survey 

initiated by the Federal Audit Executive Council (FAEC). The purpose 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 22 
of the survey was to obtain information about Federal Agencies that 

have non-OIG audit entities within the Agency. Specifically, the 

survey requested information on the policies and procedures in place 

related to the non-OIG audit entities. 

• At the beginning of this reporting period the OIG started to keep an 

on-going log of incoming inquiries. Although most of these inquiries 

were through telephone and electronic mail, a minimal amount of 

inquiries were through U.S. mail. Prior to the end of this reporting 

cycle, the OIG began to receive a large quantity of e-mail inquiries 

pertaining to a variety of issues such as alleged abuse of campaign 

rules, voter election fraud, and electronic voting. 

The OIG received a total of 6,440 e-mails this quarter. Of that total 

3,605 e-mails were unreadable due to foreign characters contained in 

the subject line and/or text, 341 were “spam” e-mails, and 239 were 

electronic advertisements. 

The OIG received 977 e-mails relating to election issues - 152 of those 

e-mails were printed and forwarded to the Office of General Council 

(OGC) – 495 were electronically filed until further notice from the 

OGC. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 23 
The OIG forwarded 509 e-mails to the Election Assistance Commission 

(EAC). Those e-mails focused on voter & election fraud, problems 

regarding absentee voting, voter registration, etc. The Information 

Division received 115 e-mails forwarded by the OIG – topics included 

campaign funding, disclosure reporting for Senate candidate, gallup 

polls, etc. The OIG forwarded 1 e-mail to the Federal Communication 

Commission. Six e-mails required further OIG attention. 

The OIG also received a total of 206 telephone inquiries – 186 of those 

telephone inquiries were forwarded to the Election Assistance 

Commission. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 24 
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 an active member of the 

Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE) and has provided input 

to a number of initiatives proposed by the Council. The ECIE serves as a 

forum for the exchange of views for the Inspector General Community. The 

Council identifies, reviews, and discusses issues that are of interest to the 

entire IG Community. The IG attended regular meetings held by the ECIE, 

and joint meetings of the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency 

(PCIE) and the Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 25 
For the period October 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005, the Inspector 

General (or staff) attended the following training, meetings, programs, 

seminars, and/or conferences: 

• ECIE - Monthly Meetings 

• PCIE - Financial Statement Audit Network (FSAN) Meeting 

• PCIE / ECIE – 2005 Association of Directors of Investigation (ADI) 

Conference 

• PCIE / ECIE - Federal Audit Executive Committee (FAEC) Meeting 

• PCIE / ECIE – Administrative Liaison Meeting 

• PCIE / GAO – Financial Statement Audit Roundtable Discussion 

• Virginia Society of Public Accountants – Ethics: Your License 

Depends on it 

• USDA Graduate School – Contract and Procurement Fraud 

• USDA Graduate School – Quick Response Auditing 

• USDA Graduate School – Writing Value Added Audit Reports 

• USDA Graduate School - JFMIP – Federal Financial Management 

Conference 

• Federal Election Commission – Finance Committee Meetings 

• Federal Election Commission – Administrative Liaison Meetings 

• Federal Election Commission – Zegato Electronic Travel Services 

Training 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 26 
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----------------------------------------------20 

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) -------------------------------30 

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--------------------------------10 

Section 5(a)(8) Questioned and Unsupported Costs-(Table I)----------------28 

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

to Better Use (Table II)------------------------------------------29 

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 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 27 
TABLE I

INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED REPORTS

WITH QUESTIONED COSTS

DOLLAR VALUE (in thousan ds) 

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 0 0 [0] 

the 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 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 28 
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 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 29 
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 

No outstanding recommendations of more than six m onths during this period. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 30 
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. 

Semiannual Report to Congress – October 1, 2004 – March 31, 2005 Page 31