OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

 

Semiannual Report to Congress 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 

 

Federal Election Commission 

999 E Street, N.W., Suite 940 

Washington, DC 20463 

 

May 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

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

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

AUDIT-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------9

AUDIT FOLLOW-UP------------------------------------------------------------------11

FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT PLANNING-----------------------------------12

CONGRESSIONAL REQUEST-------------------------------------------------------15

HOTLINE COMPLAINT--------------------------------------------------------------17

ADDITIONAL OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

ACTIVITY------------------------------------------------------------------------------18

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

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

as amended, I am submitting the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Office of 

Inspector General (OIG) Semiannual Report to Congress covering the period 

October 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004. 

The objectives of the Office of Inspector General are to 1) conduct and 

supervise audits and investigations relating to the Federal Election Commission’s 

programs and operations; 2) detect and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse of 

agency programs and operations while providing leadership and coordination; 3) 

recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness 

of the establishment; and 4) keep the Commissioners and Congress fully and 

currently informed about problems and deficiencies in FEC agency programs and 

operations, and the need for corrective action. In order to accomplish these 

objectives and improve the accountability and performance of the Federal 

Election Commission, the OIG relies on audits, investigations, and inspections 

conducted by the OIG staff. 

Major activities and accomplishments relevant to the Federal Election 

Commission, Office of Inspector General are summarized in the Executive 

Summary. Detailed information on a specific topic can be found in subsequent 

sections of this report. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 1
The audit entitled Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process – 

(OIG-02-03) was originated during a previous reporting period. The two major 

objectives associated with the audit are 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) determine whether an adequate process is in place to remedy 

reporting discrepancies. 

During this reporting period the Office of Inspector General has made 

significant progress in executing the audit pertaining to the FEC public disclosure 

system. The auditors met and discussed the results of a preliminary review of 

various campaign finance transactions with a dollar value difference between 

what the political action committee (PAC) reported vs. what the candidate 

reported. Based on this discussion the auditors selected and tracked additional 

transactions to include only those with a difference of $10,000-$20,000. 

Pertinent information from each transaction was documented to include the 

amount of the transaction and date reported by the committee/PAC and date 

recorded by the candidate. 

Additional work related to the audit included randomly selecting one 

candidate (incumbent only) to compare balances of candidate receipts vs. 

political committee disbursement. The OIG has reviewed a large quantity of 

material such as quarterly reports and amendments (if applicable), as well as 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 2
mid-year and year-end reports filed by candidates. The auditors also obtained 

and evaluated the summary report of committees who gave to the candidates - 

the summary report summarizes campaign finance transactions reported by the 

PAC or Non-Party committees. The auditors then traced each transaction, as 

reported by the committee/PAC, to the corresponding quarterly report filed by 

the candidate. The OIG auditors met to discuss the audit objectives, the related 

audit steps, and work completed thus far. 

A significant amount of time has been and continues to be devoted to 

completing this assignment. The section entitled Audit, starting on page 9, 

contains more detailed information. 

For many years improving financial management and information security 

has been an important priority of the federal Government. On November 7, 

2002, the President signed Public Law 107-289, The Accountability of Tax 

Dollars Act of 2002, which states that Federal entities are required to have their 

financial statements audited annually by the agency Inspector General. Starting 

with fiscal year 2004, and annually thereafter, the FEC Inspector General is 

required to perform an audit of the agency’s financial statements. 

The President’s goal is to ensure that federal financial management 

systems produce accurate and timely information to support operating, budget, 

and policy decisions. The OIG’s goal is to ensure that the agency’s financial 

operations are properly conducted, financial statements are presented fairly, and 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 3
applicable laws and regulations are being followed. The OIG is preparing to meet 

this obligation and has contracted with an independent certified public 

accounting (CPA) firm to conduct the audit of the FEC’s financial statements. 

Additional information pertaining to this topic is located on page 12, the 

Financial Statement Audit Planning section of this report.

Prior to the end of this reporting period, the OIG received a congressional 

request from Senator Jack Reed regarding electronic voting machines. The letter 

from Senator Reed stated that he was writing on behalf of his constituents in 

Rhode Island. In order to accurately respond to the concerns of the constituents, 

Senator Reed contacted the OIG for assistance. 

The auditor responsible for this assignment provided Senator Reed with 

background information about the FEC and its purpose for being established. 

Additional information was also given pertaining to the Commission’s Office of 

Election Administration (OEA – the OEA transferred to the EAC on April 1, 

2004) and the newly created Election Assistance Commission (EAC) along with 

information concerning electronic voting machines. For detailed information see 

the Congressional Request section located on page 15. 

Inspectors General are responsible for ensuring efficiency and integrity in 

the programs and operations of the agencies they oversee. The OIG hotline 

provides a prompt, effective, and confidential channel for reporting fraud, waste, 

abuse, and mismanagement to the Inspector General. Individuals with 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 4
information regarding the manner in which the FEC executes its programs and 

operations are encouraged to contact the Office of Inspector General by calling, 

visiting, e-mailing or sending correspondence to our office. 

The OIG is currently addressing a hotline complaint received from an 

individual who requested confidentiality. The complaint was recorded on the 

OIG’s Procedures for Processing Hotline Calls form, which states a preliminary 

inquiry must be conducted on all allegations reported to the OIG. During this 

reporting period, the OIG conducted a preliminary inquiry pertaining to the 

hotline complaint. Once the preliminary inquiry is completed, the OIG will 

determine whether or not a full investigation is warranted. For complete details, 

see the section entitled Hotline Complaint, which is on page 17. 

In addition to audits, investigations, and reviews, the OIG also performs 

an array of other activities. This section is intended to provide a brief synopsis of 

the general activities pertaining to the OIG. Starting with page 18, in the section 

entitled Additional Office of Inspector General Activities, detailed 

information regarding the additional activities of the FEC/OIG can be found. 

• The FY 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Bill requires all Inspectors General 

to submit a report to Congress on the implementation of the Rural 

Development Act of 1972. Research as been conducted and the report will 

be finalized in June (see page 18). 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 5
• The Commission’s Policy Legal Review Administrative Law office 

contacted the OIG regarding the OIG’s contract authority. FEC 

management asked the Administrative Law office to provide a legal 

opinion on whether the FEC OIG may enter into contracts absent 

Commission approval. To discuss the issue the OIG met with an attorney 

representing the Administrative Law office (see page 18). 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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. 

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 

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. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 7
One of the goals of the Office of Inspector General is to assist the FEC in 

operating more efficiently and effectively by identifying ways to improve the 

FEC’s programs. To accomplish this goal the OIG conducts audits, inspections, 

and investigations, and makes recommendations to and consults with FEC 

management on findings and conclusions. Including the Inspector General, 

Lynne A. McFarland - the OIG staff consists of four (4) employees - two Auditors, 

and a Special Assistant to the Inspector General. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 8
AUDIT

TITLE: Audit of the FEC’s Public Disclosure Process 

ASSIGNMENT #: OIG – 02-03 

RELEASE DATE: In Progress 

PURPOSE: The OIG’s reason 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 primary 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. 

At the start of this reporting period, the OIG auditors met to discuss the 

results of the preliminary review of various campaign finance transactions with a 

dollar value difference between what the committee reported vs. what the 

candidate reported. Based on this discussion, the auditors refined the search 

criteria to include only those transactions with a difference of $10,000 to 

$20,000. 

Other work related to this audit included randomly selecting one 

candidate (incumbent only) to compare balances of candidate receipts vs. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 9
political committee disbursements. The auditors retrieved and printed a 

summary listing of all reports filed by or for the candidate. They also retrieved 

and printed the summary report of committees who gave to the candidate; this 

report summarizes campaign finance transactions reported by the PAC or NonParty committees. Quarterly reports and amendments (if applicable), as well as 

mid year and year end reports filed by the candidate were obtained and reviewed 

by the auditors. The auditors then traced each transaction, as reported by the 

committee/PAC, to the corresponding quarterly report filed by the candidate. 

Pertinent information from each transaction was documented to include 

the amount of the transaction and date reported by the committee/PAC and date 

recorded by the candidate. Based on this data, the average number of days 

between financial transactions reported by the committee/PAC vs. candidate 

reported was determined and summarized in the work papers. 

To determine what types of issues are given high priority or consideration 

within the review and referral process, the OIG examined the FEC Reports 

Analysis Division’s (RAD) electronic review requirements process documents. To 

obtain information regarding the new client server disclosure system and the 

electronic review process, the Commission’s IT Strategic & Performance Plan for 

FY 2004-2008 was obtained and reviewed and the pertinent information was 

documented and included in the audit work papers. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 10
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: This audit was originally conducted to assess the 

effectiveness and efficiency of management controls governing the procedures for 

the procurement of training services from outside vendors. 

The Acting Personnel Director contacted the IG office to obtain our 

opinion on the disposition of training records when an employee separates from 

the Federal Election Commission. To address the question, the OIG reviewed the 

audit report and the Code of Federal Regulations on record retention for training 

records. The OIG also consulted the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) Website for guidance on Federal agency records 

management. 

Although management provided the OIG with draft procedures during the 

previous reporting period, the final version of the training procedures must be 

finalized before the OIG considers the four (4) outstanding recommendations 

closed. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 11
FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT PLANNING

For many years improving financial management and information security 

has been an important priority of the federal Government. On November 7, 

2002, the President signed Public Law 107-289, The Accountability of Tax 

Dollars Act of 2002, which states that Federal entities are required to have their 

financial statements audited annually by the agency Inspector General. Starting 

with fiscal year 2004, and annually thereafter, the FEC Inspector General is 

required to perform and/or oversee the audit of the agency’s financial statements. 

The President’s goal is to ensure that federal financial management 

systems produce accurate and timely information to support operating, budget, 

and policy decisions. The OIG’s goal is to ensure that the agency’s financial 

operations are properly conducted, financial statements are presented fairly, and 

applicable laws and regulations are being followed. 

To prepare for and meet this obligation, the OIG consulted other 

Inspectors General, as well as the General Services Administration (GSA) to 

obtain guidance on the contracting process. The OIG contacted the Accounting 

Office and the Planning and Management Director to obtain information on the 

FEC’s accounting and budget system to incorporate into the statement of work. A 

considerable amount of time was spent preparing the statement of work which 

was used to procure the independent public accounting (IPA) firm. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 12
An evaluation panel, consisting of the Inspector General and both OIG 

auditors, evaluated each of the technical proposals received from the offerors in 

order to select a certified public accounting (CPA) firm that offered the best 

overall value. Each proposal was analyzed based on the requirements listed in 

the Statement of Work. Each panel member awarded points to the offerors based 

on their proposals and summary evaluation worksheets of technical and past 

performance were completed for each proposal. After each vendor had been 

evaluated separately by the panel, the panel met to discuss and perform an 

overall analysis of the contract proposals. 

The OIG reviewed the legal offers submitted by each of the vendors. The 

legal offers included evidence of continuing professional education credits for 

contractor personnel, as well as documentation of a recent positive peer review. 

One of the panel members reviewed the signed statements by the CPA firms, 

attesting that no actual or potential conflicts of interest exist between the vendor 

and the FEC. 

A meeting was held with the FEC’s contracting officer, at which time the 

proposals received from the CPA firms were discussed. The firm that presented 

the best, overall value was selected. The FEC/OIG elected to award the contract 

to Clifton Gunderson LLP, the 12th largest CPA and consulting firm in the United 

States, with a staff exceeding 1,400 and offices in 13 states – including the 

District of Columbia. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 13
An entrance conference was arranged with management to discuss the 

audit objectives and also provided an opportunity for management to meet some 

of the Clifton Gunderson employees, as well as ask questions and discuss any 

issues relevant to the audit. The contractors and the OIG intend to meet 

regularly, and plan to keep Management apprised of the firm’s work throughout 

the audit. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 14
CONGRESSIONAL REQUEST

During this reporting period, the OIG received a congressional request 

from Senator Jack Reed regarding electronic voting machines. The letter from 

Senator Reed stated that he was writing on behalf of his constituents in Rhode 

Island. 

The OIG responded to the request and provided Senator Reed with 

background information about the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and its 

purpose for being established. Additional information pertaining to the 

Commission’s Office of Election Administration (OEA – the OEA transferred to 

the EAC on April 1, 2004) and the newly created Election Assistance Commission 

(EAC) was also provided. The OEA transferred to the EAC on April 1, 2004. 

The Federal Election Commission was established in 1975 to administer 

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

and enforces the FECA through four core programs – 1) promoting disclosure of 

campaign finance reports; 2) enforcing limitation provisions of FECA; 3) 

implementing the presidential public funding provisions; and 4) enhancing 

federal election administration. 

The Commission’s Office of Election Administration (OEA) was created to 

assist state and local election officials charged with administering federal 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 15
elections. The OEA provided for the compilation and distribution of information 

and research on all matters related to election administration. The office helped 

states implement the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), which 

Congress enacted to facilitate and increase voter registration by providing 

opportunities to register at a number of state agencies, using a number of 

registration methods. 

In addition, the OEA issued Voting Systems Standards for release and 

publication. The standards are intended to ensure that computer-based election 

equipment certified for purchase by participating states will be accurate, reliable 

and dependable. To assist and provide guidance to states, voting system vendors 

and local jurisdictions in the transition to the 2002 standards, the Commission 

also approved an Implementation Plan for the Voting System Standards. 

Public Law 107-252 – Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), required 

the establishment of a new agency, The Election Assistance Commission. Under 

HAVA, the EAC is responsible for developing voluntary voting machine 

standards, certifying voting systems, auditing grant recipients, and studying a 

number of issues in election administration. The EAC is also responsible for the 

distribution of more than $2 billion to states for the purchase of new voting 

machines and new voter education programs, as well as monitoring and 

publicizing each state’s HAVA planning and implementation. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 16
HOTLINE COMPLAINT

Inspectors General are responsible for ensuring efficiency and integrity in 

the programs and operations of the agencies they oversee. The OIG hotline 

provides a prompt, effective, and confidential channel for reporting fraud, waste, 

abuse, and mismanagement to the Inspector General. Individuals with 

information regarding the manner in which the FEC executes its programs and 

operations are encouraged to contact the Office of Inspector General by calling, 

visiting, e-mailing or sending correspondence to our office. Regardless of the 

method, all information received is handled promptly and efficiently. 

Currently being addressed during this reporting period is a hotline 

complaint the OIG received from an individual who requested confidentiality. 

The OIG commenced a preliminary inquiry which included obtaining and 

reviewing records from the Accounting Office. Once further research is 

completed, the OIG will make a determination as to whether or not a full 

investigation is necessary. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 17
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 FY 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Bill requires all Inspectors General 

to submit a report to Congress on the implementation of the Rural 

Development Act of 1972. The OIG has started researching this area. In 

addition, reports from other OIGs have been reviewed and a draft report 

on the FEC’s implementation has been initiated. Once all the research has 

been completed, the report, which is due in June, will be finalized. 

• The Commission’s Policy Legal Review Administrative Law office 

contacted the OIG regarding the OIG’s contract authority. FEC 

management asked the Administrative Law office to provide a legal 

opinion on whether the FEC OIG may enter into contracts absent 

Commission approval. To discuss the issue the OIG met with an attorney 

representing the Administrative Law office. The OIG provided the 

attorney with several documents that support the OIG’s contract authority. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 18
Those items included memorandums of understanding (MOU) between 

the OIG and the Staff Director, and the General Counsel., as well as a copy 

of the Inspector General Act. The Administrative Law office concluded 

that the OIG may enter into contracts without prior approval of the 

Commission. 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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 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. 

For the period October 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004, the Inspector 

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

and/or conferences: 

• ECIE - Monthly Meetings

• PCIE – Inspections and Evaluations (I&E) Roundtable Discussion

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 20
• PCIE - Financial Statement Audit Network (FSAN) Meeting 

• PCIE/ECIE – Annual Joint Meeting

• PCIE/ECIE – 2004 Inspectors General Retreat

• PCIE/ECIE – Meeting with President Bush

• PCIE/ECIE – Federal Audit Executive Council (FAEC) Meeting

• PCIE/GPRA - Human Resources Roundtable Discussion

• USDA Graduate School – Contracting Basics for Contracting Officer’s 

Technical Representative (COTR)

• USDA Graduate School – Contracting for Professional Audit Services

• USDA/OIG – 2004 Directors of Investigation Conference 

• Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) – Audit Command Language (ACL) 

• Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) – Auditing in Government 

Conference: Changing World...Changing Solutions

• Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – Program Assessment 

Rating Tool (PART) Training 

• Management Concepts – CFO Reporting: Preparing Federal 

Financial Statements 

• Joint Financial Management Improvement Program (JFMIP) – 

Improving Performances with Useful Financial Information 

• Small Agency Council – Effective Writing (Intermediate) 

• Federal Election Commission/Information Division – Campaign 

Finance Law Seminar for Candidates and Political Party Committees 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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----------------------------------------------18 

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 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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 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 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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 

 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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.

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 Page 26 
 

October 1, 2003 – March 31, 2004 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.