U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

49–010 

" ! SENATE 

114TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2015

114–86 

Calendar No. 156 

FEDERAL IMPROPER PAYMENTS ACT 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 614 

TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO AND USE OF INFORMATION BY FEDERAL 

AGENCIES IN ORDER TO REDUCE IMPROPER PAYMENTS, AND FOR 

OTHER PURPOSES 

JULY 21, 2015.—Ordered to be printed 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SENcongress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

BEN SASSE, Nebraska 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

KEITH B. ASHDOWN, Staff Director 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Chief Counsel 

PATRICK J. BAILEY, Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Deputy Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs 

COURTNEY J. ALLEN, Counsel 

GABRIELLE A. BATKIN, Minority Staff Director 

JOHN P. KILVINGTON, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

MARY BETH SCHULTZ, Minority Chief Counsel 

PETER P. TYLER, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
Calendar No. 156 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 114–86 

FEDERAL IMPROPER PAYMENTS ACT 

JULY 21, 2015.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 614] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 614) to provide access to and use 

of information by Federal agencies in order to reduce improper payments, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports 

favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the 

bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary .................................................................................. 1 

II. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................... 2 

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 6 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 6 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 7 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 7 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 8 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

S. 614 seeks to reduce improper payments made by federal agencies, which are payments that the government makes in erroneous 

amounts, or payments that should not be made at all. The bill 

would improve the sharing and use of key data to combat improper 

payments, and would encourage the use of data analytics by federal 

agencies for government-wide waste and fraud reviews. 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

This Committee has long been concerned with the federal government’s persistent improper payment problem—that is, executive 

branch agencies’ too common mistake of sending money to people 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
2 

1 Congressional Research Service (CRS), Improper Payments and Recovery Audits: Legislation, 

Implementation, and Analysis, R42878, 1 (Jan. 2, 2013). 2Pursuant to an executive order, the Secretary of the Treasury in consultation with the Attorney General and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) maintains a website on improper 

payments reporting at http://www.paymentaccuracy.gov/. 3 Id. 4 Id. 5 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, National Health Expenditure Projections 2013– 

2023, http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Proj2013.pdf. 6 Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Medicaid Baseline Projections. (Mar. 09, 2015), 

https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44204-2015-03-Medicaid.pdf. 7 Congressional Budget Office, Medicare Baseline Projections, (Mar. 09, 2015). 8 CRS, Improper Payments and Recovery Audits: Legislation, Implementation, and Analysis, 

R42878, 1 (Jan. 2, 2013). 9Pub. L. No. 107–300, 116 Stat. 2350, 31 U.S.C. § 3321 note (2002). 

10The list of the 24 agencies covered by this mandate is found at 31 U.S.C. § 901(b)(1)(2004). 

or companies, whether for benefits or under contracts, either in an 

incorrect amount or when no money should be paid to the recipient 

at all. Improper payments include remittances to ineligible recipients, duplicate payments, payments for a good or service not received, payments that do not reflect credits for applicable discounts, and in some cases payments to the deceased.1 Improper 

payments by federal agencies impose a significant cost on taxpayers, with the United States Treasury losing tens of billions of 

dollars annually to overpayments, including, at times, fraudulent 

payments to government contractors, program beneficiaries, and 

others. For fiscal year (FY) 2014, for example, federal agencies reported an estimated total of $124.7 billion in improper payments, 

an increase of $19 billion from the prior fiscal year.2

Errors in carrying out federal health care entitlements are the 

largest contributor to improper payments.3 Medicare, Medicaid, 

and the Children’s Health Insurance Program account for approximately $78 billion in improper payments in 2014.4 The expansion 

of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act and the increased utilization of the Medicare programs due to an aging population will result in increased spending on these programs in future years.5 Indeed, Medicaid spending is expected to increase from $270 billion 

in 2014 to $529 billion in 2025.6 During that same period, Medicare 

spending is expected to grow from $600 billion to nearly $1.2 trillion.7

As spending on Medicare and Medicaid continues to grow—nearly doubling over ten years—it is imperative that the rate of improper payments is brought under control and dramatically reduced. If the improper payment rates for these two programs remain the same, by 2025 just these two programs could account for 

$150 billion in improper payments based on the projected outlays. 

For over a decade, a series of laws have attempted to identify, 

prevent, and recover improper payments.8

Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA).9 Agencies 

began to deal comprehensively with improper payments following 

the enactment of IPIA, which required each agency subject to the 

requirements of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 10 to annually review all programs and activities that it administers, identify 

those that may be susceptible to significant improper payments, develop improper payments estimates for those programs deemed 

susceptible, and report the estimates annually. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
3 

11Pub. L. No. 111–204, 124 Stat. 2224 (2010). 12Pub. L. No. 112–248, 126 Stat. 2390, 31 U.S.C. § 3321 note (2013). 13Memorandum on Enhancing Payment Accuracy Through a ‘‘Do Not Pay List,’’ (June 18, 

2010), http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-enhancing-payment-accuracy-through-a-do-not-pay-list. The Do Not Pay list was established to allow screening 

against the following databases: the SSA DMF, which lists all deaths reported to the agency 

since 1936; the General Services Administration’s Excluded Parties List System, which lists entities debarred from receiving federal contracts; the Department of the Treasury’s Debt Check 

Database, which contains information on individuals who owe delinquent child support or nontax debt that might exclude them from certain federal loans, loan insurance, or loan guarantees; 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Credit Alert Verification Reporting 

System, which provides information on individuals who are in default or have had claims paid 

on direct or guaranteed federal loans, or are delinquent on other debts owed to federal agencies; 

and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General’s (HHS–OIG) 

List of Excluded Individuals/Entities, which identifies those barred from federally-funded health 

care programs. 

Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 

(IPERA).11 In July 2010, Congress passed, and the President 

signed, IPERA to enhance the reporting and reduction of improper 

payments. IPERA amended IPIA by expanding on the previous requirements for identifying, estimating, and reporting on programs 

and activities susceptible to significant improper payments and expanding requirements for recovering overpayments across a broad 

range of federal programs. IPERA: 

• Added a requirement that any program with estimated improper payments exceeding specific dollar amounts and error 

rate thresholds set out in the law must report on the actions 

the agency is taking to reduce improper payments; 

• Imposed a new requirement for agencies to conduct audits 

to recover improper payments, where cost effective, for each 

program and activity with at least one million dollars in annual program outlays; 

• Established incentives and budgetary penalties for programs that fail to comply with the requirements of the law 

over a reasonable number of years; and 

• Required each federal agency’s inspector general to determine annually whether his or her agency is in compliance with 

certain IPERA requirements and to report on that determination. 

IPERA Improvement Act of 2012 (the ‘‘Improvement Act’’).12

Building on the previously enacted legislation, the Improvement 

Act required agencies to take additional steps to curb improper 

payments. Specifically, the Improvement Act: 

• Expanded requirements for agencies to estimate improper 

payments, forcing agencies to improve previously weak efforts 

at estimating such payments. For example, the Act prevents 

agencies from relying only on voluntary disclosure of improper 

payments by contractors and requires agencies to produce documentation to prove a payment was correct. 

• Codified the government-wide Do Not Pay program (previously established through a 2010 White House memorandum) that requires agencies to check against a central, 

comprehensive database of entities ineligible to receive federal 

funds before making payments, including the Social Security 

Administration’s (SSA) Death Master File (DMF) and the other 

databases specified in the White House memorandum.13 The 

law also addressed some of the challenges encountered by the 

Administration as it attempted to implement its Do Not Pay 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
4 

14Payment Accuracy, Government-wide Improper Payments Targets, http:// 

www.paymentaccuracy.gov/. 15Testimony of Beryl Davis, Government Accountability Office before the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, ‘‘Examining Federal Improper Payments and Errors in the Death Master File,’’ Mar. 16, 2015. 16 ‘‘Curbing Federal Agency Waste and Fraud: New Steps to Strengthen the Integrity of Federal 

Payments;’’ Hearing Before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

113th Cong. (2013), http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/curbing-federal-agency-waste-andfraud-new-steps-to-strengthen-the-integrity-of-federal-payments. 17 ‘‘Risky Business: Examining GAO’s 2015 List of High Risk Government Programs;’’ Hearing 

Before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 114th Cong. (2015). 

http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/risky-business-examining-gaos-2015-list-of-high-risk-government-programs. 

program, such as the need for multilateral data sharing agreements among agencies. • Required that the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), within 120 days of enactment, issue a plan for curbing 

improper payments to deceased individuals. 

The creation of the Do Not Pay list and these legislative efforts 

have resulted in an increased focus across the government in preventing, identifying, and reducing improper payments. Total improper payments made by the federal government dropped from 

$120.6 billion in FY 2010 to $106 billion in FY 2013.14

However, as noted above, improper payments in FY 2014 rose to nearly $125 billion. That increase is attributed to increased error 

rates in three major programs: Medicare Fee-for-Service, Medicaid 

programs, and the Earned Income Tax Credit. These three programs accounted for approximately 65 percent of total governmentwide improper payments for FY 2014.15 As outlays continue to increase, the growth in improper payments will also increase unless 

action is taken. Clearly, additional efforts are needed to return to 

a downward trajectory in improper payments. 

During the 113th Congress, the Committee held a hearing to examine the implementation of IPERA and the IPERA Improvement 

Act, and to explore potential next steps for similar initiatives, such 

as improving the sharing and accuracy of data to prevent improper 

payments to dead people. At the hearing, Daniel I. Werfel, Controller, OMB’s Office of Federal Financial Management, highlighted 

federal efforts to prevent improper payments. Both his testimony 

and that of Richard L. Gregg, Fiscal Assistant Secretary at the Department of the Treasury, provided an update on the progress 

made in implementing the Do Not Pay initiative, acknowledging 

that there was much to be done to ensure that the initiative provided a comprehensive solution to payment integrity.16 Patrick P. 

O’Carroll, Jr., SSA Inspector General and Daniel Bertoni, a Government Accountability Office Director for Education, Welfare, and 

Income Security, and Marianna LaCanfora, the SSA Acting Deputy 

Commissioner for Retirement and Disability Policy, also gave testimony. 

On February 11, 2015, GAO Comptroller General Gene Dodaro 

testified before the Committee regarding the release of GAO’s biannual ‘‘High Risk’’ list of government programs most at risk of 

waste, fraud, or abuse. The testimony and deliberations of this 

hearing included discussions of the level of federal improper payments, as well as causes and potential solutions.17

The Committee has continued to examine this issue following 

consideration of S. 614. On March 16, 2015, the Committee held a 

hearing titled ‘‘Examining Federal Improper Payments and Errors 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
5 

18 ‘‘Examining Federal Improper Payments and Errors in the Death Master File;’’ Hearing Before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 113th Cong. (2013). 

http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/examining-federal-improper-payments-and-errors-in-thedeath-master-file. 19Letter from Chairman Ron Johnson, S. Comm. On Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, to Sylvia Burwell, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (Mar. 17, 

2015). 20Letter from Chairman Ron Johnson, S. Comm. On Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, to John Koskinen, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (May 21, 2015). 

in the Death Master File’’ which examined the $19 billion increase 

in improper payments in 2015.18 The hearing also uncovered problems with the DMF, the key database used by agencies to screen 

payments in an effort to prevent improper payments to the deceased. 

On March 17, 2015, Committee Chairman Ron Johnson wrote to 

the Department of Health and Human Services, requesting information regarding, as stated by the letter, improper payments of advanced premium assistance tax credits and cost-sharing subsidies 

under the Affordable Care Act to 200,000 individuals who were not 

eligible to receive them because they did not verify legal residency 

in the United States.19 On May 21, 2015, the Chairman also sent 

a letter to the Internal Revenue Service, the agency responsible for 

recovering those improper payments.20 The Chairman estimates 

that the loss to taxpayers could be as high as $400 million and neither agency has responded that they have a plan to recoup these 

payments. IPERA, as noted above, requires agencies to establish a 

plan for the identification, prevention, and recoupment of improper 

payments when doing so would result in a recovery of overpayments greater than the administrative cost of pursuing such recovery. 

S. 614, the Improper Payments Coordination Act, reflects lessons 

learned through the Committee’s hearings, as well as the Committee’s other ongoing oversight of federal agency improper payments, 

which includes reviews of annual agency reports on improper payments as well as extensive discussions with agency inspectors general regarding their body of work related to improper payments. 

S. 614 takes additional key steps to address improper payments 

made by government agencies. The legislation extends access to the 

Do Not Pay initiative to the judicial and legislative branches of the 

federal government, as well as the state government agencies that 

manage federal funds, to expand use of this tool to prevent improper payments. The legislation also requires the Department of 

State and Department of Defense to report death data to other 

agencies to prevent improper payments to deceased individuals. 

Additionally, the bill improves the Do Not Pay initiative by requiring OMB to issue guidance clarifying rules and procedures for 

agencies to share information. 

Finally, the legislation seeks to expand and improve the use of 

data analytics by federal agencies for federal-wide waste and fraud 

reviews. As part of the Do Not Pay initiative, the Department of 

Treasury established a center within the Department to identify 

payments that are improper or potentially fraudulent. This analysis involves payments across a wide range of federal agencies and 

programs. However, the roles and responsibilities of the analysis 

center are not well-defined. For example, the center’s interaction 

with similar efforts by federal agency inspectors general is not yet 

defined, and there is no timetable for the continuing development 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
6 

of the center. Therefore, the bill requires the Secretary of the 

Treasury to prepare a report describing data analytics performed, 

the metrics used in determining whether these analytics help reduce improper payments, and target dates for implementing the 

data analytics operations performed as part of the Do Not Pay initiative. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Ranking Member Carper and Chairman Johnson introduced S. 

614 on February 7, 2015 and the bill was referred to the Committee. 

The Committee considered S. 614 at a business meeting on 

March 4, 2015. The Committee ordered the bill reported favorably 

by voice vote en bloc. Members present for the vote on the bill were 

Senators Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Ayotte, Ernst, Carper, 

McCaskill, Baldwin, Heitkamp, and Peters. 

IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED

Section 1—Short title 

This section establishes the bill’s title as the ‘‘Improper Payments Coordination Act of 2015.’’ 

Section 2—Availability of the Do Not Pay Initiative to the Judicial 

and Legislative Branches and States 

This section amends Section 5 of the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 to expand the Do 

Not Pay initiative from use by just Executive branch agencies, to 

also allow use of the Do Not Pay Program by the Judicial and Legislative Branches, as well as state government agencies that manage federal programs. 

Section 3—Improving the sharing and use of data by Government 

agencies to curb improper payments 

This section amends Section 5 of the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 to: 

(1) Replace the use of the words ‘‘Death Master File’’ with ‘‘death 

records.’’ This is a technical correction. 

(2) Improve the sharing of information regarding overseas 

deaths. Currently, there are no clear procedures for agencies such 

as the Department of Defense and Department of State to share 

their notices of overseas deaths of United States citizens (as opposed to deaths that occur within the United States) to update federal agency lists of deceased individuals. These lists are used to ensure that beneficiaries, retirees, and others do not receive improper 

payments when deceased. The section requires OMB to provide 

guidance that the two agencies should share notices of overseas 

deaths. 

(3) Provide guidance for agencies to share data with the Do Not 

Pay program. Currently, six key databases are required by law to 

be included in the Do Not Pay program. However, some agencies 

have been slow to share key data, often due to a lack of clarity on 

rules and procedures. This section requires OMB to provide guidance addressing this problem. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
7 

1 A fraudulent payment (the intentional misuse of funds) may be related to an improper payment, but they are not necessarily the same. Efforts to curtail improper payments do not exclusively target fraud prevention. For additional information see: Congressional Budget Office: How 

Initiatives to Reduce Fraud in Federal Health Care Programs Affect the Budget (October 2014). 

Section 4—Data analytics 

The Department of Treasury has an analysis center to help federal agencies identify and prevent improper payments. This section 

amends Section 5 of the IPERA Improvement Act of 2012 (31 

U.S.C. § 3321 note) by adding subparagraph (h). Subparagraph (h) 

requires the Secretary of the Treasury to submit a report to Congress describing how the Do Not Pay Initiative data analytics center incorporates: (1) comparisons of payment and beneficiary enrollment lists for state programs that use federal funds to identify improper payments; (2) reviews of payments across federal programs 

to identify payment duplication; and (3) reviews of other information determined to be effective. The report, due within 180 days 

after enactment, must also describe the metrics used to determine 

if the analytic and investigatory efforts have helped reduce improper payments. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of 

the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

the regulatory impact of this bill and determined that the bill will 

have no regulatory impact within the meaning of the rules. The 

Committee agrees with the Congressional Budget Office’s statement that the bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

JUNE 18, 2015. 

Hon. RON JOHNSON, Chairman, 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 614, the Federal Improper 

Payments Coordination Act of 2015. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew Pickford. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 

S. 614—Federal Improper Payments Coordination Act of 2015 

S. 614 would amend federal law with an aim to reduce improper 

payments made by the federal government. Improper payments 

occur when funds are paid to the wrong recipient, the recipient receives the incorrect amount of funds, documentation is not available to support a payment, or the recipient uses funds in an improper manner.1 Specifically, the legislation would authorize the judicial and legislative branches, as well as state government agenVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:53 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR086.XXX SR086

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
8 

cies that manage federal programs, to use the Treasury Department’s Do Not Pay (DNP) Program. (Agencies use that program to 

check various databases before making payments or contract 

awards in order to identify ineligible recipients and to prevent 

other payment errors.) S. 614 also would direct the Secretaries of 

State and Defense to improve the accuracy of their payment systems by sharing information relating to the deaths of individuals. 

Finally, the Secretary of the Treasury would be required to submit 

a report to the Congress on efforts to reduce improper payments. 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports that about $125 billion in improper payments were made by the federal government in 2014, which represented about 4 percent of the $3 trillion in government-wide spending that year. Although implementing the bill would probably result in fewer improper payments, any subsequent budgetary savings would not be significant 

for several reasons: • Most improper payments result from incomplete documentation related to the payment and correcting that documentation usually does not alter the amount of the payment; • Over 80 percent of improper payments stem from the larger federal entitlement programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, 

Unemployment Insurance, and Supplemental Security Income. 

The bill would not provide any new authorities to help those 

programs reduce improper payments; • The judicial and legislative branches of the government 

can already access the DNP program under current law, according to Treasury Department officials; • Spending by those branches represents less than 1 percent 

of total federal spending and most of it is for salaries and expenses. Such spending generally does not result in large numbers of improper payments; • State and local governments already use databases similar 

to the DNP to detect improper payments. 

In fact, no measures used by OMB or evidence from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) indicate that focusing on correcting improper payments would lead to a significant reduction in 

federal spending. 

Because enacting the bill could affect direct spending for federal 

entitlement programs, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, 

CBO estimates that any change in direct spending would not be 

significant for the reasons stated above. We also estimate that implementing S. 614 would not result in significant additional administrative costs for the Departments of Defense, State, and the 

Treasury. 

S. 614 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew Pickford. The 

estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by S. 614 as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
9 

is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing 

law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 31—MONEY AND FINANCE 

* * * * * * * 

Section. 3321. Disbursing authority in the executive branch 

* * * * * * * 

Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery 

Improvement 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 5. DO NOT PAY INITIATIVE 

(a) 

(1) * * * 

(2) 

ø(A) The Death Master File of the Social Security Administration.¿ (A) The death records maintained by the 

Commissioner of Social Security. 

(b) 

(1) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(3) ACCESS AND REVIEW øBY AGENCIES¿.—For purposes of 

identifying and preventing improper payments, each agency 

shall have access to, and use of, the Do Not Pay Initiative to 

verify payment or award eligibility in accordance with subsection (a) when the Director of the Office of Management and 

Budget determines the Do Not Pay Initiative is appropriately 

established for the agency. States and any contractor, subcontractor, or agent of a State, and the judicial and legislative 

branches of the United States (as defined in paragraphs (2) and 

(3), respectively, of section 202(e) of title 18, United States 

Code), shall have access to, and use of, the Do Not Pay Initiative to verify payment or award eligibility for payments (as defined in section (2)(g)(3) of the Improper Payments Information 

Act of 2002, 31 U.S.C. 3321 note) when, with respect to a State, 

the Director of the Office of Management and Budget determines that the Do Not Pay Initiative is appropriately established for that State and any contractor, subcontractor, or agent 

of the State, and, with respect to the judicial and legislative 

branches of the United States, when the Director of the Office 

of Management and Budget determines that the Do Not Pay 

Initiative is appropriately established for the judicial branch or 

the legislative branch, as applicable. 

(c) * * * 

(d) 

(1) * * * 

(2) 

(A) * * * 

(B) shall include not less than 3 agencies as users of the 

system; øand¿ 

(C) shall include investigation activities for fraud and 

systemic improper payments detection through analytic 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
10 

technologies and other techniques, which may include commercial database use or accessø.¿; and 

(D) may include States and their quasi-government entities, and the judicial and legislative branches of the United 

States (as defined in paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively, 

of section 202(e) of title 18, United States Code) as users of 

the system in accordance with subsection (b)(3). 

* * * * * * * 

(h) REPORT ON IMPROPER PAYMENTS DATA ANALYSIS.—Not later 

than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Federal Improper 

Payments Coordination Act of 2015, the Secretary of the Treasury 

shall submit to Congress a report which shall include a description 

of— 

(1) data analytics performed as part of the Do Not Pay Initiative for the purpose of detecting, preventing, and recovering improper payments through pre-award, post-award pre-payment, 

and post-payment analysis, which shall include a description of 

any analysis or investigations incorporating— 

(A) review and data matching of payments and beneficiary enrollment lists of State programs carried out using 

Federal funds for the purposes of identifying eligibility duplication, residency ineligibility, duplicate payments, or 

other potential improper payment issues; 

(B) review of multiple Federal agencies and programs for 

which comparison of data could show payment duplication; 

and 

(C) review of other information the Secretary of the 

Treasury determines could prove effective for identifying, 

preventing, or recovering improper payments, which may 

include investigation or review of information from multiple Federal agencies or programs; 

(2) the metrics used in determining whether the analytic and 

investigatory efforts have reduced, or contributed to the reduction of, improper payments or improper awards; and 

(3) the target dates for implementing the data analytics operations performed as part of the Do Not Pay Initiative. 

SEC. 6. * * * 

SEC. 7. IMPROVING THE USE OF DATA BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 

FOR CURBING IMPROPER PAYMENTS. 

(a) PROMPT REPORTING OF DEATH INFORMATION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.—Not later 

than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary 

of State and the Secretary of Defense shall establish a procedure 

under which each Secretary shall, promptly and on a regular basis, 

submit information relating to the deaths of individuals to each 

agency for which the Director of the Office of Management and 

Budget determines receiving and using such information would be 

relevant and necessary. 

(b) GUIDANCE TO AGENCIES REGARDING DATA ACCESS AND USE

FOR IMPROPER PAYMENTS PURPOSES.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 6 months after the date of 

enactment of this section, and in consultation with the Council 

of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, the heads of 

other relevant Federal, State, and local agencies, and Indian 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN
11 

tribes and tribal organizations, the Director of the Office of 

Management and Budget shall issue guidance regarding implementation of the Do Not Pay Initiative under section 5 to— 

(A) the Department of the Treasury; and 

(B) each agency or component of an agency— 

(i) that operates or maintains a database of information described in section 5(a)(2); or 

(ii) for which the Director determines improved data 

matching would be relevant, necessary, or beneficial. 

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The guidance issued under paragraph 

(1) shall— 

(A) address the implementation of subsection (a); and 

(B) include the establishment of deadlines for access to 

and use of the databases described in section 5(a)(2) under 

the Do Not Pay Initiative. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS-SEN