Fiscal Year 2001 Results of OIG Efforts

The work of more than 9,600 employees of Offices of the Inspector

General government-wide during FY 2001 contributed to results that include:

• Potential savings of over $24.5 billion (includes management decisions on 

 OIG recommendations that funds be put to better use and questioned 

 costs)

• Recovery Actions of over $3.7 billion

• More than 7,600 successful prosecutions

• Suspensions or debarments of nearly 9,000 individuals or businesses

• More than 2,000 civil or personnel actions

• Almost 5,000 Indictments and Criminal Informations

• More than 70 testimonies before the Congress on issues of national interest.

These accomplishments reflect the work of the 57 Offices of 

Inspector General, whose combined FY 2001 budgets totaled 

about $ 1.4 billion.
A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Contents

Foreword ................................................................................................................ 1

Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top 

Management Challenges ........................................................................................... 3

The Inspector General Community ............................................................................. 9

Committee Accomplishments................................................................................... 13

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments ................................................................ 18

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001............................................................... 37

PCIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers ..................................................... 69

ECIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers ..................................................... 70

Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary ...................................................................... 71
A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency
Foreword

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 1

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Foreword

The members of the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) and the Executive Council 

on Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE) are pleased to issue this year’s annual report to the President. 

This report highlights the exemplary accomplishments of the 57 individual Offices of Inspector 

General (OIG) during fiscal year (FY) 2001 and directs attention to a number of key initiatives that 

our organizations have addressed. This report also highlights the contributions of the dedicated OIG 

employees who assisted in the work related to the September 11 tragedy, an event that tried not 

only our resolve as a Nation, but the way the Executive Branch operates as well.

Our mission and the more than 9,600 men and women charged with putting it into effect make the 

Inspector General (IG) community a significant, positive force for improving the economy, efficiency, 

and effectiveness of Federal programs and operations and for preventing and detecting fraud, waste, 

abuse, and mismanagement. This report highlights the successes of the IG community in 

sharpening the management capabilities of our agencies, along with our findings of shortcomings 

and our recommendations for addressing them. 

Through the thousands of independent audits, investigations, evaluations, and other activities we 

conducted during FY 2001, the OIGs accounted for over $28 billion in saved and recovered Federal 

funds, as well as thousands of prosecutions, civil and personnel actions, and suspensions and 

debarments of businesses and individuals for wrongdoing. The statistical accomplishments we 

underscore throughout the report point to a 20-fold return on the taxpayers’ $1.4 billion investment 

in the OIGs. 

A critical function of each OIG is to determine the most important management challenges its 

agency faces. As documented in this report, IGs have encountered deficiencies common to a host of 

agencies across the full spectrum of Government operations and programs, requiring the best 

collaborative efforts and attention of the IG community, administration leadership, and agency 

managers. Many of the challenges discussed in this report are consistent with administration 

initiatives detailed in the President’s Management Agenda. This report also discusses a number of 

serious management challenges, four of which merit special emphasis. Federal agencies need to:

 Continue to address the protection of our Nation’s physical and information infrastructure as part 

of the overall “Homeland Security” initiative.

 Improve the acquisition and management of information technology systems, and develop the 

capacities these systems offer for enhancing communications and performance.

 Develop appropriate program performance measures and apply them to agency budgets and 

management decisionmaking.

 Emphasize Government accountability and transparency by requiring Federal financial 

management systems to provide timely, accurate, and useful information.

This year we are prouder than ever of both the individual OIGs’ accomplishments in sound 

management, law enforcement, and homeland security and the IG community’s progress in 

strengthening cooperation to further these efforts. We have shared our best practices with one 

another, with agency management, and with the public through forums, congressional testimony, 

and other communication vehicles. Information on IG community initiatives and the active 

committees of the PCIE and ECIE is further detailed in this report and can be found on the 

community’s Web site, IGnet (www.ignet.gov), which also contains links to our members’ Web sites.
2 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Foreword

As individual IGs and as a community, we are committed to work together to carry out the mission 

established for us 23 years ago. We look forward to continued cooperation with the administration 

and Congress to address the ever-changing challenges our Government faces.

Gaston L. Gianni, Jr., Vice Chair

President’s Council on Integrity 

and Efficiency

Barry R. Snyder, Vice Chair

Executive Council on Integrity 

and Efficiency
Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 3

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and 

Old Top Management Challenges

Helping to fight terrorism, evaluating the Nation’s critical infrastructure, striving to improve the 

Government’s financial management, and validating agency performance and accountability 

measures are among the key tasks facing the Nation’s IGs today. These tasks have emerged as a 

result of priorities established by the administration or Congress, or, more recently, in response to 

threats against our homeland. These priorities are sharply different from the ones the newly 

designated IGs faced 23 years ago.

In 1978, the IG Act was signed, creating 12 independent audit and investigative offices. At that 

time, the IGs were charged with independently reviewing the programs and operations of their 

agencies; detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse; and promoting economy, efficiency, 

and effectiveness so their agencies could best serve the public. While the act has since been 

amended several times to add new IGs and clarify reporting requirements, these basic tenets have 

remained constant and strong. Today, 57 OIGs provide oversight to 59 Federal agencies. 

Individual OIGs view themselves as “agents of positive change” within their agencies and direct 

their work toward examining programs and operations to promote program efficiency and 

effectiveness and protect Government integrity. IGs strive to be influential forces by identifying 

vulnerabilities in their agency’s programs and operations and by facilitating excellence by 

recommending improvements. While changes in vulnerability and risk have affected the focus of 

their work and priorities over the years, the OIGs have drawn on their broad base of knowledge and 

expertise to adapt to these changes and remain relevant and on point.

Our report this year continues to demonstrate the tangible savings and contributions to a sound 

Federal Government that the OIG community of over 9,600 employees has identified through its 

various audits, evaluations, inspections, investigations, and other activities. Overall, Federal 

departments and agencies agreed to savings or recoveries totaling over $28 billion in Federal 

monies that OIGs identified. Other OIG actions resulted in more than 7,600 successful prosecutions, 

almost 5,000 indictments and criminal informations, and more than 2,000 civil or personnel actions 

against individuals or entities. Also, the OIGs reported suspensions or debarments of nearly 8,800 

contractors, grantees, and other entities or individuals doing business with the Government. OIGs 

testified more than 70 times before congressional committees on a broad range of matters of 

national interest. Of course, these figures do not include the intensive efforts of the many dedicated 

OIG employees who assisted in the work related to the September 11 tragedy. 

Clearly, the OIGs bring longstanding historical perspectives, stability, and integrity to bear on the 

challenges, opportunities, and difficult times facing our Government. As evidenced in this report, the 

IG community continues to demonstrate its dedication to its homeland, commitment to good 

government through its management challenges work and support of the President’s Management 

Agenda, and obligation to its basic mission. An overview of these issues follows, with specifics 

beginning on page 37 of this report. 

IG Community’s Response to the September 11 Terrorist Attacks

September 11, 2001, is a day that Americans will never forget. The deaths of more than 3,000 

people at the hands of a well-orchestrated terrorist attack will remain etched in our minds and 

hearts. While the realization that these attacks could and did take place on American soil was all too 

frightening, a renewed sense of patriotism, cooperative spirit, and faith in the American dream 

emerged throughout the Nation. The IG community felt this same determination and mobilized itself 

to help restore the calm, collect and analyze evidence, and support initiatives to combat terrorism. 
4 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

Immediately following the attacks, hundreds of OIG special agents and other personnel participated 

in rescue and evidence recovery efforts at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the 

Pennsylvania crash site. That day, OIG special agents helped the New York/New Jersey Port 

Authority transport more than 160,000 people from New York City across the river to New Jersey, 

while other agents from the IG community assisted in initial search and rescue efforts at the 

Pentagon. Twenty-one OIGs sent teams of special agents to the Pentagon and World Trade Center to 

assist in evidence recovery, working 12-hour shifts to find airplane parts and identify victims.

In the aftermath of these disastrous attacks, the IG community responded quickly and in large 

numbers to provide strong and widespread support to the efforts to answer such questions as where 

the terrorists came from, how they concealed themselves in our society, how they financed their 

operations, and what support they had within the United States. Almost every IG provided the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other law enforcement agencies with investigative 

assistance and resources to identify, interview, and arrest suspects. They also helped trace funds; 

conducted record checks, searches, and surveillance; and provided computer forensic support. OIG 

agents with specific expertise also contributed significantly to the FBI’s anthrax and bioterrorism 

investigation by helping to identify potential suspects and assisting in screening and investigating 

suspicious mail. 

Since the attacks, the support of the IG community has not wavered. OIGs are continuing to support 

various initiatives to secure our homeland. For example, OIGs from around the country have 

contributed to safeguarding our Nation’s airways by detailing special agents from the Federal law 

enforcement community to the Federal Air Marshal program. In addition, OIGs have refocused their 

audit work not only to examine the systemic vulnerabilities that failed to prevent or detect the 

crimes--or even facilitated their occurrence--but also to explore other homeland vulnerabilities that 

could be future targets of terrorism. 

Top Management Challenges Highlight Security and Good Government

Throughout 2001, the members of the PCIE and ECIE continued to bring to bear their collective 

perspective, expertise, and resources to confront the Federal Government’s top challenges more 

effectively and efficiently. Individually, IGs across the Government identified the management 

challenges posing the greatest risk to programs and operations at their respective agencies. Clearly, 

the security of our Nation’s physical and information infrastructure tops the list of challenges facing 

many agencies. Good government issues—such as information technology management and 

financial management reform—continue to rank high as significant challenges. These are real 

issues, requiring the sustained attention of Congress, the administration, Federal managers and 

employees, and the IG community.

Although the IG community can assist agencies and Congress in identifying and addressing these 

challenges, support from the administration and the public is critical. In August 2001, the 

administration announced the President’s Management Agenda, which targets five Governmentwide 

reform initiatives—human capital management, competitive sourcing, financial performance 

improvement, expanded electronic government, and budget and performance integration—as its 

immediate focus for achieving a more responsible and responsive Government that is 

citizen-centered, results-oriented, and market-based. Each of these five initiatives closely correlates 

with areas that the OIGs have designated as top management challenges. As in years past, the PCIE 

and ECIE have once again compiled these challenges into a short report to the Chairman and 

Ranking Member of the House Committee on Government Reform, to focus attention on areas that 

warrant high-level attention and review. 

While vulnerability and risk changed dramatically during 2001, the IGs remained vigilant in 

addressing top management challenges and positioning their organizations to further advance 

agency progress in these critical initiatives, as highlighted below. 
Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 5

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Protecting the Nation’s Physical and Information Infrastructures—

“Homeland Security” 

Historically, many of the Nation’s critical infrastructures have been physically and logically separate 

systems with little interdependence. Advances in information technology (IT), however, have 

created new vulnerabilities to terrorism, equipment failures, human error, weather and other natural 

causes, and cyber-attacks. Securing the Nation’s critical infrastructure is essential to economic and 

national security, and homeland security has become a priority of the administration. All IGs 

recognize physical and information infrastructure as a top management challenge. 

IGs are also conducting annual independent evaluations of their agencies’ information security 

programs and practices as part of the Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA), which 

codifies and reiterates existing security policies and responsibilities. The PCIE and ECIE are 

continuing to collaborate on a four-phase review of Federal agencies’ implementation of Presidential 

Decision Directive (PDD) 63, which calls for a national effort to ensure the security of critical 

infrastructures. During 2001, the OIGs reported on opportunities to improve the Government’s 

planning and assessment activities for critical cyber-based infrastructure assets. Individually, OIGs 

have accelerated a review of controls over accidental or intentional release of biohazards, 

emphasizing pathogen accountability and personnel and physical security at key Federal 

laboratories. 

Managing Information Technology and the Transition to Electronic 

Government 

In an increasingly interconnected society, Americans use the telephone and the Internet to obtain 

services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. More than 60 percent of all Internet users interact with 

more than 31 million Federal Web pages on 22,000 Government Web sites, and this number is 

growing. The President’s Management Agenda cites expanded electronic government 

(E-Government) as a key Governmentwide initiative aimed at: 

 Making it easy for citizens to obtain services and interact with the Federal Government. 

 Improving Government’s efficiency and effectiveness.

 Improving Government’s responsiveness to citizens.

OIGs across the Federal Government agree that electronic technology can be used efficiently and 

effectively to improve services to the American taxpayer. They have begun reviewing E-Government 

initiatives with a view to ensuring that appropriate controls are in place to safeguard the sensitive 

data and critical systems of Government. Under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), 

executive agencies must move to E-Government by October, 2003. The purpose of GPEA is not 

simply to replace paper transactions with electronic ones, but to help agencies improve operations, 

achieve cost savings, and develop adequate controls to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. With the 

Federal Government expecting to spend more than $50 billion in 2003 on E-Government issues, the 

IG community plays a vital role in overseeing the management of information technology and the 

resources dedicated to E-Government. 

The OIGs also recognize that the growth of Web access and E-Government, the availability of 

electronic access under the Freedom of Information Act (as amended by the Electronic Freedom of 

Information Act), and the implementation of GPEA will further increase demands for online records 

and services. IG work during 2001 pointed out the importance of mastering the challenges of 

preserving electronic records in a way that makes them available in systems through which users 

can locate, retrieve, and read them. 
6 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

Better Integration of Budget and Performance Results

The administration's focus on improving program results while controlling costs is emphasized 

through its integration of budget and performance initiatives. Although Federal departments and 

agencies have developed plans and reported on their performance as required by the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA), this information has not been aligned or included in their 

budget submissions to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The U.S. General Accounting 

Office (GAO) also has reported that additional effort is needed to describe clearly the relationship 

among performance expectations, requested funding, and consumed resources.

The IG community continues to consider GPRA implementation and accountability as significant 

agency challenges. Last year, we responded to Chairman Dan Burton of the House Government 

Reform Committee on the OIGs’ assessment of the most significant performance measures 

contained in their respective agencies' performance reports and the extent to which the data or 

information underlying the measures was valid and accurate. 

Many of the OIGs have made the assessment of GPRA-related performance measures a standard 

part of their work and have identified areas for improving performance budgeting, streamlining 

time-tracking systems, simplifying tracking of product and service costs, and implementing other 

enhancements to the performance management framework. Agencies also will need to upgrade 

their financial and program information systems to generate the appropriate information for fully 

integrating their budget and performance programs.

Improving Financial Performance

With improved financial performance prominently featured in the President’s Management Agenda, 

the administration is aggressively seeking to improve the timeliness, usefulness, and reliability of 

financial information to enable sound decisionmaking and safeguard the Government’s assets. Since 

the enactment of key legislation during the 1990s to improve Federal financial management, OIGs 

also have worked closely with Federal entities to address financial management and accounting 

system weaknesses. As a result of this concerted effort, 18 of 24 Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act 

agencies received unqualified or “clean” opinions on their FY 2001 financial statements. 

Much more needs to be done to improve the quality, timeliness, and usefulness of financial 

information and enhance financial information systems. Our experience shows, however, that for 

some agencies, attainment of a clean opinion is a fragile and somewhat artificial achievement 

because it results from extraordinary end-of-year efforts rather than a more constant real time 

financial management system operation. The administration’s emphasis on accelerating the 

reporting requirements over the next few years, to require in 2004 an audited financial statement 

within 45 days after the end of the FY, will challenge the community. The CFO and IG communities 

are working together to address this emerging issue.

Agencies will need to further streamline their processes and/or upgrade their financial information 

systems to achieve this goal. In June 2001, the IG community issued its “Best Practices Guide: 

Coordinating the Preparation and Audit of Federal Financial Statements” to share methods OIGs use 

to coordinate the financial statement audits within their agencies. Together with GAO, we have 

revised the “Financial Audit Manual,” which provides auditors with a single reference for auditing 

agency financial statements. The IG community and CFOs are also conducting a joint project to 

determine the extent of erroneous payments and identify ways to address this $20 billion problem. 

Addressing the Strategic Management of Human Capital

The wave of expected retirements, recruitment and retention obstacles, inadequate evaluation and 

reward systems, and outdated training and education methods are areas that need immediate 
Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 7

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

attention. GAO has announced that these areas present a “high-risk” factor for the Federal 

Government’s ability to sustain its continued level of services to the public. According to GAO, more 

than half the Federal workforce, or about 900,000 employees, will be eligible to retire by 2005. The 

administration is addressing this risk by asking each agency to develop a viable human resource 

strategy to attract and retain the right people, in the right places, and at the right time. This 

strategy should enable each agency to be a high-performance organization that delivers high-quality 

services to the American public. 

Members of the IG community agree that human capital management is a major challenge, not only 

for their respective agencies but also for their own organizations. Many OIGs have reported that 

agencies could address their human capital issues through workforce skills and competency 

assessments, benchmarking against other Federal or private sector organizations, succession 

planning, innovative recruitment and hiring approaches, improved training opportunities and 

techniques, adoption of appropriate workplace tools, and other workforce planning strategies. The 

PCIE also has aligned its committee structure by establishing a Human Resource Committee to 

create and implement innovative and effective human resource management programs within the 

community.

Managing Procurement and Competitive Sourcing

With the dual goals of improving performance and cutting costs, the President’s Management 

Agenda places increased emphasis on creating competition between Federal and private sources for 

certain tasks that are readily available in the commercial marketplace, such as administrative 

support, certain aspects of facilities management, and payroll services. Under the Federal Activities 

Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act, agencies and the OIGs are identifying functions that could be 

performed by the private sector. With this emphasis on “market-based” government, the OIGs’ 

independent assessment of agency contracting activities takes on added importance. 

As a note of caution, we must point out that the Federal Government has been lax in its contractor 

oversight. Our annual reports to the President—including the compendium in this report—are full of 

examples of poor contractor oversight resulting in excessive and unnecessary costs. Even more 

alarming, fraudulent billing schemes can result. OIG investigative work continues to confirm the 

vulnerability of programs to general contract fraud and embezzlement, and has resulted in the 

recovery of billions of dollars. Appropriate internal controls and effective oversight must be in place 

to ensure that the goods or services are not only meeting the needs of the Government and the 

public but are provided in the most cost-effective and efficient manner. The OIGs continue to identify 

procurement and grant management as a major management challenge.

Conclusion

Across Government, IGs face expanding challenges as we work with agencies to address the myriad 

issues confronting the Federal Government. We contribute to a comprehensive national strategy to 

secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks. We have taken the lead in evaluating 

threats to physical and information infrastructure since September 11, 2001, and in making detailed 

recommendations for addressing them. Homeland security has become one of the top management 

challenges our agencies face.

OIGs also add value by their constant focus on improving Government operations and enhancing 

service to the public—successfully using their authority to be independent voices for Federal 

economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. Many of our top management challenges mirror the 

President’s Management Agenda of Government reform initiatives, such as expanding electronic 

government and improving financial performance. We play a dynamic role in focusing the attention 

of Congress, the administration, and Federal managers and employees on problems and solutions. 
8 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Executive Summary: Helping Federal Agencies Face New and Old Top Management Challenges

Collectively, the PCIE and ECIE continue to help to improve Government programs and operations. 

We are working in greater collaboration than ever before with agency managers to present audits 

and recommendations that are fair, constructive, and reasonable. In addition, our investigations 

help narrow the opportunities for misconduct and corruption within the Federal Government and 

among citizens and businesses the Federal Government serves. Our goal is for every criminal and 

administrative investigation to produce systemic and procedural reforms to prevent future abuse.

Both as individual IGs and as a community, we look forward to building on our cooperative working 

relationships with Congress, the administration, and Federal managers, so that together we can 

continue to make substantive progress in resolving the top management challenges facing the 

Federal Government. 
The Inspector General Community

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 9

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

The Inspector General Community

In October 1978, Congress passed and the President signed the IG Act, which created independent 

audit and investigative offices within 12 Federal agencies. Before that time, most Federal audit and 

investigative resources were under the management of specific Federal program offices—meaning 

that these auditors and investigators were frequently part of the programs they were reviewing. 

This splintered system made it hard for these small audit and investigative offices to see patterns of 

abuse in their agencies’ programs. 

The IG concept has proved to be of significant benefit to the Government. Each year, billions of 

dollars are returned to the Federal Government or better spent because of the recommendations 

from IG reports. As a result of this success, the IG concept has been gradually expanded to most of 

the Federal Government. In FY 2001, 57 OIGs were providing oversight to 59 Federal agencies. 

The modern civilian IG was derived from the military custom of having an IG to provide an 

independent review of the combat readiness of the Continental Army’s troops. Today’s civilian IGs 

are charged with a similar mission—to independently review the programs and operations of their 

agencies; to detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse; and to promote economy, efficiency, and 

effectiveness so that their agencies can best serve the public.

Independence

IGs are different from other Federal officials because of their independence. This statutory 

independence is intended to ensure the impartiality of their audits and investigations. IGs report 

both to the heads of their respective agencies and to Congress. This dual reporting responsibility is 

the framework within which IGs perform their functions. It is the legislative safety net that protects 

IG independence and objectivity.

Specifically, the IG Act authorizes IGs to do the following: 

 Conduct audits and investigations and issue reports as they believe appropriate (with limited 

national security, financial market, and law enforcement exceptions).

 Issue subpoenas for information and documents outside the agency (with the same limited 

exceptions).

 Have direct access to all records and information of the agency.

 Have ready access to the agency head.

 Administer oaths for taking testimony.

 Hire and control their own staff and contract resources.

 Request assistance from any Federal, State, or local government.

IGs often seek input from stakeholders on what projects and areas they should pursue. Except in 

special circumstances, IGs share drafts of their reports with their agencies and respond to agency 

comments in final reports. IGs also frequently provide “technical advice” on a particular issue or 

piece of legislation to officials within their agencies and to Congress. Many IGs also participate in 

their agencies’ senior councils, and OIG staff frequently provide advice on management policies as 

they are developed.
10 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

The Inspector General Community

Mission

In simple terms, IGs have two basic roles—to find and report on current problems and to foster good 

program management to prevent future problems. This annual report discusses how IGs meet their 

specific statutory mission by: 

 Conducting and supervising audits, investigations, and inspections relating to the programs and 

operations of their agencies.

 Reviewing existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to the programs and 

operations of their agencies.

 Providing leadership for activities designed to promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency, 

and promote efforts to reduce fraud, waste, and abuse in their agencies’ programs.

 Informing their agency heads and Congress of problems in their agencies’ programs and 

operations and of the need for and progress of corrective actions. 

In performing this mission, OIGs prepare a variety of reports. During FY 2001, OIGs collectively 

issued more than 4,100 reports and provided some 70 testimonies before congressional 

committees. In addition, OIGs closed more than 29,700 investigations and processed nearly 

228,800 complaints. The reports include the following: 

Audit Reports. The IG Act requires OIG audits to be performed under auditing standards 

established by GAO. OIG audits evaluate: 

 Performance of agency programs and supporting administrative and financial systems.

 Compliance with relevant laws and regulations.

 Ways funds could be put to better use.

 Fulfillment of responsibilities to the Government by contractors and/or grantees.

 Entitlement of individuals or firms doing business with or receiving benefits from the 

Government to have received funds and whether they should make restitution.

OIGs devote the bulk of their resources to audits and related services. This work is performed by 

OIG audit staff, by other Federal auditors under cost-reimbursable agreements, or by non-Federal 

auditors under various contracting and partnering arrangements.

Inspection Reports. Inspections include policy and program evaluations. Several OIGs have 

adopted inspections as a quick way to spot-test the effectiveness of agency programs or to do a 

broad review on issues that affect agency programs. The PCIE and ECIE have adopted professional 

standards to promote the validity and independence of OIG inspections. 

Investigation Reports. In accordance with professional guidelines established by the PCIE and 

ECIE and, in certain cases, guidance from the Department of Justice (DOJ), OIGs investigate both 

criminal and administrative wrongdoing against agency programs and operations. IGs are 

empowered to investigate anyone who may have defrauded their agencies’ programs. They may 

investigate beneficiaries, contractors or grantees, or Federal officials. IGs are required to report 

suspected violations of criminal law directly to the Attorney General and frequently work 

cooperatively with the DOJ’s United States Attorneys on criminal investigations.

Semiannual Reports to Congress. These reports, specifically mandated by the IG Act, require IGs 

to summarize their most significant recent reports and management’s action on significant IG 

recommendations. The reports provide a useful overview of OIG activity and demonstrate the 

contributions of each IG. 
The Inspector General Community

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 11

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

IG Appointments

IGs are selected on the basis of their personal integrity and expertise in accounting, auditing, 

financial analysis, law, management analysis, public administration, or investigations. The IGs 

serving in Cabinet-level departments and sub-Cabinet agencies are nominated by the President and 

confirmed by the Senate. These IGs can be removed only by the President, who must communicate 

the reasons for any such removal to both houses of Congress. 

IGs at certain independent agencies, corporations, and other Federal entities—called “designated 

Federal entities”—are appointed by the heads of those entities, who may also remove the IGs from 

office. If they are removed, the entity head must notify both Houses of Congress of the reasons for 

removal.

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency

The presidentially-appointed IGs work together and coordinate their professional activities through 

the PCIE. This Council, which was created by Executive Order 12301, Integrity and Efficiency in 

Federal Programs, dated March 26, 1981, and updated in 1986 by Executive Order 12625 and in 

1992 by Executive Order 12805, works to promote collaboration on integrity, economy, and 

efficiency issues that transcend individual Government agencies and to increase the professionalism 

and effectiveness of OIG personnel throughout the Government. 

The Deputy Director for Management of OMB chairs the PCIE and is responsible for reporting to the 

President on its activities. In addition to the presidentially-appointed IGs, members include the 

Controller of OMB’s Office of Federal Financial Management, the Special Counsel from the Office of 

Special Counsel (OSC), the Director of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), the Deputy Director 

of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Assistant Director, Criminal Investigative 

Division, FBI. The Vice Chair, who is recommended by the PCIE members and approved by the Chair, 

manages the Council’s day-to-day activities. The Vice Chair is also a member of the ECIE.

Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

IGs of designated Federal entities work together and coordinate their professional activities through 

the ECIE. This Council, also created by Executive Order 12805 on May 11, 1992, has the same 

mission as the PCIE—to address integrity and efficiency issues that transcend individual Government 

agencies and to increase professionalism and effectiveness of OIG personnel throughout the 

Government. OMB’s Deputy Director for Management also chairs the ECIE. In addition to the IGs, 

the ECIE includes the Controller of OMB’s Office of Federal Financial Management, the Special 

Counsel of OSC, the Director of OGE, the Deputy Director of OPM, and the Assistant Director, 

Criminal Investigative Division, FBI. The Vice Chair, who is recommended by the ECIE members and 

approved by the Chair, manages the Council’s day-to-day activities. The Vice Chair is also a member 

of the PCIE. The ECIE also has representatives on PCIE committees. 

PCIE and ECIE Activities

The PCIE and the ECIE rely on the Vice Chair offices and the PCIE standing committees to oversee 

their many activities. Members of both Councils joined together in roundtables and working groups 

throughout the year to address a wide range of relevant issues, including auditing standards, 

information technology security, and misconduct in research. The work of the six standing 

committees is summarized in the next section of this report. 

In May 2001, both Councils adopted a strategic framework that laid out their mission, vision, goals, 

objectives, and strategies for the next 3 years. This framework sets out a strategy for members of 

both Councils to fulfill their agency missions as well as collectively contributing to resolving 
12 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

The Inspector General Community

Governmentwide challenges. In the fall of 2001, the Councils published “A Strategic Framework” and 

prepared a companion brochure on the IG community to share with stakeholders. 

Also in May 2001, the PCIE and ECIE held their annual conference, entitled Managing in a Time of 

Change. The conference gave the members an opportunity to hear from Congress, the 

administration, and Federal managers on the critical challenges facing the Government and the 

opportunities for the IG community to add value.

During its annual awards program held in the fall, the community recognized more than 450 

individuals for outstanding performance and commitment to fulfilling the IG mission. During this 

program, the community recognized June Gibbs Brown, former IG at the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), as the first recipient of the June Gibbs Brown Career Achievement Award. 

After receiving her award, Ms. Brown assisted in presenting five additional career achievement 

awards bearing her name. 

In addition, the Councils publish the Journal of Public Inquiry twice a year. The Journal consists of a 

compilation of articles by members of the IG community, scholars, professionals outside the Federal 

Government, and others on topics important to the IG community. In FY 2001, three editions were 

published, focusing on the important challenges facing the new administration, human capital 

issues, information technology, and other issues germane to the IG community. All Journal editions 

can be found on the IG Web site at www.ignet.gov/randp/jpi.

Finally, the PCIE maintains two training centers for OIG staff: the Inspectors General Auditor 

Training Institute (IGATI) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, and the Inspector General Criminal Investigator 

Academy (Academy) at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia. 

More information on PCIE, ECIE, and individual OIG activities is available on IGnet at 

www.ignet.gov. 
Committee Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 13

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Committee Accomplishments

PCIE, in conjunction with ECIE, maintains six standing committees and other groups to examine 

important issues and assist the Councils in their ongoing efforts to promote integrity, accountability, 

and excellence in Government. Below is a discussion of each committee’s accomplishments for FY 

2001. 

Audit Committee

Inspector General Gregory H. Friedman of the Department of Energy (DOE) chairs the Audit 

Committee. During FY 2001, the Audit Committee continued to provide leadership in matters within 

its purview, including providing oversight to IGATI, which trained more than 1,700 auditors during 

the year.

The committee continued its efforts to promote relevant, high-profile, crosscutting initiatives by 

multiple OIGs in areas of interest to Congress, the administration, and others. In FY 2001, the 

committee helped facilitate efforts of the Social Security Administration (SSA) OIG to lead a 

multiagency review of controls over Social Security numbers (SSN). It is anticipated that the results 

of this review will have significant implications both within individual Government agencies and with 

respect to larger national concerns over homeland security, identity theft, and related challenges.

In March 2001, the committee issued “Review of Federal Agencies’ Implementation of Presidential 

Decision Directive 63 Related to Critical Infrastructure Protection.” Critical infrastructures are the 

physical and cyber-based systems essential to the minimum operations of the economy and 

Government. They include banking and finance, telecommunications, energy, transportation, and 

essential Government services. These matters took on even more significance in the aftermath of 

September 11. The report can be found at www.ignet.gov/pande/audit/dreport.pdf. 

The committee published the “Financial Audit Manual” (FAM), a joint effort of PCIE and GAO. The 

issuance of this document marks the first time that the PCIE community and GAO will have a single 

reference for auditing agency financial statements. The two volumes of the FAM can be found at 

www.ignet.gov/pande/audit/famvol1.pdf and www.ignet.gov/pande/audit/famvol2.pdf. 

In addition, the committee formed an interagency team tasked with updating the “Audit Peer Review 

Guide,” helping to ensure that OIG audit operations comply with current and emerging standards for 

audit integrity and professionalism. The committee also contributed to the improvement of the 

overall quality of single audit efforts, in part by helping to update the “Federal Cognizant Agency 

Audit Organization Guidelines.”

Finally, the committee released “Best Practices Guide for Financial Statement Preparation and Audit 

Activities,” a compendium of best practices from Federal OIGs and CFOs. This guide can be found at 

www.ignet.gov/pande/audit/affs0601.pdf.

Human Resources Committee

Nikki Tinsley, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) IG, chairs the Human Resources 

Committee. During FY 2001, the Professional Development Committee initiated plans for a new 

direction to focus its efforts and was renamed the Human Resources Committee. Discussions were 

held to identify the best methods to serve the IG community and to address the strategies set forth 

in the PCIE and ECIE Strategic Framework. 

Suggestions included creating a centralized clearinghouse for training information, cross-training 

auditors and investigators, establishing partnerships with training institutes and universities, and 

developing new methods for the recruitment and retention of personnel.
14 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Committee Accomplishments

The committee also organized and sponsored two forums during the year. The first forum was 

presented by Roger Viadero, formerly the IG of the Department of Agriculture (USDA). He 

addressed the importance of employee motivation by managers. Mr. Viadero shared his many audit 

experiences and successes at the FBI and USDA through the effective delegation of projects to staff 

members and the achievement of positive results.

The second forum was presented by Virginia L. Thomas, Director, Executive Branch Relations, from 

the Heritage Foundation. Ms. Thomas, who is responsible for helping the foundation convey its 

resources and ideas to the decisionmakers in the Bush administration, shared her ideas on the 

administration’s position on issues. She also emphasized the importance of all IGs developing 

relationships with Members of Congress. She urged IGs to become more public about their activities 

and achievements. 

Inspection and Evaluation Committee

Michael Mangano, Principal Deputy IG at HHS, provided interim leadership for the Inspection and 

Evaluation Committee after the January 2002 retirement of June Gibbs Brown. 

During FY 2001, the committee pursued a number of new directions to improve the usefulness of 

inspections and evaluations (I&E) in supporting the work of the IG community and to share 

information about current issues and best practices. The committee also continued to work closely 

with the I&E Roundtable—the organization of assistant IGs and others who have responsibility for 

conducting evaluations and inspections in their respective agencies. Together, the committee and 

roundtable continued their efforts to further enhance I&E activity throughout the Government. 

During FY 2001, the committee issued “Advisory and Assistance Services: A Practical Reference 

Guide.” This guide for helping the IG community obtain advisory and assistance services targets OIG 

project officers, providing an overview of the legal and practical aspects of contracting for various 

“intellectual” or consulting services, as well as helpful advice for those considering the use of other 

service contracts. It focuses on acquisition planning, selection of contractors, and contract 

management and administration. The guide is available at www.ignet.gov/randp/rpts.html. 

In addition, the I&E Committee continued its work in the area of child support enforcement. This 

multiphase project was prompted by Executive Order 12953, which mandates that the Federal 

Government set an example of leadership in collecting child support payments due from its 

employees. The committee has examined compliance with child support laws among employees of 

the FBI and HHS, as well as those agencies’ efforts to ensure compliance. DOJ OIG issued a report 

on the findings of its FBI review, and HHS OIG issued a report on its findings at HHS.

The I&E Committee also provided outreach to private sector groups and other public organizations. 

As a result of this outreach, the committee has worked to improve the use and quality of evaluations 

via presentations made to the American Evaluation Association, the Eastern Evaluation Research 

Society, and other professional organizations, as well as new IGs. 

And finally, the committee and roundtable placed vigorous emphasis on training. Together, they 

sponsored numerous programs to enhance the skills of evaluators and inspectors, and thus the 

quality of their reports. More than 120 OIG staff members from numerous agencies took advantage 

of the courses, which covered such topics as effective writing, statistics, questionnaire design and 

survey techniques, and evaluation skills and analysis. 

The I&E Committee and roundtable are continuing close discussions with their membership and with 

the larger IG community to share findings on crosscutting issues such as bioterrorism, information 

security, and travel and purchase card usage; to select new roundtable projects; and to identify 

effective evaluation and inspection practices. 
Committee Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 15

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Investigations Committee

Patrick E. McFarland, OPM’s IG, chairs the Investigations Committee. The purpose of the committee 

is to advise the Federal OIG community on issues involving criminal investigations, criminal 

investigative personnel, training, and the establishment of criminal investigative guidelines. In 

addition, the committee serves as the board of directors of the Academy, with the accountable IG 

from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). The committee relies on the 

Investigations Advisory Subcommittee, composed of assistant IGs for investigations, to assist in 

these efforts.

In FY 2001, the committee, with the assistance of the Investigations Advisory Subcommittee, 

addressed the following initiatives:

“Qualitative Assessment Review Guide”—A draft of the guide that outlines external peer review 

standards was distributed to the IG community in July 2001. As a pilot, each OIG has been asked to 

conduct an internal review of its investigation program, based on the draft guide. The purpose of 

this pilot review is for OIGs to refine the draft by commenting on the length of time it took to 

complete the review, any difficulties encountered as a result of the directions in the draft guide, and 

any other information that may be helpful in modifying the guide before final adoption. 

Permanent Statutory Law Enforcement Authority—In FY 2000, Senator Fred Thompson introduced 

legislation (S. 3144) to confer permanent law enforcement authority on 23 presidentially-appointed 

and Senate-confirmed IGs. Although the bill was reported out by the Senate Governmental Affairs 

Committee on October 3, 2000, the Senate took no action. Efforts were continued during FY 2001 to 

seek support for such a permanent law enforcement authority.

IG Criminal Investigator Academy—Early in FY 2001, the President signed legislation that 

established the Academy, in addition to an IG Forensic Science Laboratory, under the Department of 

the Treasury. However, funding for the Academy and the IG Forensic Science Lab was not included in 

the FY 2002 or FY 2003 President’s Budget Request.

Integrity Committee

Grant D. Ashley, Assistant Director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, chairs the Integrity 

Committee. As created by the PCIE and ECIE Chair and formally established by Executive Order 

12993, Administrative Allegations Against Inspectors General, the Integrity Committee receives, 

reviews, and refers for investigation, where appropriate, allegations of wrongdoing by IGs and, in 

limited cases, OIG staff. The membership of this committee, which includes representatives from 

the FBI, OSC, OGE, and at least three IGs appointed by the PCIE and ECIE Chair, is dictated by the 

Executive Order. 

During FY 2001, the committee successfully managed its responsibilities, as evidenced by the 

statistics below. At the close of FY 2001, the committee had eight pending cases and one active 

investigation. The committee’s accomplishments are as follows:

 Reviewed 24 new complaints.

 Processed and brought to closure 33 separate complaint matters, which included cases opened 

in previous years.

 Determined that 23 of the 33 complaints were outside the committee’s purview and referred 

them to other agencies for consideration. Nine cases were unsubstantiated, and one case was 

closed administratively.
16 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Committee Accomplishments

 Supervised two investigations into allegations of misconduct by OIG personnel. One 

investigation was closed owing to the complainant’s refusal to cooperate in the investigation. The 

other was ongoing at the end of the FY.

Legislation Committee

Department of Transportation (DOT) IG Kenneth Mead chairs the Legislation Committee. The 

committee alerts and informs the PCIE and ECIE about legislative initiatives of interest to the IG 

community, particularly bills and amendments that would affect IG statutory authority or create new 

IG responsibilities. The committee also provides information to the entire IG community about 

applicable Federal statutes, concerns of particular Members of Congress, and congressional hearings 

of importance to IGs and their staff. 

The Legislation Committee also brings together IGs and influential Members of Congress to discuss 

areas of mutual legislative interest. When the administration or Congress requests comments from 

the PCIE and ECIE on legislation or policy, the Legislation Committee serves as a central 

coordinating point. The committee also systematically informs all IGs, deputy IGs, IG legislative 

liaisons, and counsels to the IGs about legislative developments in Congress. 

In FY 2001, the committee sent out more than 20 legislative alerts, advising the IG community 

about proposed legislation in the following areas:

 Financial management.

 Computer privacy and security.

 Law enforcement.

 Government management and operations.

 Energy management policy.

The committee also provided extensive input during development of the original fraud recovery 

audit legislation, which became law this year as part of the FY 2002 Department of Defense (DOD) 

Authorization Act (P.L. 107-107). This law requires agencies with contracting authority in excess of 

$500 million to perform recovery audits to identify any overpayments to vendors providing goods 

and services to the Government. Sponsors of this legislation (H.R. 2547) in the House of 

Representatives retained provisions sought by the Legislation Committee regarding IG authority and 

oversight responsibilities, fraud detection and reporting, and collection of recovered funds. 

Other Committees, Roundtables, and Working Groups 

GPRA Coordination Committee—The mission of the GPRA Coordination Committee is to foster 

and advance the implementation of management performance and accountability by serving the IG 

community as catalysts, facilitators, and educators. This committee helped promote greater 

understanding and integration of the sound business practices inherent in GPRA precepts and 

guidelines and served as a focal point to advance knowledge and expertise within and outside the IG 

community. During FY 2001, under the leadership of the Department of State (DOS) OIG, the 

committee met with representatives from OMB, Congress, GAO, and several “good government” 

organizations to elicit their views on GPRA and agency progress in implementing effective planning 

and performance measurement. The committee established itself as a point of contact with 

congressional staff members interested in GPRA and assisted OIGs in responding to a request from 

Chairman Dan Burton of the House Committee on Government Reform. Twenty-six OIGs responded 

to Chairman Burton’s request for the OIGs to assess the most significant performance measures 

contained in their agencies’ performance reports and the extent to which the data or information 

underlying the measures was valid and accurate. Under the auspices of TIGTA OIG, the committee 

enhanced its Web site by providing more extensive and accessible GPRA information and resources 
Committee Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 17

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

for the IG community, including a database of IG community performance measures that was 

developed by EPA OIG. 

Information Technology Roundtable—The IT Roundtable, led by the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA) OIG, serves as a forum for sharing IT information and best practices 

among members of the IG community. The IT Roundtable plays a coordinating role in developing 

OIG responses to national-level IT priorities and disseminating information about, and responding 

to, hostile activities against the national information infrastructure. In FY 2001, the NASA OIG 

sponsored two Governmentwide conferences, which provided both the IG and the chief information 

officer (CIO) communities with viewpoints from OMB, the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), GAO, and law enforcement agencies regarding OIGs’ GISRA responsibilities. 

Also, the IG community conducted reviews of PDD-63, the Presidential Decision Directive on Critical 

Infrastructure Protection. Twenty-one OIGs participated in the first phase of this review, which 

focused on agency planning and assessment activities for protecting critical cyber-based 

infrastructures. On March 21, 2001, the PCIE and ECIE Vice Chairs issued the Phase I report to the 

Director, OMB, and the National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and 

Counter-Terrorism. The third phase of the review also began during FY 2001.

Misconduct in Research Working Group—Sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) 

OIG, the Misconduct in Research (MIR) Working Group was formed to educate the IG community 

about MIR issues and develop a set of standards for the conduct or oversight of MIR investigations. 

Representatives from more than 20 OIGs participated in this year’s efforts. The group worked 

closely with the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to host a February 2001 workshop 

focused on implementing the OSTP Research Misconduct Policy. More than 70 people attended this 

workshop, which served as a springboard for agency and OIG representatives to discuss 

implementation of OSTP policy within their respective agencies. Representatives of the MIR Working 

Group coordinated closely with the Academy to incorporate MIR materials into training modules. The 

group also developed a supplement to the PCIE/ECIE “Quality Standards for Investigations,” which is 

being used to assist OIG special agents with misconduct investigations and help OIGs establish 

standards for conducting oversight reviews of agency investigations.
18 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

The tables on the following pages demonstrate the impact of OIGs in their agencies and summarize 

key accomplishments for FY 2001. The statistics included in this report are based on submissions 

from the reporting OIGs. The data reported are defined in most instances by the provisions of the IG 

Act, 5 U.S.C. app. § 5, whereby Congress established uniform reporting categories for each IG’s 

semiannual report to Congress. Because of data limitations or features peculiar to individual OIGs, 

however, some variations occur, as explained in the accompanying footnotes. In addition, OIGs often 

participate in multiagency task forces or join with other OIGs to accomplish a common objective. 

In reporting this year’s investigative statistics, the IG community undertook a project to eliminate 

the potential for duplicative reporting of joint casework among OIGs. Traditionally, the investigative 

statistics have been compiled by listing the statistics reported by each OIG and then aggregating the 

figures for the IG community. Recognizing that this process had the potential for duplicative 

reporting of casework that involved multiple OIGs, the IG community conducted a study that defined 

consistent criteria for compiling the investigative data. Despite a few technical issues encountered 

during the project (which have been footnoted in the following tables), we are pleased to report that 

nearly all the joint efforts were identified and have been reported separately in the investigative 

tables. We will continue to improve on this approach for compiling investigative data in future 

reports.

The goal of this investigative project was to eliminate the possible duplicate reporting of statistics 

among the OIGs. As in the past, these statistics do include the efforts of the OIGs when their 

investigations are conducted jointly with traditional law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, U.S. 

Secret Service, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, or State and local law enforcement agencies.

Recommendations That Funds Be Put to Better Use (Tables I-P and I-E)

The IG Act defines a recommendation that funds be put to better use as “a recommendation by the 

Office that funds could be used more efficiently if management of an establishment took actions to 

implement and complete the recommendation, including (1) reductions in outlays; (2) 

de-obligations of funds from programs or operations; (3) withdrawal of interest subsidy costs on 

loans or loan guarantees, insurance, or bonds; (4) costs not incurred by implementing 

recommended improvements related to the operations of the establishment, a contractor, or 

Performance Profile 2001

Summary of Combined Accomplishments of PCIE and ECIE Members

Recommendations That Funds Be Put to Better Use $89,226,582,927

Management Decisions on Recommendations That 

Funds Be Put to Better Use

$22,178,783,933

Questioned Costs $4,125,882,715

Management Decisions on Questioned Costs $2,341,932,048

Investigative Recoveries $3,748,150,897 

Successful Criminal Prosecutions 7,609

Civil Actions 905

Suspensions/Debarments 8,828

Personnel Actions 1,213

Indictments and Criminal Informations 4,980
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 19

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

grantee; (5) avoidance of unnecessary expenditures noted in pre-award reviews of contractor grant 

agreements; or (6) any other savings which are specifically identified.”

For FY 2001, including Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audits performed in agreement with 

OIGs or agencies, PCIE member agencies recommended that approximately $89.2 billion be put to 

better use; ECIE member agencies recommended that approximately $67.5 million be put to better 

use.

Management Decisions on OIG Recommendations That Funds Be Put to 

Better Use (Tables II-P and II-E)

In FY 2001, PCIE member agency management agreed with approximately $22.1 billion in 

recommendations that funds be put to better use; ECIE member agency management agreed with 

approximately $110.2 million in recommendations that funds be put to better use.

Questioned Costs (Tables III-P and III-E)

The IG Act defines a questioned cost as “a cost that is questioned by the Office because of (1) an 

alleged violation or provision of law, regulation, contract, grant, or cooperative agreement, or other 

agreement or document governing the expenditure of funds; (2) a finding that at the time of the 

audit, such cost is not supported by adequate documentation; or (3) a finding that the expenditure 

of funds for the intended purpose is unnecessary or unreasonable.”

During FY 2001, including DCAA audits performed in agreement with OIGs or agencies, PCIE 

member agencies questioned costs of approximately $3.9 billion; ECIE member agencies questioned 

costs of approximately $233.3 million.

Management Decisions on Audits with Questioned Costs (Tables IV-P and 

IV-E)

For FY 2001, PCIE member agency management agreed with approximately $2.3 billion in 

questioned costs; ECIE member agency management agreed with approximately $24.9 million in 

questioned costs.

Both recommendations that funds be to better use and questioned costs can be resolved without an 

actual monetary recovery or reduction in outlays. In many cases, it is possible for management to 

take other corrective action to remedy or remove the condition that led to the auditor’s finding. 

Consequently, the totals reported in these two categories do not represent a monetary savings to 

the Treasury in like amount.

Successful Criminal Prosecutions (Table V)

A prosecution is considered successful if the person or entity was convicted in a Federal, State, local, 

or foreign government venue, or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), or was accepted 

for a pretrial diversion agreement by the DOJ as a result of OIG activity. PCIE and ECIE member 

agencies had 7,609 successful prosecutions in FY 2001, of which 108 were the result of joint 

investigations.

Criminal Indictments and Informations (Table VI)

This new table represents criminal indictments and informations filed in a Federal, State, local, or 

foreign government court or under the UCMJ, any of which result from a case in which an OIG has 

an active investigative role. The PCIE and ECIE agencies reported 4,980 criminal indictments and 

informations in FY 2001, of which 113 were based on joint investigations.
20 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Civil Actions (Table VII)

Civil actions are the total number of matters arising from OIG investigations, audits, and reviews 

other than criminal prosecutions that are successfully resolved during the year. They include civil 

judgments or forfeitures in favor of the U.S. Government filed in Federal, State, local, or foreign 

government venues; or settlements negotiated by a prosecuting authority prior to or following the 

filing of a formal civil complaint; or judgments, settlements, or agreements reached based on 

Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (PFCRA), Civil Monetary Penalty (CMP), or other agency-specific 

civil litigation authority. Personnel actions and suspensions/debarments are not reported as civil 

actions. In FY 2001, PCIE and ECIE member agencies had 905 civil actions, of which 4 resulted from 

joint investigations.

Suspensions and Debarments (Table VIII)

This category represents agency actions to suspend, restrict, or prohibit vendors/contractors, 

grantees, and other non-Government entities or individuals from doing business with the 

Government. In FY 2001, PCIE and ECIE member agencies suspended or debarred 8,828 individuals 

and entities, of which 28 actions resulted from joint investigations.

Personnel Actions (Table IX)

Personnel actions are the total number of reprimands, suspensions, demotions, or terminations of 

Federal, State, and local (and Federal contractor/grantee) employees as a result of OIG actions. 

During FY 2001, PCIE and ECIE member agencies initiated 1,213 personnel actions.

Investigative Recoveries (Table X)

Investigative recoveries are based on the total dollar value of:

1. Criminal cases—The amount of restitution, criminal fines, or special assessments resulting from 

a criminal judgment or established through a pretrial diversion agreement. 

2. Civil cases—The amount of damages, penalties, or forfeitures resulting from judgments issued 

by any court (Federal, State, local, military, or foreign government) in favor of the U.S. Government; or the amount of funds to be repaid to the U.S. Government based on any negotiated settlements by a prosecuting authority; or the amount of any assessments or penalties imposed by 

PCFRA, CMP, or other agency-specific civil litigation authority.

3. Voluntary repayments—The amount of funds voluntarily repaid based on an OIG investigation 

before prosecutorial action is taken.

In FY 2001, PCIE and ECIE member agencies tallied investigative recoveries totaling 

$3,748,150,897, of which $152,729,630 resulted from joint investigations.

Collections from Audits and Investigations (Table XI)

Collections from audits and investigations are the total dollars collected or recovered during the FY 

that have been returned to the Treasury or the DOJ. In FY 2001, PCIE and ECIE audits collected 

$526,130,683, while PCIE and ECIE investigations collected $1,297,742,650.

Joint Investigations (Table XII)

This table lists the percentage of investigations PCIE and ECIE member agencies conducted with 

other Federal investigative entities, not including OIGs.
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 21

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table I-P: PCIE Recommendations That Funds Be Put To Better Use

Agency OIG DCAA Total

AID (Agency for International Development) $224,914,866 $0 $224,914,866 

CNCS (Corporation for National and Community 

Service)

 $56,000 $0 $56,000 

DOC (Department of Commerce) $14,188,794 $0 $14,188,794 

DOD (Department of Defense) $413,454,000 $3,139,100,000 $3,552,554,000 

DOE (Department of Energy) $1,274,658,923 $0 $1,274,658,923 

DOI (Department of the Interior) $112,700,000 $0 $112,700,000 

DOJ (Department of Justice) $24,323,109 $0 $24,323,109 

DOL (Department of Labor) $2,348,180 $0 $2,348,180 

DOS (Department of State) $522,000 $0 $522,000 

DOT (Department of Transportation) $954,700,000 $0 $954,700,000 

ED (Department of Education) $0 $0 $0 

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) $31,911,486 $0 $31,911,486 

FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) $2,255,200 $0 $2,255,200 

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) $11,888,621 $0 $11,888,621 

GSA (General Services Administration) $90,841,259 $216,000 $91,057,259 

HHS (Department of Health & Human Services) $63,118,166,000 $0 $63,118,166,000 

HUD (Department of Housing & Urban 

Development)

 $4,095,000 $0 $4,095,000 

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration)

 $892,644,000 $236,633,000 $1,129,277,000 

NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) $75,000 $0 $75,000 

OPM (Office of Personnel Management) $0 $0 $0 

RRB (Railroad Retirement Board) $520,000 $0 $520,000 

SBA (Small Business Administration) $11,061,994 $0 $11,061,994 

SSA (Social Security Administration) $276,229,594 $0 $276,229,594 

Treasury (Department of the Treasury) 1 $177,163,000 $79,000 $177,242,000 

TIGTA (Treasury IG for Tax Administration) $13,000,326,022 $0 $13,000,326,022 

TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) $80,822,279 $0 $80,822,279 

USDA (Department of Agriculture) $951,503,197 $2,098,847 $953,602,044 

VA (Department of Veterans Affairs) $4,107,600,000 $2,000,000 $4,109,600,000 

TOTALS $85,778,968,524 $3,380,126,847 $89,159,095,371 

1 Amount includes revenue enhancements of $168,663,000. A revenue enhancement is an action recommended by Treasury 

OIG that would, if implemented, enhance the General Fund receipts of the Federal Government, usually without having any 

budgetary impact on any of the Department of the Treasury’s appropriations.
22 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table I-E: ECIE - Recommendations That Funds Be Put To Better Use

Agency OIG DCAA Total 

Amtrak $4,570,622 $0 $4,570,622 

ARC (Appalachian Regional Commission) $5,666,000 $0 $5,666,000 

CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) $0 $0 $0 

CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting) $0 $0 $0

CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) $0 $0 $0

EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) $0 $0 $0

FCA (Farm Credit Administration) $0 $0 $0

FCC (Federal Communications Commission) $0 $0 $0

FEC (Federal Election Commission) $0 $0 $0 

FHFB (Federal Housing Finance Board) $0 $0 $0

FLRA (Federal Labor Relations Authority) n/a n/a n/a

FMC (Federal Maritime Commission) $0 $0 $0

FRB (Federal Reserve Board) $0 $0 $0

FTC (Federal Trade Commission) $29,359 $0 $29,359 

GPO (Government Printing Office) $16,650 $0 $16,650 

ITC (International Trade Commission) $78,537 $0 $78,537 

LSC (Legal Services Corporation) $0 $0 $0

NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) $467,628 $0 $467,628 

NCUA (National Credit Union Administration) $0 $0 $0

NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) $0 $0 $0

NEH (National Endowment for the Humanities) $0 $0 $0

NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) $0 $0 $0

NSF (National Science Foundation) $50,000 $0 $50,000 

PBGC (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) $0 $0 $0

PC (Peace Corps) $800 $0 $800 

SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) $0 $0 $0

SI (Smithsonian Institution) $381,960 $0 $381,960 

USPS (U.S. Postal Service) $56,226,000 $0 $56,226,000 

TOTAL $67,487,556 $0 $67,487,556 
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 23

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table II-P: PCIE - Management Decisions on Recommendations That Funds Be Put 

To Better Use

Agency

No Management

Decision Start

FY 2001

Recommendations

Issued in FY 2001

Recommendations 

Agreed to by

Management

Recommendations 

Not Agreed to by

Management

No Management 

Decision End

FY 2001

AID $0 $224,914,866 $186,352,551 $8,060,293 $30,502,022 

CNCS $0 $56,000 $0 $0 $56,000 

DOC $157,989 $14,188,794 $2,153,872 $5,643,127 $6,549,846 

DOD 1 $8,267,772,000 $3,552,604,000 $3,709,605,000 $2,448,632,000 $5,662,139,000 

DOE $436,557,558 $1,274,658,923 $14,893,267 $221,409,231 $1,474,913,983 

DOI 2 $396,812,246 $112,700,000 $21,967,161 $6,727,161 $479,091,604

DOJ $265,210 $24,323,109 $11,309,337 $0 $13,278,982 

DOL $7,987,478 $2,348,180 $6,723,129 $1,079,349 $2,533,180 

DOS $1,447,000 $522,000 $428,000 $0 $1,541,000 

DOT $137,702,000 $954,700,000 $966,700,000 $76,000,000 $49,702,000 

ED $10,410,180 $0 $0 $110,180 $10,300,000 

EPA $0 $31,911,486 $0 $0 $31,911,486 

FDIC $0 $2,255,200 $2,255,200 $0 $0 

FEMA $175,955,629 $11,888,621 $872,291 $145,100,000 $41,702,409 

GSA 3 $277,281,369 $90,112,929 $98,103,423 $209,212,740 $59,054,883 

HHS 4 $374,352,000 $63,118,166,000 $92,161,000 $7,795,000 $63,392,562,000 

HUD $8,459,000 $4,095,000 $4,646,000 $151,000 $7,757,000 

NASA 5 $372,065,000 $1,129,277,000 $798,129,000 $237,887,000 $465,326,000 

NRC $0 $75,000 $75,000 $0 $0 

OPM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

RRB $0 $520,000 $0 $0 $520,000 

SBA 6 $1,603,345 $11,061,994 $5,984,419 $6,680,920 $0 

SSA $77,064,610 $276,229,594 $328,490,695 $6,655,589 $18,147,920 

Treasury $17,122,000 $177,242,000 $189,943,000 $4,342,000 $79,000 

TIGTA $9,186,160 $13,000,326,022 $13,008,445,717 $968,056 $98,409 

TVA $0 $80,822,279 $47,604,447 $32,882,582 $335,250 

USDA 7 $808,846,056 $953,602,044 $121,887,296 $1,479,266,680 $161,239,622 

VA $75,600,000 $4,109,600,000 $2,449,800,000 $242,700,000 $1,492,700,000 

TOTALS $11,456,646,830 $89,158,201,041 $22,068,529,805 $5,141,302,908 $73,402,041,596 

1 Reflects a variance of $1,941,528,000 ($10,209,300,000 minus $8,267,772,000) between the end of FY 2000 and the beginning of FY

2001 due to contracts not awarded and revised audit findings and recommendations. 2 Reflects correction to data in FY 2000 PCIE-ECIE Report.

3 The difference between the amount in Recommendations Issued in FY 2001 in this table and that in the Total column in Table I-P 

represents recommendations in a final report removed from the resolution process pending litigation.

4 Start of FY 2001 differs from end of FY 2000 due to amendments in management decisions.

5 Start FY 2001 revised due to DCAA adjustments resulting from contracts not awarded and revised audit findings and recommendations.

6 Difference from September 2000 semi-annual report ending balance caused by prior reclassification of prior dollar finding from 

questioned cost to funds put to better use. 7 Reflects a variance of $54,502 between beginning and ending balances due to the inclusion of excess amounts.
24 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table II-E: ECIE - Management Decisions On Recommendations That Funds Be Put 

To Better Use

Agency

No Management

Decision Start

FY 2001

Recommendations

Issued in FY 2001

Recommendations

Agreed to by

Management

Recommendations

Not Agreed to by

Management

No Management

Decision End

FY 2001

Amtrak $0 $4,570,622 $1,480,525 $67,602 $3,022,495

ARC $298,000 $5,666,000 $1,254,000 $2,544,000 $2,166,000

CFTC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

CPB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

CPSC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

EEOC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FCA $25,100 $0 $25,100 $0 $0 

FCC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FEC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FHFB $10,000 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 

FLRA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FMC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FRB $29,070 $0 $29,070 $0 $0 

FTC $0 $29,359 $29,359 $0 $0 

GPO $688,000 $16,650 $29,650 $0 $675,000

ITC $0 $78,537 $78,537 $0 $0 

LSC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NARA $0 $467,628 $0 $0 $467,628

NCUA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NEA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NEH $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NLRB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NSF $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000

PBGC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

PC 1 $2,000 $800 $2,800 $0 $0 

SEC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

SI $109,261 $381,960 $11,052 $0 $480,169

USPS $108,132,118 $56,225,711 $107,314,035 $8,502,504 $48,541,290

TOTALS $109,293,549 $67,487,267 $110,254,128 $11,124,106 $55,402,582

1 Reflects correction to data in FY 2000 PCIE-ECIE Report.
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 25

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table III-P: PCIE - Questioned Costs

Agency OIG DCAA Total

AID $5,946,950 $2,528,072 $8,475,022

CNCS $2,984,000 $0 $2,984,000

DOC $10,638,410 $0 $10,638,410

DOD $0 $1,410,900,000 $1,410,900,000

DOE 1 $7,651,747 $0 $7,651,747

DOI $15,788,601 $0 $15,788,601

DOJ $142,371,705 $0 $142,371,705

DOL $41,641,821 $0 $41,641,821

DOS $11,500,000 $0 $11,500,000

DOT $72,244,000 $0 $72,244,000

ED $82,435,089 $0 $82,435,089

EPA $29,050,869 $2,173,495 $31,224,364

FDIC $5,708,216 $0 $5,708,216

FEMA $42,252,923 $0 $42,252,923

GSA $11,542,604 $0 $11,542,604

HHS $1,008,237,000 $0 $1,008,237,000

HUD $85,155,000 $0 $85,155,000

NASA $0 $30,676,000 $30,676,000

NRC $0 $2,422 $2,422

OPM $279,650,719 $0 $279,650,719

RRB $0 $0 $0 

SBA $520,673 $0 $520,673

SSA $135,100,905 $0 $135,100,905

Treasury $0 $1,266,000 $1,266,000

TIGTA $715 $167,713 $168,428

TVA $6,131,711 $0 $6,131,711

USDA 2 $423,876,783 $440 $423,877,223

VA $24,400,000 $0 $24,400,000

TOTALS $2,444,830,441 $1,447,714,142 $3,892,544,583

1 The Energy OIG’s submission does not include nor does it track DCAA audits

2 Includes $1,671,339 in recommendations from work performed by non-Federal auditors.
26 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table III-E: ECIE - Questioned Costs

Agency OIG DCAA Total

Amtrak $17,304,505 n/a $17,304,505

ARC $250,000 n/a $250,000

CFTC $0 $0 $0 

CPB $786,131 $0 $786,131

CPSC $0 $0 $0 

EEOC $0 $0 $0 

FCA $0 $0 $0 

FCC $1,324,977 $0 $1,324,977

FEC $0 $0 $0 

FHFB $0 $0 $0 

FLRA n/a n/a $0 

FMC $0 $0 $0 

FRB $0 $0 $0 

FTC $189,202 $0 $189,202

GPO $148,548 n/a $148,548

ITC $1,000 $0 $1,000

LSC $0 $0 $0

NARA $1,314,332 $0 $1,314,332

NCUA $0 $0 $0 

NEA $25,181 $0 $25,181

NEH n/a n/a $0 

NLRB $0 $0 $0 

NSF $6,377,345 $11,297 $6,388,642

PBGC $0 $0 $0 

PC $9,614 $0 $9,614

SEC $0 $0 $0 

SI $0 $0 $0 

USPS $131,273,000 $74,323,000 $205,596,000

TOTALS $159,003,835 $74,334,297 $233,338,132
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 27

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table IV-P: PCIE - Management Decisions on Audits With Questioned Costs

Agency

No Management

Decision Start

FY 2001

Recommendations

Issued in FY 2001

Recommendations

Agreed to by

Management

Recommendations

Not Agreed to by

Management

No Management

Decision End

FY 2001

AID 1 $59,639,930 $8,475,022 $13,970,555 $52,053,375 $2,091,022

CNCS $10,408,000 $2,984,000 $650,000 $145,000 $12,597,000

DOC $4,675,622 $10,638,410 $7,491,950 $3,668,326 $4,189,759

DOD 2 $7,409,800,000 $1,410,900,000 $961,800,000 $533,000,000 $7,325,900,000

DOE $7,651,747 $0 $0 $0 $7,651,747

DOI 3 $185,900,170 $15,788,601 $2,047,827 $732,158 $193,712,749

DOJ $10,210,766 $142,371,705 $111,529,629 $0 $41,052,842

DOL $53,480,804 $41,641,821 $6,874,251 $7,286,436 $80,978,425

DOS 4 $6,775,000 $11,500,000 $860,000 $0 $17,415,000

DOT 5 $427,000 $72,244,000 $64,679,000 $42,000 $8,078,000

ED 6 $116,476,150 $82,435,089 $21,504,102 $15,868,072 $161,539,065

EPA 7 $103,224,369 $31,224,364 $59,504,639 $23,331,024 $51,613,070

FDIC $0 $5,708,216 $5,708,216 $0 $0 

FEMA $35,901,096 $42,252,923 $19,206,340 $17,998,634 $40,949,045

GSA 8 $2,802,975 $11,542,604 $14,667,826 $549,509 $349,043

HHS 9 $653,719,000 $1,008,237,000 $411,081,000 $36,315,000 $1,214,560,000

HUD $43,715,000 $85,155,000 $59,979,000 $4,731,000 $64,160,000

NASA 10 $234,727,000 $30,676,000 $30,801,000 $23,697,000 $210,905,000

NRC $0 $2,422 $2,422 $0 $0 

OPM $65,673,570 $279,650,719 $233,572,058 $42,825,087 $68,927,144

RRB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

SBA 11 $4,046,779 $520,673 $3,622,085 $581,236 $573,482

SSA $81,148,807 $135,100,905 $212,224,763 $512,102 $3,512,847

Treasury 12 $4,032,000 $1,266,000 $1,141,000 $1,739,000 $2,418,000

TIGTA $0 $168,428 $32,537 $0 $135,891

TVA $1,409,712 $6,131,711 $4,245,821 $3,192,049 $103,553

USDA 13 $2,101,833,748 $423,877,223 $45,387,747 $2,267,744,027 $213,449,337

VA $0 $24,400,000 $24,400,000 $0 $0 

TOTALS $11,197,679,245 $3,884,892,836 $2,316,983,768 $3,036,011,035 $9,726,862,021

1 The ending balance for fiscal year 2000 of $59,599,349 was increased by $40,581 to reflect adjustments in finding amounts occuring in 

five reports within FY 2002 reporting period $59,639,930. 2 Includes forward pricing proposals and operations audits. Reflects a variance of $687,300,000 ($8,097,100,000 minus $7,409,800,000) 

between the end of FY 2000 and the beginning of FY 2001 due to contracts not awarded and revised audit findings and recommendations. 3 Reflects correction to data in FY 2000 PCIE-ECIE Report. 4 Start FY 2001 differs from end of FY 2000 due to post-reporting period corrections. 5 Dollar Value of Disallowed Costs includes $128,000 that management decided to seek above recommended amounts. 6 Reflects corrections to data in FY 2000 PCIE-ECIE Report, which are detailed in ED semi-annual reports 42 and 43 for FY 2001. 7 Start FY 2001 differs from end of FY 2000 due to post-reporting period adjustments. 8 Includes $1,220,799 that management decided to seek that exceeded recommended amounts.

9 Start of FY 2001 differs from end of FY 2000 due to amendments in management decisions. 10 Start FY 2001 revised due to DCAA adjustments resulting from contracts not awarded and revised audit findings and recommendations. 11 Difference from September 2000 semi-annual report ending balance caused by prior reclassification of prior dollar finding from 

questioned cost to funds put to better use. 12 For two reports, management partially agreed to the dollar value of the recommendations. 13 Reflects the decrease of one audit and $240,769 for adjustments made between the first and second semiannual periods during fiscal 

year 2001. Reflects a varience of $1,110,909 between the beginning and ending balance because of the inclusion of excess amounts.
28 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table IV-E: ECIE - Management Decisions On Audits With Questioned Costs

Agency

No Management

Decision Start

FY 2001

Recommendations

Issued in FY 2001

Recommendations

Agreed to by

Management

Recommendations

Not Agreed to by

Management

No Management

Decision End

FY 2001

Amtrak $923,674 $17,304,504 $15,066,376 $801,090 $2,360,712

ARC $133,000 $250,000 $1,000 $354,000 $28,000

CFTC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

CPB $109,969 $786,131 $0 $109,969 $786,131

CPSC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

EEOC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FCA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FCC $265,180 $1,342,977 $135,180 $130,000 $1,342,977

FEC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FHFB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FLRA n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

FMC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FRB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

FTC $0 $189,202 $189,202 $0 $0 

GPO $361,101 $123,895 $362,505 $122,491 $0 

ITC $0 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 

LSC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NARA $0 $1,314,332 $1,314,332 $0 $0 

NCUA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NEA $309,174 $25,181 $309,174 $0 $25,181

NEH n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

NLRB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

NSF $6,000,536 $6,388,642 $1,888,877 $5,248,282 $5,389,095

PBGC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

PC $0 $9,614 $0 $9,614 $0 

SEC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

SI $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

USPS $76,890,998 $205,596,276 $5,680,634 $9,509,423 $267,297,217

TOTALS $84,993,632 $233,331,754 $24,948,280 $16,284,869 $277,229,313
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 29

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table V: Successful Criminal Prosecutions

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID 9 Amtrak 20

CNCS 4 ARC 0

DOC 8 CFTC 0

DOD 244 CPSC 0

DOE 10 CPB 0

DOI 31 EEOC 0

DOJ 133 FCA 0

DOL 215 FCC 0

DOS 29 FEC 0

DOT 147 FHFB 0

ED 91 FLRA 0

EPA 23 FMC 0

FDIC 24 FRB 1

FEMA 32 FTC 0

GSA 35 GPO 1

HHS 406 ITC 0

HUD 727 LSC 1

NASA 42 NARA 0

NRC 7 NCUA 0

OPM 19 NEA 0

RRB 51 NEH 0

SBA 37 NLRB 0

SSA1 4,190 NSF 2

Treasury 4 PBGC 1

TIGTA 243 PC 4

TVA 10 SEC 0

USDA2 352 SI 1

VA 318 USPS3 29

SUBTOTAL 7,441 SUBTOTAL 60

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: 7,501 

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 108 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 7,609

1 Includes 2,158 fugitive felon and 656 illegal alien apprehensions.

2 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community's project to identify duplicate reporting. 

3 During FY 2001, the USPS Inspection Service had 480 successful prosecutions that are reported in the Postal Service OIG’s 

semiannual reports to Congress. These prosecutions include matters where concurrent jurisdiction existed, as well as matters 

for which the Inspection Service has primary responsibility.
30 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table VI: Criminal Indictments and Informations

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID 6 Amtrak 0

CNCS 0 ARC 0

DOC 0 CFTC 0

DOD 312 CPSC 0

DOE 4 CPB 0

DOI 25 EEOC 0

DOJ 153 FCA 0

DOL 359 FCC 0

DOS 21 FEC 0

DOT 186 FHFB 0

ED 125 FLRA 0

EPA 14 FMC 0

FDIC 28 FRB 1

FEMA 53 FTC 0

GSA 33 GPO 0

HHS 515 ITC 0

HUD 778 LSC 0

NASA 34 NARA 0

NRC 0 NCUA 0

OPM 19 NEA 0

RRB 36 NEH 0

SBA 38 NLRB 0

SSA 1,122 NSF 0

Treasury 1 PBGC 0

TIGTA 236 PC 0

TVA 13 SEC 0

USDA1 358 SI 4

VA 359 USPS 34

SUBTOTAL 4,828 SUBTOTAL 39

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: 4,867

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 113

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 4,980

1 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community’s project to identify duplicate 

reporting.
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 31

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table VII: Civil Actions

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID 2 Amtrak 0

CNCS 2 ARC 0

DOC 0 CFTC 0

DOD 7 CPSC 0

DOE 4 CPB 0

DOI 9 EEOC 0

DOJ 2 FCA 0

DOL 28 FCC 0

DOS 1 FEC 0

DOT 12 FHFB 0

ED1 137 FLRA 0

EPA 3 FMC 0

FDIC 6 FRB 0

FEMA 6 FTC 0

GSA 5 GPO 0

HHS 416 ITC 0

HUD 21 LSC 0

NASA 8 NARA 0

NRC 1 NCUA 0

OPM 7 NEA 0

RRB 53 NEH 0

SBA 7 NLRB 0

SSA 72 NSF 1

Treasury 0 PBGC 0

TIGTA 0 PC 0

TVA 2 SEC 0

USDA1 78 SI 0

VA 9 USPS 2

Subtotal 898 Subtotal 3

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: 901 

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 4 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 905

1 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community’s project to identify duplicate 

reporting.
32 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table VIII: Suspensions and Debarments

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID 5 Amtrak 0

CNCS 2 ARC 0

DOC 0 CFTC 0

DOD 243 CPSC 0

DOE 11 CPB 0

DOI 3 EEOC 0

DOJ 1 FCA 0

DOL 29 FCC 0

DOS 0 FEC 0

DOT 17 FHFB 0

ED 0 FLRA 0

EPA 11 FMC 0

FDIC 0 FRB 0

FEMA 0 FTC 0

GSA 94 GPO 4

HHS 3,752 ITC 0

HUD 418 LSC 0

NASA 7 NARA 0

NRC 4 NCUA 0

OPM 4,033 NEA 0

RRB 0 NEH 0

SBA 0 NLRB 0

SSA 0 NSF 0

Treasury 0 PBGC 0

TIGTA 0 PC 0

TVA 0 SEC 0

USDA1 153 SI 0

VA 11 USPS 2

SUBTOTAL 8,794 SUBTOTAL 6

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: 8,800

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 28 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 8,828

1 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community’s project to identify duplicate reporting. 
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 33

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table IX: Personnel Actions

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID 10 Amtrak 74

CNCS 1 11 ARC 0

DOC 1 11 CFTC 0

DOD 23 CPSC 0

DOE 16 CPB 0

DOI 85 EEOC 0

DOJ 82 FCA 0

DOL 29 FCC 0

DOS 5 FEC 0

DOT 20 FHFB 1

ED 2 FLRA 0

EPA 7 FMC 0

FDIC 0 FRB 11

FEMA 7 FTC 1

GSA 18 GPO 9

HHS 2 ITC 0

HUD 0 LSC 0

NASA 26 NARA 4

NRC 20 NCUA 4

OPM 0 NEA 0

RRB 0 NEH 0

SBA 6 NLRB 5

SSA 18 NSF 2

Treasury 13 PBGC 13

TIGTA 420 PC 5

TVA 30 SEC 5

USDA 1 57 SI 12

VA 133 USPS 16

SUBTOTAL 1,051 SUBTOTAL 162

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: 1,213

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 0 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: 1,213

1 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community’s project to identify duplicate reporting. 
34 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table X: Investigative Recoveries

PCIE ECIE

Agency Total Agency Total

AID $67,248,547 Amtrak $591,400

CNCS $54,102 ARC $0

DOC 1 $73,429 CFTC $0

DOD $1,394,090,677 CPSC $0

DOE $5,408,770 CPB $0

DOI $156,594,774 EEOC $0

DOJ $989,047 FCA $0

DOL $101,313,740 FCC $0

DOS $414,701 FEC $0

DOT $62,615,348 FHFB $0

ED1 $21,642,373 FLRA $0

EPA $4,386,638 FMC $0

FDIC $78,848,150 FRB $525

FEMA $3,209,244 FTC $0

GSA $4,520,706 GPO $35,315

HHS $1,374,087,301 ITC $0

HUD $61,012,560 LSC $12,000

NASA $67,651,346 NARA $0

NRC $2,786,802 NCUA $0

OPM $7,913,317 NEA $0

RRB $2,423,944 NEH $0

SBA $11,624,713 NLRB $40

SSA $44,023,673 NSF $424,578

Treasury $214,127 PBGC $300

TIGTA $13,352,162 PC $0

TVA $5,997,628 SEC $0

USDA1 $61,893,678 SI $42,743

VA $35,189,396 USPS $4,733,473

SUBTOTAL $3,589,580,893 SUBTOTAL $5,840,374 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL INVESTIGATIONS: $3,595,421,267 

TOTAL FROM JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: $152,729,630 

TOTAL FROM INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT INVESTIGATIONS: $3,748,150,897

1 Data provided by OIG and could not be included in the IG community’s project to identify 

duplicate reporting. 
Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 35

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Table XI: PCIE and ECIE - Collections From Audits and Investigations

PCIE

From

Audits

From

Investigations ECIE

From

Audits

From

Investigations

AID $28,549,000 $66,355,660 Amtrak $11,583,084 $113,229

CNCS $0 $39,393 ARC n/a n/a 

DOC $6,875,989 $21,911 CFTC $0 $0 

DOD $0 $0 CPB n/a $0 

DOE $0 $13,264,088 CPSC $0 $0 

DOI $0 $0 EEOC $0 $0 

DOJ $6,845,260 $108,827 FCA $0 $0 

DOL $1,073,929 $926,717 FCC $0 $0 

DOS n/a $440,310 FEC $0 $0 

DOT n/a n/a FHFB $0 $0 

ED $1,905,940 $869,282 FLRA $0 $0 

EPA $0 $0 FMC $0 $0 

FDIC $0 $0 FRB $0 $0 

FEMA $17,246,807 $0 FTC $674,500 $0 

GSA $0 $0 GPO $0 $0 

HHS $315,835,000 $1,083,209,720 ITC $0 $0 

HUD $6,089,748 $52,149,893 LSC $0 $0 

NASA $0 $4,342,601 NARA $0 $0 

NRC $0 $2,767,262 NCUA $0 $0 

OPM $102,064,000 $7,768,805 NEA $0 $0 

RRB $0 $990,356 NEH n/a n/a 

SBA $0 $0 NLRB $0 $0 

SSA $2,039,707 $15,271,127 NSF $1,496,529 n/a 

Treasury $8,579,100 n/a PBGC $0 $0 

TIGTA $0 $119,375 PC $0 $0 

TVA $0 $123,935 SEC $0 $0 

USDA $15,251,631 $20,772,858 SI $0 $0 

VA $20,459 $24,509,301 USPS $0 $3,578,000

SUBTOTAL $512,376,570 $1,294,051,421 SUBTOTAL $13,754,113 $3,691,229

TOTAL 

PCIE/

ECIE Audit 

$526,130,683 TOTAL 

PCIE/ECIE 

Investigation

$1,297,742,650
36 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Statistical Summaries of Accomplishments

Table XII: PCIE and ECIE - Joint Investigations

PCIE

Percentage of Investigations 

conducted with other Federal 

Investigative Offices not 

including OIGs ECIE

Percentage of Investigations 

conducted with other Federal 

Investigative Offices not 

including OIGs

AID 2% Amtrak n/a

CNCS 0% ARC n/a

DOC 100% CFTC 0%

DOD 55% CPB 0%

DOE 24% CPSC 0%

DOI 0% EEOC 10%

DOJ 18% FCA 0%

DOL 11% FCC 16%

DOS 43% FEC 0%

DOT 16% FHFB 0%

ED 13% FLRA 0%

EPA 0% FMC 0%

FDIC 33% FRB 0%

FEMA 15% FTC 100%

GSA 19% GPO 0%

HHS 0% ITC 0%

HUD 30% LSC 0%

NASA 34% NARA 20%

NRC 0% NCUA 0%

OPM 61% NEA 0%

RRB 5% NEH 0%

SBA 21% NLRB 0%

SSA 7% NSF 17%

Treasury 0% PBGC 0%

TIGTA 1% PC 0%

TVA 0% SEC 8%

USDA 9% SI 10%

VA 28% USPS 10%
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 37

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

OIGs provide a valuable service with their audits, investigations, inspections, and other initiatives. 

Governmentwide, there are many excellent examples of the critical work performed by OIGs. The 

many accomplishments of the OIGs are too numerous to include, so a representative sample was 

selected for inclusion in this report. These examples focus on issues that reflect current priorities of 

the Federal Government or interests of the general public.

The IG Community’s Response to the September 11 Terrorist Attacks 

As the Office of Homeland Security recently stated in its “Securing the Homeland, Strengthening the 

Nation” report, “The United States Government has no more important mission than fighting 

terrorism overseas and securing the homeland from future terrorist attacks.” OIGs across the 

Federal Government have taken this challenge very seriously. 

In the weeks following the tragic events of September 11, many questions were asked about the 

terrorists. How were they able to assimilate themselves into our society? What documentation did 

they have, and how did they obtain it? How were they able to finance their operations? Were their 

supporters in the United States? The list continues. In response to these questions and others, the 

IG community rose to the challenge and provided assistance and support in numerous areas.

We are committed to providing whatever assistance we can to bring to justice those who committed 

the unfathomable terrorist acts against our Nation. Additionally, we will provide whatever knowledge 

and resources we have to effect significant changes in our Federal programs, so terrorists cannot 

use our own systems and processes against us. 

As evidenced by the myriad efforts OIGs have already taken, both collaboratively and individually, 

our resolve is deep. A summary of these efforts follows.

Rescue and Evidence Recovery

Immediately following the attacks, hundreds of OIG special agents and other personnel participated 

in rescue and evidence recovery efforts at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the 

Pennsylvania crash site. For example, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), the 

criminal investigative arm of the DOD OIG, assisted in initial search and rescue efforts soon after 

American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon. Working with the FBI task force, DCIS agents 

arranged for a temporary morgue at a National Guard Center and a storage site for recovered 

aircraft pieces at an Army Reserve Center, both near the Pennsylvania crash site. 

The DOJ OIG provided 29 people to assist the New York Port Authority Police, the FBI, and the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in their rescue, evidence recovery, and investigative efforts 

during the weeks following the attacks. Immediately following the attacks, U.S. Postal Service 

(USPS) OIG agents assisted the New York/New Jersey Port Authority in securing the safe 

transportation of people to and from the lower Manhattan area via the New York/New Jersey 

waterways. Before September 11, the waterways averaged 32,000 passengers per day, but on 

September 11, OIG agents helped evacuate more than 160,000 people from New York to New 

Jersey.

Numerous OIGs, including DOD, DOE, DOJ, Treasury, USDA, the Departments of Commerce (DOC), 

Education (ED), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Labor (DOL), State (DOS), and Veterans 

Affairs (VA), as well as USPS, NASA, SSA, TIGTA, EPA, OPM, Farm Credit Administration (FCA), 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), 

National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Amtrak, the Government Printing Office (GPO), and 

the General Services Administration (GSA), sent teams of special agents to the Pentagon and World 
38 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

Trade Center to assist in evidence recovery. Typically, the agents worked 12-hour shifts to sift 

through debris and rubble in search of airplane parts and evidence that would identify the victims.

Investigative Assistance and Participation in Antiterrorism Task Forces

OIG special agents across the country assisted FBI and other law enforcement agencies after the 

terrorist attacks by doing what they do best—attempting to put together the pieces of an elaborate 

and dangerous puzzle. Almost every IG provided investigative assistance and resources to:

 Identify, interview, and arrest criminal suspects.

 Trace funds.

 Conduct record checks, searches, and surveillance.

 Provide computer forensic support. 

For example, several OIGs detailed special agents to the FBI’s National Infrastructure Protection 

Center to assist in certain aspects of the investigation. In fact, one ED OIG special agent became a 

shift leader in the FBI’s Headquarters Technology Cell, where he provided oversight in processing 

electronic evidence such as questionable e-mail accounts, flight records, and seized computers. 

Using advanced technology, the Cell found online clues to assist in charting the conspirators’ actions. 

SSA OIG’s involvement in the ongoing national investigation has grown daily since September 11. 

This involvement is mandated by the role the SSN plays in establishing false identities and 

committing the financial crimes necessary to bankroll terrorism. Nine SSA OIG special agents in the 

New York and New Jersey area were assigned exclusively to the FBI investigation. 

In addition, one SSA OIG agent was quickly assigned to the FBI’s Strategic Information and 

Operations Center and another to the National Infrastructure Protection Center. Six members of SSA 

OIG’s Electronic Crimes Team assisted the FBI, while two computer specialists wrote programs to 

query SSA’s databases more specifically for information the FBI needed. Seven additional agents 

fielded requests for SSN information on suspects and witnesses, each of which was routed through 

the FBI’s Baltimore office to SSA headquarters. Many of SSA OIG’s special agents are working full 

time on the terrorism investigation and responding to allegations of SSN misuse. 

Many IGs have also committed resources to participate in national and State terrorism task forces, 

such as the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), which is designed to use their collective 

resources to prevent, preempt, deter, and investigate terrorism and activities related to terrorism. 

Several IGs have contributed significantly to the FBI’s anthrax and bioterrorism investigation. USPS 

OIG participated on FBI task forces to help identify potential suspects and assisted the Inspection 

Service in screening and investigating suspicious mail to maintain the integrity of the Nation’s mail 

system. 

USDA OIG special agents visited 51 USDA-owned or -sponsored laboratories and research facilities 

across the United States to evaluate their vulnerability to terrorism. OIG special agents have 

responded to and conducted numerous investigations involving biological threats at USDA-owned or 

-regulated facilities or threats made by USDA employees. In fact, several USDA employees are 

facing potential criminal prosecution and/or agency personnel action for anthrax hoaxes and false 

reports of possible food contamination at USDA-inspected plants.

Air Marshal Program

The FAA requested special agents from the Federal law enforcement community to be temporarily 

detailed to its Federal Air Marshal program for 6 to 18 months. OPM’s OIG coordinated the IG 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 39

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

community’s response to the FAA. More than 15 OIGs responded to the call for assistance with a 

number of special agents, even though they also had committed other special agent resources to 

assist the FBI in New York. Numerous OIG staff from organizations such as Treasury, VA, ED, DOC, 

DOE, DOJ, DOT, HHS, the Small Business Administration (SBA), and GSA have been detailed to the 

FAA Air Marshal Service while it expands its permanent cadre. 

Security of Agency Personnel and Facilities

Following the September 11 attacks, several OIGs assigned special agents to provide security for 

Federal leaders, personnel, and facilities. For example, the Secretary of Labor asked its OIG to take 

over the security of departmental facilities on a temporary basis to assess security, identify 

vulnerabilities, recommend solutions, and enhance the technical expertise of departmental staff. 

Because disruption of the U.S. Government appears to be one goal of terrorism, the USDA OIG 

heightened its protection of the Secretary and joined in ensuring the continuation of USDA functions 

in the event of further assaults. 

Other Initiatives

OIGs throughout the Government recognized after the September 11 attacks that securing our 

country and finding those responsible were our immediate priorities. Equally important, however, 

was determining how the terrorists committed these offenses. 

With this information, OIGs could make recommendations to their respective agencies regarding the 

implementation of controls and processes to address systemic vulnerabilities that failed to prevent 

and detect the crimes or even facilitated their occurrence. Many OIGs refocused their planned audit 

initiatives for FY 2002 to items that had more immediate importance for preventing future terrorist 

attacks and protecting citizens and Federal employees. Several examples are highlighted below.

DOE’s OIG reevaluated its FY 2002 work plan in view of the issues and vulnerabilities that surfaced 

as a result of the attacks. Given the implications with regard to DOE operations and programs, OIG 

shifted a significant amount of its planned resources to examine related topics. 

Specific planned initiatives include reviews of the security of the DOE’s aircraft and the adequacy of 

the hiring process for drivers who transport hazardous and low-level waste. OIG also initiated 

several follow-up reviews to evaluate the actions DOE has taken to correct previously identified 

security concerns in areas such as the following: 

 Classified document mailings.

 Coordination of transportation safeguard activities.

 Export controls relating to foreign visits and assignments.

EPA OIG added “Protecting Infrastructure from Nontraditional Attacks” to its list of management 

challenges, recognizing that the Nation’s water supply, among other targets, could be vulnerable to 

a terrorist attack. EPA has created an action plan to address threats to public health through 

environmental resources. OIG reported this as a major management challenge to ensure that 

actions are taken and milestones are met to protect infrastructure.

FDIC’s OIG began evaluating the adequacy of physical security in its facilities in major cities and 

other selected sites throughout the country. The evaluation placed particular emphasis on the 

security measures taken to provide a safe work environment for FDIC employees and visitors. The 

review was designed to determine whether FDIC’s safety and environmental management policies 

for real property had been established and implemented to:
40 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

 Protect Federal real and personal property.

 Promote mission continuity.

 Assess risk.

 Make decisionmakers aware of risks.

 Act promptly and appropriately in response to risk.

HHS’ OIG is currently assessing State and local health departments’ ability to detect and respond to 

bioterrorism and to deploy medical supplies. In addition, OIG plans to evaluate the vaccine 

procurement program and adherence to regulations governing facilities that transfer and receive 

select agents, which have the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety, and could 

be used as weapons of mass destruction for criminal or terrorist purposes.

In light of the events of September 11, DOJ OIG initiated five follow-up reviews at the Immigration 

and Naturalization Service (INS), whose work is critical to deterring terrorists from entering or 

remaining in the United States. DOJ OIG examined INS progress in:

 Improving the Visa Waiver Program.

 Securing the northern border.

 Linking INS and FBI automated fingerprint identification systems.

 Implementing a reliable tracking system for nonimmigrants who overstay their visas.

 Reviewing security concerns regarding the Transit Without Visa Program.

Findings from all five follow-up reviews show that many of the security concerns identified in the 

original DOJ OIG reports persist. 

As stated earlier, SSA OIG immediately began preparing information that Congress used to 

craft antiterrorism legislation since the attacks. OIG gave Congress an assessment of SSA’s business 

processes for issuing and protecting SSNs. This assessment covered areas such as:

 Securing valid evidence presented with SSN applications.

 Computerized controls.

 Training for SSA employees.

 SSA’s accounting for SSN cards.

 Public awareness of the proper use and dissemination of the SSN.

 SSA’s coordination efforts with other Federal agencies. 

OIG also provided an assessment to Congress of SSA’s programs and operations to identify fake and 

stolen SSN cards and described SSA’s coordination efforts with other Federal agencies to identify 

suspected terrorists. In November, OIG provided Congress with its opinion on new techniques—such 

as new categories of SSNs, photo identification cards, and additional automated controls—to 

improve SSN verification and decrease incidents of identity theft. This work continued into FY 2002.

Throughout SSA OIG’s responses to Congress, OIG relayed the importance of limiting the role of the 

SSN by stopping the commercial use of SSNs by institutions such as schools and hospitals, and 

regulating the sale and purchase of SSNs. Also, OIG has reiterated its position that SSA needs to 

strengthen its business processes, including interagency data verification and data matching 

agreements between Federal and State agencies, to prevent future fraudulent activities that may aid 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 41

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

terrorists. In particular, SSA OIG strongly encouraged SSA to pursue matching agreements with 

States that use biometric technology.

The following table summarizes the IG community’s participation in activities immediately following 

September 11.

IG Community Participation Following September 11, 2001

AGENCY SUPPORTED TYPES OF DUTY

AGENCY PERSONNEL FBI (Hours) FAA (Hours) TOTAL HRS INVESTIGATIVE

EVIDENCE 

RECOVERY

Agriculture 95 5,927 5,927 X X

AID 1 60 60 120 X

AMTRAK 1 40 40 X

DCIS 125 30,000 30,000 X X

DOC 5 709 161 870 X X

DOE 22 1,607 1,607 X

DOI 10 1,193 1,193 X

DOJ 29 2,850 1,089 3,940 X X

DOL 46 3,333 3,333 X X

DOS 3 92 92 X X

DOT 44 9,004 3,108 12,112 X

ED 35 2,475 420 2,895 X X

EEOC 2 112 112 X

EPA 3 106 106 X

FCA 1 48 48 X

FDIC 10 612 612 X X

GPO 7 1,071 1,071 X X

GSA 9 1,839 1,839 X

HHS 7 838 838 X

HUD 97 7,650 4,512 12,162 X X

NASA 13 1,397 1,397 X X

NCUA 1 24 24 X

NRC 2 446 446 X

NSF 2 140 140 X X

OPM 2 170 170 X X

RRB 10 983 983 X

SBA 3 519 211 730 X

SSA 207 13,000 13,000 X X

TIGTA 110 23,106 2,100 25,206 X X

Treasury 7 810 768 1,578 X X

USPS 26 2,089 2,089 X X

VA 34 8,086 8,086 X X

TOTAL 32 969 120,336 12,429 132,766 28 24
42 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

Focus on Agency Management Challenges Aligns With the President’s 

Management Agenda 

For the fourth consecutive year, OIGs across the Federal Government have examined their agencies’ 

programs and operations and shared their agencies’ top management challenges with congressional 

leaders. OIGs identified these challenges through ongoing work related to each agency’s overall 

mission and discussed how the issues unique to their agencies would be addressed.

With their focus on activities that promote Governmentwide efficiency and effectiveness, the PCIE 

and ECIE annually compile these challenges into a short report. This compilation is useful to 

Congress and the rest of the oversight community in identifying possible Governmentwide projects 

that warrant high-level attention and review. The management challenges most frequently identified 

by OIGs are detailed in the following chart:

Agency

Information 

Technology 

Management 

& Security

Performance 

Management, 

Measurement, & 

Accountability

Financial 

Management 

& CFO 

Statements

Procurement 

& Grant 

Management

Human 

Capital & 

Staffing

Public 

Health 

& 

Safety

Physical 

Infrastructure

Service 

to the

Public

1. AID X X X X X

2. USDA1 X X X XXX

3. DOC X X X X X

4. DOD X X X X X X

5. DOEd X X X X X

6. DOE X X X X X X

7. HHS X X X X X X X

8. HUD X X X X X X

9. DOI X X X X X X

10. DOJ X X X X X X X

11. DOL X X X X X X X

12. State X X X X X X X

13. DOT X X X X X X X X

14. Treasury X X X

15. VA X X X X X X X

16. EPA X X X X X X X

17. FEMA X X X X X X X X

18. FDIC X X X X X X X

19. GSA X X X X X X X

20. IRS X X X X X X

21. NASA X X X X X

22. NSF X X X X X X

23. NRC X X X X X X X

24. OPM X X X X X

25. SBA X X X X X

26. SSA X X X X

TOTAL 26 23 23 22 20 15 15 14

1. USDA’s first Performance and Accountability Report, to be issued on February 1, 2003, will include USDA OIG’s identified 

management challenges. The information provided herein is a draft as of August 9, 2002. 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 43

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Following the issuance of “A Blueprint for New Beginnings: A Responsible Budget for America’s 

Priorities,” the President announced his Management Agenda in August 2001. This agenda is 

designed to coordinate agency efforts to “address the most apparent deficiencies and focus 

resources where the opportunity to improve performance is the greatest.” The agenda’s goal is to 

establish a more responsible and responsive Government that is citizen-centered, results-oriented, 

and market-based. The administration is focused on the following five Governmentwide initiatives. 

 Expanded Electronic Government.

 Budget and Performance Integration.

 Improved Financial Performance.

 Strategic Management of Human Capital.

 Competitive Sourcing.

Clearly, the events of September 11 have moved the protection of our homeland to the top of 

everyone’s list. This initiative includes securing the Nation’s physical and information infrastructures 

as well as the ever-present concern for the public’s health and safety. 

The fact that the initiatives the President is focused on closely relate to the Government’s most 

significant management challenges identified by the IG community is not a coincidence. The IG 

community will continue, as it has since 1978, to focus on good, responsible Government. The 

examples that follow are clear evidence of this commitment. 

Protecting the Homeland

By the time the President established the Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security 

Council on October 8, 2001, many OIGs had already begun work on homeland security issues. The 

mission of the Office is to develop, coordinate, and implement a comprehensive national strategy to 

secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks.

The Office, in consultation with the Homeland Security Council, is responsible for coordinating 

efforts to detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist 

attacks within the United States. Defending against further terrorist attacks poses enormous 

physical security challenges because of the sheer number of potential terrorist targets and the wide 

variety of weapons that could be used. The need to develop vaccines to fight the spread of anthrax 

and deadly diseases such as smallpox, help States and communities train and equip police and 

firefighters, improve intelligence collection and sharing, expand patrols at our borders, strengthen 

the security of air travel, and use technology to track the arrivals and departures of visitors to the 

United States is immediate when basic rights and freedoms are threatened.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ attention to the threat against our 

homeland.

In light of the events of September 11, EPA OIG and the Senate Committee on Environmental and 

Public Works asked EPA to report its current and immediate action plans to protect the Nation’s 

water systems from terrorist attack. In a November 19, 2001, memorandum to the IG, EPA reported 

that the Administrator had established a Water Protection Task Force with a staff working full time 

on implementing PDD 63 and other related activities.

EPA has expanded its work to include support for all water systems, both drinking water and 

wastewater. This is a major initiative with national impact that merits continued attention to ensure 

that planned activities are implemented, milestones are met, and issues are reported, addressed, 

and corrected as soon as possible. 
44 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) OIG plans to monitor FEMA’s efforts to 

support the Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council as their roles and 

missions are further defined. The FEMA Director is a member of the Homeland Security Council, 

which also includes the Secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Transportation, and HHS; the Attorney 

General; and the Directors of the FBI and Central Intelligence Agency. 

FEMA’s mission is to lead and support the Nation in preparing for, mitigating, responding to, and 

recovering from any destructive event, whether natural or caused by humans. FEMA expects to play 

a major role in supporting the Homeland Security Office and Council. FEMA supports the recently 

developed Homeland Security Roadmap and expects to continue its efforts in supporting first 

responders with planning, equipment, training, and exercises. 

OIG also noted that FEMA’s focus on State and local preparedness has taken on a new urgency 

following the events of September 11. FEMA must continue to place a high priority on developing 

State and local capabilities to respond to terrorist events and natural disasters. It is critical that 

State and local capabilities be relied upon whenever possible. 

Another challenge for FEMA is devolving more responsibility to States for responding to and coping 

with disasters rather than routinely issuing disaster declarations—especially for small and 

medium-sized disasters. Over the past decade, the frequency of federally-declared disasters has 

almost doubled. 

Instead of responding only to major disasters such as earthquakes and terrorist attacks, FEMA is 

regularly called upon to respond to events that are fairly predictable—such as snowstorms and 

repeated flooding in flood-prone areas. Both Congress and OMB have urged FEMA to develop 

improved criteria for disaster declarations. While FEMA has agreed that disaster criteria could be 

clarified, resistance from stakeholders—especially States—has impeded FEMA’s efforts to reform the 

criteria. The criteria should recognize the financial capacity of States and include capability 

thresholds that States are expected to meet prior to a declaration. 

Also, the criteria should include incentives to States to enhance capability. Pursuant to a proposal in 

the President’s FY 2002 budget blueprint, FEMA plans to improve its disaster assistance criteria 

guidelines for determining when and under what conditions a presidential disaster declaration 

should be made. 

A number of HHS OIG reviews have addressed concerns about HHS departmental vulnerabilities 

and the readiness of responders at all levels of government to protect public health in areas such as 

bioterrorism. OIG is assessing security controls at HHS laboratories and plans to conduct these 

assessments at other laboratories, including examining how these institutions are handling the USA 

Patriot Act of 2001 prohibition on access to select agents by restricted persons. 

The September 11 attacks revealed the vulnerability of Department of the Interior (DOI) employees, 

visitors, infrastructure, and national monuments to terrorist actions. As a result, DOI OIG elevated 

the objective of ensuring the adequacy of DOI’s contingency planning and preparedness for natural 

disasters and terrorist attacks to a critical management challenge. 

As part of responding to this challenge, OIG completed a Comprehensive Assessment of DOI Law 

Enforcement, including a review of security and emergency preparedness within DOI, and made 

several recommendations to the Secretary. Both OIG and DOI are committed to providing maximum 

protection to DOI resources under all possible circumstances, and OIG is now determining where it 

can best apply its resources to maximize its contribution to protecting DOI and its visitors. 

DOT OIG testified before congressional committees on OIG recommendations for deployment and 

maximum use of explosives detection equipment for screening checked baggage. In numerous 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 45

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

testimonies, DOT OIG has reported on its post-September 11 review of checked baggage screening, 

where it found air carriers were not maximizing the use of explosive detection machines and that 73 

percent of the machines were not in continuous use as required by FAA. 

The events of September 11 also heightened attention to other aspects of DOT OIG’s work, including 

oversight of the Federal Commercial Drivers License (CDL) program to minimize fraud and abuse 

and prevent unqualified individuals from driving big rigs on the country’s highways, as well as 

computer security to protect networks from disruption and address the vulnerability of DOT’s 

computer systems to hackers.

Fraud in the testing and licensing of commercial drivers is a significant problem that has 

compromised highway safety and the Nation’s security. Since 1998, criminal law enforcement 

investigations of the States’ CDL programs have identified schemes in 15 States for obtaining CDLs 

through fraud. Under Federal reciprocity rules, a State must allow any person to operate a 

commercial vehicle if the driver has a CDL issued by another State. Thus, problems with CDL testing 

and licensing in one State may easily spread to others unless a strong national CDL program is in 

place. 

The events of September 11 added security concerns that future terrorist actions could involve 

hazardous materials delivered by truck. One of DOT OIG’s top priorities is to work closely with the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to strengthen the national CDL program and improve its 

oversight review of the State CDL programs. 

SSA OIG was instrumental in providing information and recommendations that Congress has used 

to craft antiterrorism legislation. Aside from playing a major investigative role, SSA OIG continues 

its audit efforts to inform Congress and SSA of the importance of limiting the use of the SSN. Audit 

work reiterates that SSA needs to strengthen its business processes to prevent future fraudulent 

activities that may make it easier for terrorists to integrate themselves into U.S. society.

Managing Information Technology and the Transition to Electronic Government 

We live in an increasingly interconnected society, where the Internet has spawned tremendous 

improvements in efficiency and customer service. People use the telephone and Internet to get 

service 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. More than 60 percent of all Internet users interact with 

Government Web sites, and this number is expected to grow. The President’s budget states that 

there are more than 31 million Federal Web pages on 22,000 Web sites. 

The President’s E-Government strategy paper notes that the primary goals for this initiative are to:

 Make it easy for citizens to obtain services and interact with the Federal Government. 

 Improve Government’s efficiency and effectiveness.

 Improve Government’s responsiveness to citizens.

OIGs across the Government agree that electronic technology can be used efficiently and effectively 

to improve services to the American taxpayer. However, appropriate controls need to be in place to 

safeguard the sensitive data and critical systems of Government. Since the Federal Government is 

expected to spend more than $50 billion in 2003 on E-Government issues, the IG community must 

play a vital role in overseeing the resources dedicated in this area.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in the information technology and 

E-Government arena. 
46 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

TIGTA notes that modernization of IRS technology is crucial to implementing the new business 

vision of providing world-class service to taxpayers. Key goals, such as having 80 percent of tax 

returns filed electronically by 2007 and significantly improving levels of service in answering 

taxpayer questions, are contingent on developing new technology. 

Furthermore, while the new technology evolves, existing operations must continue and 

improvements must be made to meet the needs of tax administration and demonstrate to taxpayers 

the IRS’ commitment to better services. As a result, TIGTA has identified systems modernization as 

a major management challenge facing the IRS in FY 2002. 

In FY 2001, TIGTA reported the following areas that pose potential barriers to the success of 

business systems modernization:

 Delays and cost overruns in delivering tangible benefits to taxpayers. 

 Potential funding problems. 

 Inconsistencies in implementing key systems development processes.

 The fact that business needs are not always well defined.

 Lack of clarity as to which systems development projects should be classified as modernization 

projects. 

According to OPM’s OIG, OPM worked on two major Governmentwide projects in FY 2001. The first, 

the Electronic Human Resources Integration (EHRI), should improve the efficiency of moving human 

resources data electronically between agencies and provide the basis for the envisioned move to an 

integrated human resources system for the Federal Government.

The second, the Retirement Systems Modernization (RSM), is related to the Human Resources Data 

Network (HRDN) in that it will use the electronic data gathered as part of the HRDN and is OPM’s 

central strategy to meet its long-term customer service, business, and financial management goals 

for the retirement program. 

For the RSM project, the OPM OIG provided limited oversight by attending project status meetings 

and several process validation sessions. The OIG participated as subject matter experts in validation 

sessions for the Trust Fund and Employee Withholding core processes. The objectives were to review 

the accuracy of the contractor's documented understanding of the core processes, provide input to 

correct any inaccuracies, and confirm the contractor's final documented understanding. The auditors 

also offered recommendations for improvements in several other project working sessions. 

Auditors reviewed selected goals and measures in OPM’s Performance and Accountability Report for 

FY 2001 that included the RSM effort. The review included the verification and validation of 

performance data and an evaluation of the effectiveness of related controls. OIG found controls over 

the performance measurement data were adequate and the reported results were reliable. 

OIG staff met with OPM officials to determine whether OPM was addressing E-Government items in 

its FY 2003 agency performance plan and outlined a general model for OPM to consider. Also, OIG 

will be verifying and validating FY 2001 performance data relating to E-Government issues.

DOS OIG identified weaknesses in the Department's critical infrastructure protection program. OIG 

found that the Department's international outreach strategy is unnecessarily constrained and does 

little to encourage the development of preventive measures needed to enhance global critical 

infrastructure protection. OIG also found that the critical infrastructure protection plan provided a 

suitable framework for addressing minimum essential infrastructure. However, the plan falls short 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 47

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

because it does not address potential cyber-vulnerabilities in its foreign operations or in its 

interagency connections.

ED OIG is reviewing E-Government initiatives. Under GPEA, the executive agencies must move to 

E-Government by October 2003. The purpose of GPEA is not simply to replace paper transactions 

with electronic ones but to help agencies improve program operations, achieve cost savings, and 

develop adequate controls to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. 

Agencies were required to develop and submit to OMB by October 2000 a plan that provides for 

implementation of GPEA by October 2003. During FY 2001, OIG reviewed ED’s first plan submission 

and advised the Department to identify specific milestones to ensure completion and compliance 

with GPEA.

As the DOL increases its reliance on E-Government to deliver services, benefits, and program 

administration, DOL OIG is increasing its audit coverage in this area. During FY 2001, DOL OIG 

audited mission-critical information systems that DOL depends on to monitor and analyze the 

Nation’s labor market and economic activities, manage workforce services, and protect and 

compensate American workers. These audits revealed specific vulnerabilities in computer security 

and protection of assets, and OIG recommended improvements. 

The FCC OIG focused attention on the FCC’s Web sites to determine whether they were accessible 

to disabled users. FCC OIG found that the FCC has a proactive and effective Web accessibility 

program. 

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) OIG noted that the growth of Web 

access and E-Government, the availability of electronic access under the Freedom of Information Act 

as amended by the Electronic Freedom of Information Act, and provisions of GPEA will further 

increase demands for online records and services. OIG points out that NARA must master the 

challenges of preserving electronic records in a way that makes them usable; that is, available in 

systems through which users can locate, retrieve, and read needed records. 

Better Integration of Budget and Performance Results 

In May 2001, GAO reported that most Federal managers are largely ignoring performance 

information when allocating resources. With the administration’s focus on improving program results 

through the integration of budget and performance initiatives, it is critically important that agencies 

move toward tying their GPRA initiatives to their budgets. 

GPRA established requirements for agencies to develop strategic plans and performance targets and 

to report annually on the progress toward achieving their goals. According to a recent GAO study, 

agencies have made some progress in linking expected performance and program activity funding. 

However, GAO stated that additional effort is needed to clearly describe the relationships among 

performance expectations, requested funding, and consumed resources. The IG community 

continues to consider performance management, measurement, and accountability a significant 

Government management challenge. 

Last year the PCIE responded to a request from Chairman Dan Burton of the House Government 

Reform Committee on the OIGs’ assessment of the most significant performance measures in their 

agencies’ performance reports and the extent to which the data or information underlying the 

measures was valid and accurate. Many OIGs assess GPRA-related performance measures as a 

standard part of their work. In addition, the IG community has an active GPRA Coordination 

Committee to address the challenge of achieving GPRA’s intent within the IG community and 

respective agencies. 
48 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

We believe that the President’s Management Agenda initiatives are a promising first step. However, 

the success of these initiatives can be achieved only through updated, integrated information 

systems. Agencies will need to invest in updating their financial and program information systems 

and ensure that these systems are developed and approved in accordance with standard system 

architecture platforms.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in the area of performance 

management and measurements. 

During 2001, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) OIG audited the Board’s efforts to implement 

performance management principles consistent with GPRA requirements. OIG performed this audit 

to assess the status of FRB’s implementation efforts and to evaluate the benefits of fully integrating 

GPRA concepts into FRB’s planning and budgeting process. Overall, OIG found that more work needs 

to be done to achieve the Board’s objective of voluntarily complying with GPRA. 

OIG’s recommendations were designed to enhance FRB’s current planning and budgeting process by 

developing a performance management framework and by adopting key performance management 

characteristics such as the following:

 A longer range planning horizon with an FRB-wide planning focus.

 Specific performance indicators and measures.

 Expanded performance reports detailing the levels of achievement relative to the performance 

measures. 

FRB management generally agreed with the intent of OIG’s recommendations and plans to address 

them. FRB OIG plans to follow up on FRB’s actions as part of its 2002 audit work. 

FCA OIG conducted a performance budgeting audit, and management agreed to 14 actions to 

integrate performance with budget. As a result, FCA identified products and services for each of its 

components and made budgeting more uniform. FCA also drafted a policy to institutionalize 

performance budgeting, streamlined its time tracking system to simplify the tracking of product and 

service costs, and is currently performing a staffing study. 

The DOE OIG examined DOE’s FY 2000 Performance and Accountability Report and evaluated 

whether it generally complied with GPRA requirements. After assessing the specific measures in this 

report, OIG selected 10 performance measures that most closely paralleled the major management 

challenges facing DOE as documented in OIG’s November 2000 report “Management Challenges in 

the Department of Energy.” 

OIG reported that DOE has made progress in implementing GPRA. For the past 3 years, it has issued 

a comprehensive Performance and Accountability Report with established goals designed to define 

the level of performance to be achieved by each program. In addition, DOE has worked to 

incorporate performance goals and objectives into its management contracts. However, OIG 

identified problems with the usefulness and completeness of the performance measures and the 

validity and accuracy of some of its reported results. 

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) OIG audit determined that at least 13 of 29 

safety-related performance measures and results in the FY 1999 Performance Report were either 

invalid or unreliable. In addition, the Performance Report did not adequately describe why NRC 

failed to meet one performance goal. 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 49

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

These problems were caused by inadequate management controls for ensuring the validity and 

reliability of the performance measures. Specifically, NRC lacked formal procedures or policies for 

addressing data collection, reporting results, and assigning staff responsibilities. 

Improving Financial Performance 

The administration is aggressively seeking to improve the timeliness, usefulness, and reliability of 

financial information to enable sound decisionmaking and to safeguard the Government’s assets. 

Since the enactment of key legislation during the 1990s to improve Federal financial management, 

OIGs have worked closely with Federal entities to address financial management and accounting 

system weaknesses. 

As a result, 18 of 24 CFO agencies received unqualified or “clean” opinions on their FY 2001 financial 

statements. For FY 2001, DOJ and DOT joined 16 other departments and major agencies in 

receiving clean audit opinions on their financial statements. USDA and ED, along with the Agency for 

International Development (AID), also showed substantial improvement over previous years. Two 

agencies moved down from their clean opinion status in FY 2000, receiving a qualified opinion and a 

disclaimer in FY 2001.

Much more needs to be done to improve the quality, timeliness, and usefulness of financial 

information and to enhance financial information systems. In our last annual report to the President, 

we mentioned that, for some agencies, attaining a clean opinion is a fragile and somewhat artificial 

achievement because it results from extraordinary end-of-year efforts rather than a more constant 

real time financial management system operation. 

The administration’s emphasis on accelerating the reporting requirements over the next few years to 

eventually require an audited financial statement within 45 days after the end of the FY will be a 

challenge. The CFO and IG communities will be working together to address this emerging issue. 

Other critical areas include streamlining agency processes and/or upgrading financial information 

systems and identifying more than $20 billion in erroneous benefit and assistance payments.

The OIGs considered financial management a continuing management challenge. One area in which 

the IG community identified a Governmentwide problem in financial management and provided 

recommendations was the Federal collection of non-tax-delinquent debt, which amounted to more 

than $46 billion. Currently, the IG community and CFOs are also conducting a joint project to 

determine the extent of erroneous payments and identify ways to address this $20 billion problem. 

OIGs are continuing to devote considerable resources not only by assessing these types of 

finance-related problems but also by offering their expertise in evaluating accounting operations and 

financial information systems.

The PCIE also took the lead in discussing best practices among IGs and CFOs related to the ongoing 

financial statement work. In a June 2001 report entitled “Best Practices Guide: Coordinating the 

Preparation and Audit of Federal Financial Statements,” the PCIE reported on a number of best 

practices being used in agencies, including the following: 

 Establishing key milestones in writing. 

 Consulting with GAO and OMB, as appropriate, to ensure consistency of approach 

Governmentwide. 

 Holding regular IG and CFO progress meetings. 

 Performing interim test work whenever possible and bringing identified issues to the attention of 

agency management. 
50 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

By working together on implementing these best practices, the IG and CFO communities can foster 

an environment that supports the purposes and objectives of the CFO Act and Government 

Management Reform Act.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work on improving financial management 

within the Government.

While performing the annual audits of the FDIC’s financial statements, the FDIC OIG and GAO 

successfully implemented continuous auditing techniques. This approach was designed to eliminate 

periods of high demand on audit teams and FDIC personnel that occur during the normal course of 

an audit. 

Traditionally, during the financial statement audit, auditors perform testing in one or two test 

intervals using 6 to 12 months of supporting documentation. Thus, an extended period would exist 

between the time the transactions occurred and communication of test results to management. 

To provide more timely results, the continuous audit approach allows transactions to be tested 

monthly. Through a centralized, automated sample process, auditors determine the sample sizes 

and extract samples from the general ledger or other databases. The auditors then request 

supporting documentation from FDIC personnel, complete testing, and share results.

The FDIC OIG also assessed the reasonableness of the cost-benefit analysis and the systems 

architecture vision prepared to plan the FDIC’s future financial environment. In addition, OIG 

evaluated whether the project team was recommending the acquisition of a basic or enhanced 

financial management system and the adequacy of the underlying support for this recommendation. 

Although OIG identified limitations in the cost-benefit analysis estimates, the need to modernize 

FDIC’s financial management system suggested that it should proceed with acquisition planning for 

a commercial off-the-shelf financial management system. In response to OIG’s recommendations to 

have more complete and accurate information before approving such a large technology investment, 

the FDIC Board of Directors approved the project but decided to establish funding and periodic 

reporting parameters that would impose external discipline on the process. 

FDIC’s periodic reports will address updated funding requirements, integrating and interfacing 

systems issues, reengineering business processes, acceptance testing, and other funding issues. 

FDIC OIG is continuing to monitor the agreed-upon corrective actions as the project evolves, and 

will conduct additional reviews during the various stages of the project. 

One of the greatest management challenges confronting USDA is achieving financial accountability. 

For the past 6 years, USDA OIG has disclaimed an opinion on the Department’s consolidated 

financial statements. This means the Department does not know whether it properly accounted for 

the money it collected, the cost of operations, and assets of well over $100 billion. 

Consequently, some USDA managers are forced to make decisions on program operations without 

solid financial data. The Department’s problems with its financial management system will continue 

until at least 2003, at which point all USDA agencies should be converted to the Foundation Financial 

Information System (FFIS). 

Effective implementation of FFIS is needed to improve the Department’s financial management, 

thereby ensuring that managers have reliable data to manage their programs. At the same time, 

USDA OIG investigative work continues to confirm the vulnerability of USDA programs to general 

contract fraud and embezzlement, and has resulted in the recovery of millions of dollars.
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 51

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

FEMA OIG stated that FEMA faces a significant challenge in addressing longstanding financial 

management problems and garnering resources to correct them. FEMA does not have a functioning, 

integrated financial management system, and its system of internal controls has material 

weaknesses. 

For years, these deficiencies have adversely affected FEMA’s ability to record, process, summarize, 

and report accurate, reliable, and timely financial data and have increased the risk that material 

errors or irregularities could occur without detection. 

Between FYs 1992 and 2001, FEMA successfully invested in its disaster preparedness, response, 

recovery, and mitigation programs. However, this investment was made at the expense of FEMA’s 

infrastructure (i.e., human resource management, IT management, and financial management). 

Owing to resource constraints, policies and strategies for resolving financial management problems 

and enhancing financial operations were either ignored or limited to the most fundamental tasks. 

As a result, FEMA’s financial operations continue to deteriorate each year, creating an unstable 

financial management environment and jeopardizing FEMA’s ability to fulfill its financial 

management responsibilities in future years. This situation is particularly troublesome in light of the 

increased responsibilities and associated funding that FEMA has received in response to the events 

of September 11. 

To fulfill these important new responsibilities effectively and efficiently, FEMA must develop and 

maintain an enhanced financial management and internal control structure that includes an 

integrated accounting system and ensures reliable and timely financial reporting. 

FEMA OIG has documented waste and mismanagement at grantee and subgrantee agencies 

throughout the country over the past 7 years. Between 1993 and 2000, OIG’s audits of disaster 

assistance grants have questioned the use of funds totaling nearly $900 million. 

In addition, during the past 3 years, FEMA OIG completed audits in 17 States covering FEMA’s 

management of disaster grants. There are a number of recurring grant management problems 

among the States. For example, States often do not monitor and accurately report on subgrantee 

performance and financial activities or make payments or close out projects in a timely manner, and 

financial status reports filed with FEMA are often incorrect or untimely. 

States do not always maintain adequate documentation supporting their share of disaster costs and 

other financial requirements. Although FEMA has been very aggressive in correcting the problems 

FEMA OIG has reported, much can be done proactively to prevent such problems from recurring.

On the basis of a statistical sample, HHS OIG estimated that improper Medicare benefit payments 

made during FY 2000 totaled $11.9 billion, or about 6.8 percent of the $173.6 billion in processed 

fee-for-service payments reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This 

error rate is slightly less than half that initially estimated by OIG in FY 1996, primarily because of 

CMS’ corrective actions and work with the provider community to clarify reimbursement rules. 

Causes of these improper payments could range from mistakes to fraud or abuse. Contractors claim 

that processing controls were not effective in detecting the kinds of errors the OIG audit found. 

While OIG’s 5-year analysis indicated continuing progress in reducing improper payments, 

unsupported and medically unnecessary services remained pervasive problems, accounting for more 

than 70 percent of the total improper payments over the 5 years.

HHS OIG also found that some States inappropriately inflated the Federal share of Medicaid by 

billions of dollars by requiring public providers to return Medicaid payments to State governments 

through intergovernmental transfers. The States used the funds for other purposes, some of which 
52 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

were unrelated to Medicaid. This practice was noted in two types of payments: Medicaid enhanced 

payments available under upper payment limits and Medicaid disproportionate share hospital 

payments. 

HUD OIG’s annual financial audits of the Department continue to report numerous problems 

related to inadequate system integration. For example, the lack of an automated interface between 

the departmental general ledger and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) subsidiary ledger 

necessitates extensive manual analyses, reprocessing, and additional entries. 

FHA’s funds control process is also largely manual. Other serious deficiencies include the inability to 

identify, in a timely fashion, excess funds on expired Section 8 projects and inadequate assurance 

about the propriety of Section 8 rental assistance payments. As yet there is no systems solution to 

these problems. 

DOT OIG noted that the development of a cost-accounting system is important because operating 

administrations such as the FAA, the Coast Guard, and the new Transportation Security 

Administration need good cost accounting information in order to improve operations and make 

informed management decisions. 

FAA has made progress on its cost accounting system during the past year. However, problems with 

implementing Delphi—FAA’s new financial system—are leading to delays in implementing cost 

accounting systems. DOT as a whole must have a credible cost accounting system to manage its 

programs, to know the real cost of services provided, and to identify areas where costs can be 

lowered without an adverse impact on service. 

According to DOD OIG, the Secretary of Defense has established the Defense Financial 

Management Modernization Program to provide policy direction and central control for all DOD 

financial management improvement efforts. Led by the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), 

this effort appears to be better structured and more comprehensive than the disjointed DOD efforts 

of the past several years. New emphasis on business process reengineering, providing useful 

financial information to managers, and reducing the number of systems processing financial data is 

encouraging and merits strong support. 

DOD OIG is encouraged by the primary focus of OMB, Congress, and DOD on attaining financial 

management systems that facilitate more efficient operations. In prior reports and hearings, DOD 

OIG has expressed concern about the widespread preoccupation with clean audit opinions on 

end-of-year financial statements. 

In the absence of adequate financial reporting systems, favorable audit opinions for virtually all 

major DOD financial statements were impossible, yet unrealistic goals continued to be set. To fulfill 

mandatory audit requirements, the DOD internal audit agencies were forced to apply 

disproportionate resources to financial statement audits. Not only was much of this effort repetitive, 

it also siphoned scarce audit resources away from other important areas. 

For its FY 2000 consolidated financial statements, DOC received its second unqualified or clean 

opinion. However, maintaining a clean opinion on consolidated statements remains a major 

challenge, according to DOC OIG. Audits of the FY 2000 statements identified six material 

weaknesses (serious flaws in the design or operation of an internal control component that increase 

the risk of errors, fraud, or noncompliance), seven reportable conditions, and several instances of 

noncompliance with laws and regulations.
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 53

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Managing Procurement and Competitive Sourcing 

Across the Government, increased emphasis is being placed on outsourcing tasks that are readily 

available in the commercial marketplace, such as administrative support, certain aspects of facilities 

management, and payroll services. Historically, the Government has realized significant cost savings 

through competitive sourcing. 

In November 2001 testimony, GAO noted that “Federal agencies spend billions of tax dollars each 

year to buy services, ranging from clerical support and consulting services to IT services, to the 

management and operation of Government facilities, such as national laboratories. And the amount 

spent on services is growing substantially. Last year alone, the Federal Government acquired more 

than $87 billion in services—a 24 percent increase in real terms from FY 1990.”

Again this year, the OIGs have identified procurement and grant management as a major 

management challenge. The Federal Government has been lax in its contractor oversight. Our 

annual reports to the President are full of examples of poor contractor oversight resulting in 

excessive and unnecessary costs to the taxpayer and, even more alarming, of fraudulent billing 

schemes. 

OIG reports note that appropriate internal controls and oversight of these areas must be in place to 

ensure that goods and services not only meet the needs of the Government and the public but are 

provided in the most cost-effective and efficient manner. OIGs are continuing to look at how Federal 

departments and agencies have been facilitating contract completion and providing oversight of the 

contractors.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in managing procurement and 

competitive sourcing within the Government. 

DOD is the world’s largest purchaser of services, at a cost of well over $50 billion annually. DOD 

OIG reports that DOD has taken commendable steps to provide more oversight of the largest 

contracts for services, but the thousands of other contracts and purchase actions for services remain 

a challenge. DOD OIG reported continued failure by DOD organizations to minimize sole source 

awards for task order contracts. 

In addition, DOD OIG continued its series of audits on contracting for services by individual 

organizations and reported that a large DOD agency’s contracting effort needed improvement. 

Congress has used these reports over the past year to change laws intended to improve the 

acquisition of services. DOD OIG reports also identified continued problems in purchasing supplies 

and spare parts, resulting from a combination of procurement personnel cuts, poorly designed 

purchasing systems, and inadequate oversight. 

To restore credibility to the procurement process, DOD needs to make a more serious effort to avoid 

overpriced items, such as those identified this year to include $409 sinks that should have cost $39, 

$2.10 screws worth $.48, and $.25 dust plugs worth $.03. Although these unit prices may seem too 

low to warrant concern, the true picture emerges when we consider that DOD purchases tens of 

millions of such items annually. 

DOT OIG found in a recently completed audit that DOT and FAA oversight of cost-reimbursable 

contracts totaling about $4 billion annually is seriously inadequate. This vulnerability is particularly 

significant since FAA alone awarded some 800 cost-reimbursable contracts totaling $3.4 billion in 

FY 2001. DOT OIG found that:

 FAA cost-reimbursable contracts totaling about $2 billion did not have the required incurred-cost 

audits.
54 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

 About 1,800 contracts totaling around $6 billion were completed for 3 to 12 years but were not 

closed timely.

 Contracting officers did not always have the documents to determine appropriate payments.

 Contract files frequently did not include evidence that contractors’ accounting systems were 

adequate. 

FAA’s oversight of cost-reimbursable contracts is particularly inadequate. OIG paid for audits by the 

DCAA until 1996, when Congress transferred the financial responsibilities to DOT agencies. 

Completed audits for DOT dropped from 468 in FY 1995 to a low of 53 in FY 1997. At the direction of 

the House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee in FY 2000, the number of audits has begun 

to rise and totaled 169 in FY 2001. Although independent audits are increasing, these high-risk, 

cost-reimbursable contracts need more audit scrutiny.

Last year, HUD OIG audits of FHA loan origination practices found significant problems with FHA’s 

reviews of lender underwriting and property appraisals. Deficiencies included the oversight of 

pre-endorsement contractors and the accuracy of information in the automated system tracking 

property appraisals. Therefore, HUD’s risk of losses from inflated appraisals, fraudulent 

underwriting, property flipping, and other lending abuses increased. 

Fraud and abuse by nonprofit organizations in HUD Single Family Programs also appears to be 

pervasive. Recent OIG audits found that FHA was receiving little or no benefit from discounted sales 

of HUD-owned property to nonprofit organizations. Many organizations were either fronts for 

profit-motivated entities or were unduly influenced by real estate agents, consultants, investors, 

contractors, and lenders. Discounted sales should have reduced the ultimate costs to low- and 

moderate-income homebuyers.

In the area of HUD's Public and Assisted Housing Program administration, a recent study of rent 

determinations estimates that errors made by intermediaries result in subsidy overpayments of 

$1.7 billion and underpayments of $6 million annually. Payment errors of this magnitude take on 

added significance in light of HUD’s estimate of 4.9 million unassisted households. These households 

pay more than half their income for housing or live in severely substandard housing. The reduction 

of subsidy overpayments is a top priority of this administration, and a task force is currently 

preparing a comprehensive plan for achieving these results. 

After a USDA OIG investigation of a Philadelphia corporation, its president and vice president were 

indicted for contract fraud. The fraud involved a $4.5 million renovation project at an Agricultural 

Research Service research station in Pennsylvania, as well as a $1.1 million DOD renovation project. 

The corporation failed to pay subcontractors, resulting in construction delays. The president of the 

corporation pleaded guilty in July 2000. The president and vice president were incarcerated, and the 

officers and the corporation were ordered to pay nearly $2 million in restitution. 

The NASA OIG found that between FY 1993 and FY 2000, the percentage of NASA funding available 

for competition decreased from 81 percent to less than 56 percent of the total obligations available. 

The percentage of total annual NASA procurements that were sole source rose from 35 percent in FY 

1999 to 37 percent in FY 2000. During FY 2001, OIG inspections reviewed five sole-source 

acquisitions at five different NASA centers. The reviews disclosed that the acquisitions were not 

adequately justified in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation. As a result, at least three 

procurements were subsequently cancelled, and others are under review. An audit of multiple-award 

contracts at two NASA centers identified that almost 50 percent of the 104 sole-source orders 

reviewed did not provide for adequate competition. A series of audit reports also questioned 

sole-source subcontracting by prime contractors under NASA contracts. Improper sole-source 

subcontracting by prime contractors may increase costs to the Government.
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 55

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

GSA’s Multiple Award Schedule contracting program has grown exponentially, with sales of $13.6 

billion in FY 2000. As the program has grown, GSA’s OIG has been concerned that certain program 

fundamentals, which are set out by regulation to achieve competitive pricing, have been 

marginalized. 

An OIG white paper revealed that GSA was not consistently negotiating volume pricing on 

photocopier and IT schedules because procurement officials were not leveraging the Government’s 

aggregate buying power and often failed to properly evaluate differing terms and conditions. OIG 

also reported that only 2 percent of the $199 million in recommended cost avoidances were 

sustained on recently awarded photocopier contracts. In addition, 50 percent of contract extensions 

reviewed were executed without meaningful or vigorous price analysis, and requests for pre-award 

audits decreased by almost 90 percent. 

DOE OIG conducted an audit to determine whether cost savings anticipated from the use of 

fixed-price contracts for environmental cleanup activities will be realized. OIG found that projected 

savings associated with 9 of 11 contracts reviewed were not likely to be fully realized. Some savings 

estimates were unsupported. Some were based on invalid cost comparisons, and others were invalid 

because increases in actual costs had occurred or were likely. 

ED OIG assessed the management of Government property by three ED contractors and identified 

similar internal control weaknesses at all three. The audits disclosed significant supervisory and 

procedural weaknesses in the management of Government property. OIG found that the contractors 

did not properly identify the property and did not comply with recordkeeping, reporting, or inventory 

requirements. OIG recommended several corrective actions, and all three contractors generally 

agreed with the findings. 

DOC OIG finds that as DOC increases its reliance on contractor-provided goods and services, at a 

cost of more than $1 billion annually, its efforts to monitor the effectiveness of the acquisition 

process grow as well. Several laws were enacted during the 1990s to improve and streamline 

procurement practices. However, GAO and OMB’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy, along with 

the IG community, continue to report problems with implementation of reform initiatives. 

DOC OIG identified a number of problems in this area, such as the following: 

 Inadequate use of performance-based service contracting.

 Lack of security provisions in contracts for IT services.

 Improper use of task order contracts.

 Insufficient planning for contract administration and monitoring.

 Inadequate management of the purchase card program within DOC. 

Strategic Management of Human Capital

In January 2001, GAO reported to Congress that strategic human capital management is a 

high-risk, Governmentwide issue needing immediate attention. According to GAO, more than half 

the Federal workforce—about 900,000 employees—will be eligible to retire by 2005. In addition, to 

ensure that Government's as well as citizens’ needs are effectively, efficiently, and economically 

met, Federal agencies must restructure human capital strategies to meet future challenges.

The wave of expected retirements, recruitment and retention obstacles, inadequate evaluation and 

reward systems, and outdated training and education methods are areas that need immediate 

attention. The administration’s goal is for each agency to develop a viable human resource strategy 
56 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

to attract and retain the right people, in the right places, and at the right time to enable the agency 

to be a high-performance organization that delivers high-quality services to the American public.

Members of the IG community believe this area is a major management challenge, not only for their 

respective entities but also for each OIG. The theme of a recent issue of our Journal of Public Inquiry

emphasized the challenges Government agencies and the IG community are facing with regard to 

human capital issues. This publication contained articles on the following topics: 

 Evaluating the efficacy of agency human capital systems.

 Recruitment strategies to attain a high-quality, diverse workforce.

 Building an organization for higher performance.

 Succession planning and training needs.

 Telecommuting and offsite workplaces.

PCIE has also realigned its committee structure by establishing a Human Resources Committee to 

create and implement innovative and effective human resource management programs within the 

community. As the Federal Government transforms itself to meet the challenges of the 21st century, 

it needs to answer long-unresolved questions about the size and requisite skills of its workforce. 

Although we support more flexible personnel management rules and procedures, those are merely 

tools with which to shape the workforce. The primary management emphasis should be on sound 

planning to resolve the basic goals for workforce size and skills.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in the human capital area. 

DOD OIG has noted that DOD, like most Government organizations, faces a range of serious 

personnel management issues related to an aging workforce. Moreover, the deep cuts in both the 

military force structure and the civilian workforce after the end of the Cold War were not 

accompanied by proportionate reductions in the number of military force deployments or in civilian 

workload. On the contrary, military operating tempo has been very high, and there are indications of 

morale problems among both military and civilian personnel. 

Among the negative effects of downsizing are increased retention problems because of slow 

promotions and overworked staffs, recruiting problems, and skills imbalances. A series of reports on 

acquisition, financial operations, and quality assurance have demonstrated the problems of 

inadequate numbers of personnel to perform functions. 

For example, one DOD OIG audit found that a 27 percent reduction in acquisition personnel over 

2 years at a DOD supply center resulted in a 26 percent increase in administrative lead time for 

buyers to acquire parts and supplies, a 48 percent increase in back orders, and a 40 percent 

increase in backlogged purchase requests. These results demonstrate the need for decisions on any 

additional workforce sizing to be underpinned by careful analysis of workload and realistic 

productivity projections. 

DOS OIG reviews show that recruitment, retention, and professional training for Foreign Service 

and Civil Service employees are critical issues. Although the Department is beginning to develop the 

workforce planning needed, it has far to go. OIG found that inadequate training and support for 

first-tour consular officers has led to lapses in nonimmigrant visa management at some posts.

Because GSA has downsized its workforce by 30 percent in recent years, GSA OIG performed a 

benchmark review of how other Federal and private sector organizations assess progress in 

acquiring a workforce with the skills and talents needed to meet 21st-century demands. While many 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 57

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

parts of GSA had begun the process of ensuring an adequate workforce, OIG reported that GSA 

needs to establish a unified strategy to ensure that it has highly talented professionals to meet the 

challenges of the future. 

OIG advised management of the actions taken by several Federal agencies in conducting their 

workforce self-assessments. The assessments not only demonstrate senior-level commitment but 

also map out, in an objective fashion, the agencies’ human capital requirements to meet current and 

future demographic and performance challenges. 

The U.S. International Trade Commission OIG conducted an inspection of the Commission’s 

largest resource and its most significant management challenge—human capital. Because nearly 

one-third of the Commission’s workforce is eligible for regular retirement by 2005, OIG suggested 

that the Commission address human capital in its strategic plan and develop formal workforce 

succession, recruiting, and hiring plans. 

NSF OIG reported that NSF is vulnerable to a wave of retirements in key areas as 63 percent of its 

executive workforce, as well as a large percentage of its science and engineering staff, are eligible to 

retire within 5 years. Meanwhile, NSF’s budget for salaries and expenses continues to lag behind the 

growth of its overall program budget. 

According to NRC OIG, one of the most serious management challenges facing NRC is workforce 

planning to maintain a highly competent staff to carry out NRC’s public health and safety mission. 

One aspect of workforce planning focuses on achieving labor continuity so that when employees 

leave, NRC has developed candidates to fill their positions. This is particularly important since about 

15 percent of NRC’s employees are eligible to retire within 5 years, and the percentage is 20 percent 

or greater in some technical offices. 

Ultimately, workforce planning should provide managers with a framework for making staffing 

decisions on the basis of NRC’s mission, strategic plan, budgetary resources, and desired workforce 

competencies. An OIG audit revealed that NRC is making a concerted effort to strengthen its 

workforce planning approach. However, it lacks a comprehensive, organizationwide workforce plan. 

NRC OIG found that NRC had not yet fully integrated workforce planning into its budget process, 

communicated its approach throughout the Commission, or institutionalized its efforts in a holistic 

plan that coordinated the various efforts then under way. Until NRC develops and implements such a 

plan, the future of its workforce planning efforts is at risk. 

TIGTA has identified human capital management as one of the major challenges facing IRS for 

FY 2002. IRS faces a range of serious personnel management issues, ranging from recruiting, 

training, and retaining employees to problems associated with its recent reorganization and 

modernization efforts. IRS has struggled with a continuing need to properly staff, train, and provide 

adequate tools for its employees. 

In FY 2001, TIGTA reported the need for IRS to coordinate among its functional areas to implement 

an IRS-wide workforce planning model that would identify strategic workforce requirements and be 

used in developing the strategic plan and budget. TIGTA also identified other reorganization and 

human resource issues, including programs that did not have direct control over field employees in 

another IRS functional area. 

AID OIG reports that recruitment and retention of technically proficient personnel presents a major 

challenge for AID management. To assist management in meeting this challenge, OIG plans to audit 

AID’s foreign language training program and its succession planning efforts to address anticipated 

gaps in skills caused by upcoming worker retirements. 
58 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

In addition, OIG will audit the quality of services provided by AID’s Office of Payroll in light of the 

recent transfer of employee payment activity to the National Finance Center’s payroll and personnel 

processing systems. Many employees had expressed high levels of dissatisfaction with AID’s payroll 

operations immediately following the transfer of operations. 

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) OIG completed a special project related to human 

capital management in early FY 2002. The project’s objective was to compile and analyze data on 

the retirement eligibility and projections for FEC employees over the next 10 years. The data 

analysis included a comparison of the projected employee retirements for FEC and the Federal 

Government in the Washington, DC, area.

OIG’s analysis resulted in a conclusion that the risk associated with losing substantial numbers of 

employees to retirement is considerably less for FEC than it is for the Federal Government as a 

whole. Based on October 2000 data, OPM predicted that by the end of 2006, 13.5 percent of FEC’s 

staff will have retired, compared with 22.8 percent of Federal Government staff in the Washington, 

DC, area. 

OPM predicts that by the end of 2010, 25.6 percent of FEC staff will have retired, compared with 

38.7 percent of Federal Government staff in the Washington, DC, area. OIG found FEC’s staff to be 

younger, with fewer years of service than the Washington, DC, Federal Government averages. 

Although OIG concluded that the overall staff retirement scenario appears to be reasonable for FEC, 

it suggested that management begin to incorporate goals addressing human resource strategies into 

future GPRA performance plans. 

Watching Over Public Health and Safety 

The Federal Government has an enormous role in protecting the health and safety of its citizens. 

Whether the issue is the food we eat, the roads we drive on, the airports we travel through, the 

hospitals we visit, or even the air we breathe, the Federal Government has a duty to ensure that 

appropriate standards are maintained to protect all Americans. 

While Federal agencies have risen to this challenge, more needs to be done to ensure sufficient 

Federal implementation of relevant laws. As the White House noted in the overview to the FY 2003 

budget:

“Federal programs are responsible for providing services that are critical to the people’s welfare. The 

public deserves at least the same commitment to results from its government that it expects from 

businesses. We will know we are successful when conversations no longer focus on how much we 

are spending on a program compared to last year but rather how the results of the program will 

change. Will we feed more people per dollar, educate more children per dollar, conserve more land 

per dollar, and so on?”

The IG community believes public health and safety is a key function of Federal Government and 

poses many challenges for Federal leaders. Improving Government performance in this area is 

critical to the well-being of every citizen. 

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in the area of public health and safety. 

With the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Europe and, subsequently, South America, USDA 

OIG conducted a special expedited review of the controls and procedures employed by USDA to 

prevent the entry of the disease via imported meat. Auditors found that enhanced controls were 

needed to reduce the possibility of the disease entering the United States. 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 59

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

The review found that communications between the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

(APHIS) and the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the two USDA agencies responsible for 

regulating the entry of imported meat, were weak. APHIS needed to improve its accountability over 

imported products from their arrival at U.S. ports of entry through their disposition by the respective 

agencies. APHIS and FSIS agreed with the findings and recommendations and are acting on them.

Three USDA OIG investigations to pursue specific threats resulted in significant criminal penalties 

against meat processors that distributed products contaminated by the deadly bacteria Listeria 

monocytogenes, which had sickened and killed people who consumed it. The USDA’s rapid 

emergency responses immediately halted distribution of the products. 

In one June 2001 case, attorneys for a major food-processing corporation pleaded guilty in U.S. 

District Court to producing and distributing adulterated meat and poultry products. From June to 

September 1998, one of its processing plants produced and distributed food products that contained 

Listeria monocytogenes. 

Sentencing included the maximum fine of $200,000 with an agreement to underwrite food safety 

research projects by funding a $3 million grant to Michigan State University. The corporation also 

settled a civil lawsuit relating to the 1998 sale of meat products to DOD by paying $915,800, as well 

as Government investigative costs, resulting in a total civil settlement of more than $1.2 million. 

A DOE OIG review of DOE activities involving biological select agents revealed a lack of sufficient 

Federal oversight, consistent policy, and standardized implementing procedures, resulting in the 

potential for greater risk to workers and possibly others from exposure to biological select agents 

and select agent materials that DOE maintains. 

DOE OIG discovered questionable contract implementation and administration at a DOE site that 

resulted in serious environmental, safety, and health concerns. Examples included the mishandling 

of radioactively contaminated equipment, the presence of a number of fire and electrical hazards, 

and the leakage of possibly hazardous substances from equipment. The State of Ohio subsequently 

fined the contractor for nuclear safety violations.

The EPA OIG reports that the quality and integrity of laboratory data supplied to EPA for regulatory 

compliance, enforcement, policy, and remediation purposes continues to be a pressing issue. 

Environmental data of questionable authenticity can lead to concerns about the soundness of EPA 

decisions pertaining to the protection of the environment and public health. Furthermore, data 

integrity issues lead to additional costs and unnecessary delays when EPA has to identify and assess 

the impact of the fraudulent data and undertake additional sampling. 

EPA OIG reviews and investigations have disclosed a particularly disturbing trend in the number of 

environmental laboratories that are providing misleading and fraudulent data to the States for 

monitoring the Nation’s public water supplies and other indicators of health hazards, such as air 

toxins, pesticides in food supplies, and hazardous wastes. 

A DOJ OIG review found that INS is placing the traveling public at potential risk because it does not 

consistently follow its established escort policy. To protect the traveling public, INS in 1998 adopted 

a policy of assigning INS officers to escort potentially dangerous aliens who are being removed from 

the United States on commercial flights. In three of the four districts OIG visited, INS managers 

disregarded this policy. OIG also found that INS often failed to provide the required ratio of escorts 

to dangerous aliens, and that INS did not always provide escorts during the final segment of 

multiflight removal trips. In addition, OIG found that INS does not adequately coordinate the alien 

escort process with DOS. 
60 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) OIG notes that as an environmental steward and the Nation’s 

largest public power provider, TVA strives to balance business requirements with environmental 

protection. TVA’s environmental responsibility includes compliance with both Federal and State 

regulations. Air quality, watershed management, and other environmental issues, such as the 

presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), have warranted TVA’s attention in recent years. Air 

quality issues have recently drawn the most public attention and could have the most profound 

economic effect as TVA seeks to provide cost-effective measures to achieve environmental 

compliance. 

TVA OIG monitors environmental issues and includes significant items in its monthly emerging 

issues newsletter. It also participates in an Environmental Crimes Joint Task Force on an ongoing 

basis. During FY 2001, TVA OIG cosponsored an environmental training course for auditors at TVA, 

began an audit of TVA’s compliance with Section 6002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act, and, as a result of prior audit work, assisted a TVA team dealing with PCB abatement issues at 

TVA’s request. Planned audit coverage in FY 2002 includes a review of TVA’s environmental audit 

function for compliance with applicable auditing standards.

Safeguarding the Nation’s Physical Infrastructures 

The events of September 11 highlighted the importance of protecting the Nation’s critical 

information infrastructures, which are essential to the operations of the economy and government. 

Because of the Federal Government’s major responsibilities for public health and safety, dramatic 

and widespread harm would result should its systems be compromised. These systems include, but 

are not limited to, telecommunications, energy, banking and finance, transportation, water systems, 

and emergency services, both government and private.

Many of the Nation’s critical infrastructures historically have been physically and logically separate 

systems that had little interdependence. However, as a result of IT advances and improved 

efficiency, these infrastructures have become increasingly automated and interlinked. These same 

advances have created new vulnerabilities to equipment failures, human error, weather and other 

natural causes, and cyber-attacks. Addressing these vulnerabilities will require flexible, evolutionary 

approaches that span both the public and private sectors and protect both domestic and 

international security.

OIGs continue to view physical and information infrastructure as a major management challenge. 

Currently, we are continuing to assess the Government’s IT risks through the review of its effort to 

protect physical and cyber-based systems under the Homeland Security Plan. 

We are also conducting annual independent evaluations of the agencies’ information security 

programs and practices as part of GISRA. It codifies existing OMB security policies and reiterates 

security responsibilities outlined in the Computer Security Act of 1987, the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. In addition, GISRA requires annual agency program reviews and 

annual independent evaluations for both unclassified and national security programs. Our IT 

Roundtable is working with OIGs to address GISRA requirements through forums and training 

sessions with groups such as the CIO Council, OMB, GAO, and other organizations.

In March 2001, PCIE and ECIE presented the results of Phase I of a four-phase review of Federal 

agencies’ implementation of PDD 63 related to critical infrastructure protection. PDD 63 called for a 

national effort to ensure the security of the Nation’s critical infrastructures, “those physical and 

cyber-based systems essential to the minimum operations of the economy and government.” 

Overall, the OIGs’ report stated that the Federal Government can improve its PDD 63 planning and 

assessment activities for cyber-based critical infrastructures. Specifically, the review found that 

many agency plans were incomplete, most agencies had not identified their mission-essential 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 61

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

infrastructure assets, and almost none of the agencies had completed vulnerability assessments of 

their minimum essential infrastructure assets or developed remediation plans. 

When all participating OIGs complete their Phase I reviews, they will have an estimated 100 

recommendations to improve their respective agencies’ critical infrastructure plans.

The following are selected examples of individual OIGs’ work in safeguarding the Nation’s physical 

infrastructure. 

In its GISRA review, USDA OIG disclosed that USDA is still far from effectively managing and 

securing IT resources. Audits have identified that USDA, through the work of the Office of the CIO, 

has a departmentwide security plan in place and has begun improving the security of its IT 

resources. Despite its efforts, however, USDA remains noncompliant with several OMB Circular 

A-130, Management of Federal Information Resources, and PDD 63 requirements. 

Before the appointment of a CIO, departmental agencies and staff offices addressed their respective 

IT security and infrastructure needs separately. These isolated approaches have resulted in a 

disparate array of technical and physical solutions that do not always ensure comprehensive 

departmentwide security.

USDA OIG is also accelerating a review of controls over accidental or intentional release of 

biohazards. The review emphasizes pathogen accountability and personnel and physical security of 

USDA laboratories around the Nation where the Department stores biological materials (used in 

research and diagnostic work) that could be harmful to plants and animals.

USDA OIG also reported that numerous program participants were convicted for illegally gaining 

millions of program dollars via electronic commerce systems such as the Food Stamp Program’s 

Electronic Benefits Transfer system. 

DOD OIG reports that DOD information systems are probed daily and are often attacked 

systematically by vandals, curiosity seekers, and other individuals with more sinister motives. 

Security is a major challenge to operators and users of all networked information systems. DOD’s 

concerns about security extend not only to its own systems, but also far beyond to the networks 

used to support the private sector infrastructures that sustain our military forces at home and 

abroad. 

FCC OIG concluded its first evaluation under GISRA. OIG determined that FCC has a generally 

effective information security program, with acceptable practices for managing and safeguarding its 

technology assets. FCC recognizes that some areas in its information security management and 

operational and technical controls need improvement. 

FEMA OIG reported that IT is vital to its ability to accomplish its mission, but it presents several 

management challenges. Increasing connectivity between systems, especially through the Internet, 

and constantly changing and evolving technology and communications create new opportunities for 

enhancing existing processes but also dramatically increase technology and security risks. As a 

result, FEMA must remain vigilant in guarding its systems and data. 

In several audit reports, OIG recommended ways to improve FEMA’s information security processes 

and controls. However, it has been difficult for FEMA to obtain sufficient resources to take corrective 

action. 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) OIG reviewed controls over the release of information 

stored on the hard drives of “surplused” computers donated to charitable institutions and school 

districts. OIG found that 40 percent of the hard drives sampled from computers ready for release 
62 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

outside FTC had not been scrubbed properly or had been scrubbed using an older, less effective 

erasure software, leaving password files and case-specific (and confidential) files such as 

subpoenas. 

Given the vulnerability and expense of the surplus donation program, OIG recommended that 

management destroy hard drives before donating the computers rather than erasing and reinstalling 

the hard drives. With the money saved, FTC could install new drives purchased in bulk. 

HHS OIG noted that HHS has made much progress in securing its most critical assets. However, 

recent OIG assessments found numerous weaknesses in entitywide security, access controls, service 

continuity, and segregation of duties. These weaknesses leave HHS vulnerable to:

 Unauthorized access to and disclosure of sensitive information.

 Malicious changes that could interrupt data processing or destroy data files.

 Improper payments.

 Disruption of critical operations.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) OIG’s FY 2001 audit of FLRA’s computer 

information security and a related follow-up evaluation by an independent contractor revealed 

substantial weaknesses in FLRA’s information resource program and a lack of sufficient management 

attention to the growing automation needs of customers and Federal employees. As a result of the 

audit, FLRA management placed a long-needed focus on information resources and security to 

enable FLRA to keep up with the expanding requirements of E-Government. 

DOJ OIG audits have disclosed serious problems in computer security that could lead to the 

compromise of sensitive systems and data. In FY 2001, DOJ OIG tested the effectiveness of 

information security control techniques for nine DOJ systems at the Executive Office for U.S. 

Attorneys, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice Management 

Division, and FBI. These systems included five sensitive but unclassified (SBU) and four classified 

systems.

In the five SBU systems, OIG found weaknesses in management, operational, and technical 

controls, including password management, logon management, user and account rights assignment, 

file and system configuration, and system auditing management. In the four classified systems, OIG 

found that select computer security controls were not implemented to protect the systems from 

unauthorized use, loss, or modification. 

Penetration testing on three classified systems resulted in auditors obtaining access to the systems. 

Weaknesses found in the SBU systems are considered a low-to-moderate risk. Weaknesses in the 

classified systems, when considered collectively, are a moderate-to-high risk. Weaknesses were 

more extensive and material for the classified systems because they had not been subject to such 

frequent external reviews as the SBU systems.

DOJ OIG continues to identify mission-critical computer systems that were poorly planned, 

experienced long delays in implementation, or did not provide timely, useful, or reliable data. One 

such system is INS’ Automated I-94 System, developed as an automated entry/exit system for use 

at land, sea, and air ports of entry to identify and track individuals when they enter and exit the 

country. 

A 2001 DOJ OIG audit assessed the design and implementation of the Automated I-94 System and 

determined that INS has not properly managed the project. As a result, despite having spent 

$31.2 million on the system from FY 1996 to FY 2000, INS did not have clear evidence that the 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 63

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

system met its intended goals, had gained the cooperation of only two airlines and was operating 

the system at only four airports, and was in the process of modifying the system. INS has since 

determined that the system will not meet the new requirements that Congress has set, and has 

terminated the program. 

NSF OIG reports that NSF faces the challenging task of facilitating an open research culture while 

protecting its critical information assets against unauthorized intrusion. Although NSF has enhanced 

its security program by establishing an intrusion detection service and appointing a security officer, 

continuing efforts are needed to improve system security. OIG’s review of NSF’s information security 

program indicates that there may be weaknesses that increase security risks. NSF concurred with 

the recommendations and has initiated corrective action. 

Recognizing the importance of system security a year ago, the Corporation for Public 

Broadcasting (CPB) OIG staff agreed to start a joint project with CPB’s Office of Finance and 

Administration to address the security needs of its information systems. The effort resulted in 

identifying three major weaknesses in CPB automated systems. 

CPB took several corrective actions to strengthen the safeguards of its data and records. CPB 

installed new antivirus software on its servers and implemented virus filtering on its e-mail system. 

Information systems are now protected by a multilayer firewall, and operating systems were 

improved to better protect CPB information. CPB and its OIG are currently working on procedures to 

prevent and handle threats.

In FY 2001, SSA OIG performed a number of audits and reviews in this area as required by GISRA. 

OIG’s review determined that SSA is in substantial compliance with GISRA but needs to improve its 

protection of sensitive information in the areas of technical standards implementation and system 

security monitoring. 

A review of SSA’s Computer Security Program’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations 

found that SSA lacked a strong framework for overall security administration, policy development, 

and policy implementation. OIG recommended that SSA restructure its security management 

hierarchy to heighten accountability. 

SSA OIG audited employees’ access to the Earnings Record Maintenance System (ERMS) and 

discovered that certain employees had access to ERMS above what was necessary to perform their 

duties. OIG also reviewed SSA’s system to prevent and detect direct deposit fraud and found 

weaknesses in this system. OIG noted weakness in system policy, configuration, and monitoring of 

SSA’s intelligent workstations/local area network.

During FY 2001, SSA OIG performed several reviews that analyzed the physical security of SSA’s 

facilities and assets. First, OIG reviewed SSA’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Program as it related 

to physical security and determined that updates to the Critical Information Protection Plan are 

needed. The needs include updating plans for performing its reviews of existing physical security 

policies and procedures, developing training goals to ensure that it has the personnel and skills 

necessary to implement a sound infrastructure protection program, and identifying SSA’s 

interdependencies with other Federal agencies for its physical assets. 

As part of SSA’s FY 2000 and 2001 financial statement audits, SSA OIG reviewed SSA’s physical 

security. OIG found a lack of enforcement of security policies for physical access to information 

resources at nonheadquarters locations such as SSA’s regional offices, program services centers, 

and select Disability Determination Services. It also found that SSA needs to complete its Continuity 

of Operations Plan and update its Disaster Recovery Plan. 
64 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

DOI OIG notes that DOI has not resolved its longstanding problems with computer security and 

overall system effectiveness. Chairman Steve Horn’s House Subcommittee on Government 

Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations, in its annual assessments of 

agency information system security, has consistently ranked DOI near the bottom of the list. DOI’s 

failure to maintain systems to properly account for Indian trust assets is well known. 

DOI OIG reported computer security as a material weakness in FY 2000 and 2001. The first annual 

OIG review of DOI’s IT security systems under GISRA found inadequate or nonexistent security 

plans and risk assessments as well as employees who were poorly trained in their security 

responsibilities. 

OIG’s report in DOI’s Annual Report for FY 2001 again identified material weaknesses in DOI’s 

financial management systems. Although on September 20, 2001, DOI’s CIO issued an IT security 

plan establishing minimum standards for secure operations, the plan did not specify the steps 

needed to meet these standards and is not expected to be fully implemented until FY 2006. 

A Treasury OIG audit of the U.S. Customs Service (Customs) electronic data processing controls 

identified one material weakness and three reportable conditions. The material weakness is that 

Customs still does not have an adequate disaster recovery capability. Customs has measures under 

way to eventually provide the needed improvements. 

However, until these improvements are made, Customs’ law enforcement and revenue collection 

operations remain vulnerable to disruption. The lack of adequate disaster recovery capability at 

Customs was the subject of a “7-day” letter issued by the Treasury IG to the Secretary of the 

Treasury in May 2000. 

During FY 2001, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) OIG performed several 

reviews relating to IT management and security, including general computer controls at 

headquarters and the regions, staff and contractor background investigations, controls over intranet 

Web site content, IT capital decisionmaking, operational risks in the Office of Information 

Technology, and information security program and practices (under GISRA). 

The reviews identified many significant improvements and accomplishments of SEC relating to IT. 

OIG also made a number of recommendations to improve IT practices and procedures and to ensure 

compliance with relevant statutes and regulations. 

A VA OIG report found information security weaknesses in VA systems. As a result, information 

security is designated a material weakness area under the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act. 

VA systems continue to be vulnerable to unauthorized access and misuse of sensitive information 

and data. 

VA has started efforts to correct these weaknesses and work toward compliance with GISRA. 

However, the recently completed GISRA audit identified significant information security 

vulnerabilities that continue to place VA at risk.

Collaborative Efforts to Fight Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

During FY 2001, members of the IG community collaborated with one another and with other 

organizations and agencies to combat fraud, waste, and abuse in the Federal Government—with 

special focus on systems security, improper payments, and health care fraud. After September 11, 

this collaborative spirit was also called upon to fight terrorism. Highlighted below are some instances 

of successful collaborations within the IG community.
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 65

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Conducting Operation Green Quest

Special agents nationwide, including those in the USDA OIG, are assigned to criminal investigative 

efforts and multiagency counterterrorism and financial task forces involved in Operation Green 

Quest. The purpose of this operation, which was announced by President Bush, is to identify and 

track possible sources of funding for terrorism. OIG efforts are focused on investigations of benefits 

trafficking to determine whether money is finding its way overseas. USDA OIG is tracing 

Government funds to determine whether they are being used to finance terrorism. 

Conducting Operation Safe Travel

SSA OIG, Customs, DOT OIG, and Salt Lake City Airport staff came together with the U.S. Attorney’s 

Office to investigate security issues related to the Winter Olympics under Operation Safe Travel - 

Salt Lake City, Utah. The operation originated when an airport supervisor expressed the belief that a 

large number of employees might have provided false SSNs to gain employment at the airport. Salt 

Lake City Airport management gave SSA OIG the names of approximately 600 contractors working 

at the airport. Customs was also given a list of employees with access to Customs secure areas. 

Subsequent examination of wage information by SSA OIG for those employers revealed numerous 

earnings posted to incorrect SSNs. The U.S. Attorney’s Office brought in Utah Homeland Security, 

which researched criminal histories on about 1,350 individuals who were working in highly secure 

areas of the airport. As a result, 69 individuals were indicted—including 61 for SSN misuse. Eight 

others were indicted on immigration-related charges or false statements on FAA employment 

certifications. 

Improving Export Controls

OIGs for DOE, DOD, Treasury, DOC, and DOS conducted a joint review to determine the 

effectiveness of export controls for the transfer of sensitive materials and technology to countries of 

concern under the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2000. The objective of the 

review was to assess the policies and procedures for developing, maintaining, and revising the 

Commerce Control List and the U.S. Munitions List. 

These reviews have substantially contributed toward improving the dual-use and munitions export 

licensing processes and have provided Congress with an objective and thorough analysis of these 

processes. The interagency export control reports provided timely and useful input to the 

congressional and executive branch efforts to reform the Nation’s export controls. 

Focusing on Electronic Crimes and Computer Security

USPS OIG, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the 

Canadian National Investigative Service joined forces to investigate a November 1999 attack on a 

USPS Web site. The investigation involved a hacking group known as “hv2k.” As a result of the 

investigation, a Texas man is serving a 2-year sentence following his January 2001 conviction for 

breaching computer security and aggregated theft. A second hacker responsible for the intrusion 

was placed in pretrial diversion by the court. 

The New York Electronic Crimes Task Force—which includes GSA OIG, the U.S. Secret Service, DOD, 

DOJ, the New York City Police Department, and representatives from the telecommunications 

industry—investigates telecommunications fraud (primarily involving Federal facilities in the New 

York metropolitan area). The task force is pursuing individuals who are committing fraud through 

the use of stolen Government calling card numbers, cloned cellular telephones, and electronic 

attacks on Government telephone systems. This cooperative effort was initiated when it was 

determined that such fraud was resulting in the denial of communication services to Government 
66 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

agencies. During FY 2001, approximately 18 investigations were performed and 19 individuals were 

charged with related crimes, resulting in 11 convictions or pleas.

In cooperation with the FBI, NASA OIG arrested a hacker who had broken into computers at NASA 

and other Government institutions and had used stolen credit card information to purchase 

electronic equipment. The hacker was incarcerated for 21 months and ordered to pay $87,736 in 

restitution.

Pursuing Education Grant Funds Fraud

Hermandad Mexicana Nacional Legal Center (HMNLC)—a California community-based organization—

was indicted on three counts of false statements and three counts of mail fraud after a joint ED OIG, 

FBI, and FEMA OIG investigation. The investigation determined that HMNLC had significantly 

misrepresented the number of hours students attended, as well as the amount of program-related 

expenditures. 

For the 3 fiscal years beginning in July 1995 and ending in June 1998, HMNLC received grant funds 

of approximately $6.6 million to provide adult education courses, of which approximately 

$3.2 million allegedly was not used for program-related expenditures.

Investigating Organized Crime and Labor Racketeering

DOL OIG has a unique program responsibility for investigating labor racketeering and organized 

crime influence or control in unions and the workplace. Specifically, DOL OIG identifies and curtails 

labor racketeering and corruption in employee benefit plans, labor-management relations, and 

internal union affairs. DOL OIG continues its collaboration with DOT OIG to investigate organized 

crime influence and labor racketeering in federally-financed highway and public infrastructure 

projects. The transportation industry received $200 billion in funding over a 5-year period via the 

1998 Transportation Equity Act, providing significant stimulus to transportation construction and 

maintenance. 

Since some of the same corrupt contractors who engage in labor racketeering also defraud 

federally-awarded contracts in this sector of the public construction industry, DOT OIG asked DOL 

OIG to participate in the antifraud effort.

Targeting Credit Card Fraud

The Federal Government procurement process has become more dependent on the use of charge 

cards through the GSA SmartPay program. As a result, GSA OIG developed a national proactive 

effort targeting fraud and abuse of charge cards by Federal employees and others. 

This effort resulted in 59 investigations in FY 2001. The cases—worked cooperatively with the 

U.S. Secret Service, DOC OIG, NASA OIG, the Federal Protective Service, and HHS—have resulted in 

16 criminal convictions and 8 administrative actions.

Uniting to Reduce Health Care Fraud

In the 5 years that the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program has been in place to combat 

health care fraud, coordinated efforts between the U.S. Attorney General and HHS OIG have yielded 

impressive results. More than $3 billion has been returned to the Medicare Trust Fund and the 

Federal Government as a whole. More than 15,000 individuals and entities have been excluded from 

participating in federally-sponsored health care programs. 
A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 67

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Cost savings attributable to recommendations to correct systemic vulnerabilities and improve 

program economy and efficiency are averaging more than $11 billion per year. A centralized 

Healthcare Integrity and Protection Data Bank is up and running, and industry guidance and 

beneficiary outreach have been greatly expanded.

In FY 2001, these collaborative efforts resulted in the successful conclusion of the largest 

government fraud settlement ever reached. The largest for-profit hospital chain in the country 

(Healthcare Corporation HCA) agreed to plead guilty to criminal conduct and paid the Federal 

Government and several States more than $840 million in criminal fines and civil penalties related to 

five areas of Medicare and Medicaid fraud. Contributing to this investigation and settlement were 

DOJ; the FBI; OIGs for HHS, DOD, VA, and OPM; and State Medicaid fraud control units.

TVA OIG continued to support health care fraud task forces and working groups sponsored by U.S. 

Attorney’s offices in Tennessee. One earlier investigation resulted in a physician’s guilty plea in FY 

2001 and a sentence of over $200,000 in restitution, prison time, supervised probation, and 

community service. This investigation was conducted by TVA OIG special agents, DOD, DOL, and 

investigators from Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Tennessee’s Special Investigations Unit.

Partnering to Enforce Court-Ordered Child Support

In FY 2001, HHS OIG continued to make the detection, investigation, and prosecution of 

noncustodial parents who fail to pay court-ordered child support a priority. Working with HHS’ Office 

of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), DOJ, and other Federal, State, and local partners, HHS OIG 

developed joint programmatic and operational procedures to expedite the collection of child support 

and bring to justice those who willfully disregard their obligations. 

From FY 1995 through FY 2001, HHS OIG opened 1,519 child support investigations nationwide, 

resulting in 456 convictions and court-ordered criminal restitution and settlements of over 

$25.9 million. These results are attributable in large part to the effectiveness of shared resources 

and efforts in the law enforcement community.

One specific way in which HHS OIG approaches child support enforcement collaboratively is its 

participation with OCSE in six multiagency and -jurisdictional task forces. Through the coordination 

of law enforcement, criminal justice, and child support office resources, the task forces identify, 

investigate, and prosecute the most egregious criminal nonsupport matters at both the State and 

Federal levels. 

By working together and sharing information, the task forces create a mechanism for 

communication and coordination through which stronger cases are identified and more cases are 

brought to successful resolution. The six task forces established as of FY 2001 collectively cover 29 

States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
68 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

A Compendium of OIG Activities in FY 2001
PCIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 69

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

PCIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers

Mark W. Everson, Chair, PCIE Deputy 

Director for Management

Office of Management and Budget

17th and Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Room 350, Eisenhower EOB

Washington, DC 20503

202-395-5963

Gaston L. Gianni, Jr., Vice Chair, 

PCIE*

Inspector General

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

801 17th Street, NW, Room 1096

Washington, DC 20434-0001

800-964-3342

Barry R. Snyder, Vice Chair, ECIE*

Inspector General

Federal Reserve Board

20th and C Street, NW, Mail Stop 300

Washington, DC 20551

800-827-3340 or 202-452-6400

Linda Springer, Controller-Nominee*

Office of Management and Budget

725 17th Street, NW

Room 9013, New EOB

Washington, DC 20503

202-395-9161

Everett Mosley, Inspector General

Agency for International Development

Ronald Reagan Building

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20523

800-230-6539 or 202-712-1023

Joyce N. Fleischman, Acting 

Inspector General

Department of Agriculture 

1400 Independence Ave., SW

Room 117-W Whitten Building

Washington, DC 20250-2301 

800-424-9121 or 202-690-1622 

John L. Helgerson, Inspector 

General

Central Intelligence Agency

Room 2X30, New Headquarters

Washington, DC 20505

Johnnie E. Frazier, Inspector General

Department of Commerce

HCHB 7898-C

14th & Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20230

800-424-5197 or 202-482-2495

J. Russell George, Inspector General

Corporation for National and Community 

Service

1201 New York Ave., NW, Suite 830

Washington, DC 20525

800-452-8210

Joseph E. Schmitz, Inspector 

General

Department of Defense

400 Army Navy Drive

Arlington, VA 22202-2884

800-424-9098 or 703-604-8546

John P. Higgins, Jr., Acting Inspector 

General

Department of Education

400 Maryland Ave., SW, Room 4006 MES

Washington, DC 20202-1510

800-647-8733 or 202-205-5770

Gregory H. Friedman, Inspector 

General

Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave., SW

Washington, DC 20585

800-541-1625 or 202-586-4073

Nikki L. Tinsley, Inspector General

Environmental Protection Agency

401 M Street, SW 

Washington, DC 20460

 888-565-8740

Grant D. Ashley, Assistant Director*

Criminal Investigative Division

Federal Bureau of Investigation

935 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Room 5012

Washington, DC 20535

202-324-4260

George J. Opfer, Inspector General

Federal Emergency Management Agency

500 C Street, SW, Suite 505

Washington, DC 20472

800-323-8603

Daniel R. Levinson, Inspector 

General

General Services Administration

18th & F Streets, NW, Room 5340

Washington, DC 20405

800-424-5210 or 202-501-1780

Amy L. Comstock, Director*

Office of Government ethics

1201 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20005-3917 

202-208-8022

Janet Rehnquist, Inspector General

Department of Health & Human Services

330 Independence Ave., SW

Washington, DC 20201

800-447-8477

Kenneth M. Donohue, Inspector 

General

Department of Housing & Urban Devel.

451 7th Street, SW, Room 8256

Washington, DC 20410-4500

800-347-3735 or 202-708-4200

Earl E. Devaney, Inspector General

Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, NW, Mail Stop 5341

Washington, DC 20240

800-424-5081 

Glenn Fine, Inspector General

Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Room 4706

Washington, DC 20530

800-869-4499

Gordon S. Heddell, Inspector 

General

Department of Labor

200 Constitution Ave., NW, Room S-1303

Washington, DC 20210

800-347-3756 or 202-693-6999

Robert W. Cobb, Inspector General

National Aeronautics & Space Admin.

300 E Street, SW, Code W, Room 8V79

Washington, DC 20546

800-424-9183

Hubert T. Bell, Inspector General

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Mail Stop T5 D28

Washington, DC 20555

800-233-3497

Dan Blair, Deputy Director*

Office of Personnel Management 

1900 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20415-0001

202-606-1001

Patrick E. McFarland, Inspector 

General

Office of Personnel Management 

1900 E Street, NW, Room 6400 

Washington, DC 20415-1100

Fraud, Waste, and Abuse: 202-606-2423

Health Care Fraud: 202-418-3300

Martin J. Dickman, Inspector 

General

Railroad Retirement Board

844 North Rush Street, Room 450

Chicago, IL 60611-2092

800-772-4258

Elaine Kaplan, Special Counsel*

Office of Special Counsel

1730 M Street, NW, Suite 300

Washington, DC 20036

Disclosure: 800-572-2249

Hatch Act Information: 800-854-2824

Whistleblower Protection: 800-572-2249

Phyllis Fong, Inspector General

Small Business Administration

409 Third Street, SW, 7th Floor

Washington, DC 20416

 800-767-0385 or 202-205-7151

James G. Huse, Jr., Inspector 

General

Social Security Administration

Altmeyer Building, Suite 300

6401 Security Boulevard

Baltimore, MD 21235

800-269-0271

Clark Kent Ervin, Inspector General

Department of State and the Broadcasting 

Board of Governors

2201 C Street, NW, Room 6817

Washington, DC 20520-6817

202-647-9450 or 800-409-9926

Kenneth M. Mead, Inspector General

Department of Transportation

400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 9210

Washington, DC 20590

800-424-9071 or 202-366-1461

Jeffrey Rush, Jr., Inspector General

Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20220

800-359-3898

Pam Gardiner, Acting Inspector 

General

Treasury Inspector General for

Tax Administration

1125 15th St., NW, Suite 700A

Washington, DC 20005

800-366-4484

G. Donald Hickman, Acting Inspector 

General

Tennessee Valley Authority

400 W. Summit Hill Drive

Knoxville, TN 37902-1499

800-323-3835

Richard J. Griffin, Inspector General

Department of Veterans Affairs

810 Vermont Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20420

800-488-8244

*Also members of the ECIE
ECIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers

70 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

ECIE Membership Addresses and Hotline Numbers

Mark W. Everson, Chair, ECIE

Deputy Director for Management

Office of Management and Budget

17th and Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Room 350, Eisenhower EOB

Washington, DC 20503 

202-395-5963

Barry R. Snyder, Vice Chair, ECIE

Inspector General

Federal Reserve Board

20th and C Street, NW, Mail Stop 300

Washington, DC 20551

800-827-3340 or 202-

452-6400

Fred E. Weiderhold, Jr., Inspector General 

Amtrak

10 G Street, NE, Suite 3W-300

Washington, DC 20002-4285

800-468-5469

Clifford H. Jennings, Inspector 

General

Appalachian Regional Commission

1666 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 215

Washington, DC 20009-1068

800-532-4611 or 202-884-7667

A. Roy Lavik, Inspector General

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581

202-418-5510

Mary B. Wyles, Inspector General

Consumer Product Safety Commission

4330 East-West Highway

Bethesda, MD 20814-4408

301-504-0573

Kenneth Konz, Inspector General

Corporation for Public Broadcasting

401 Ninth St., NW

Washington, DC 20004

800-599-2170 or 202-783-5408

Aletha L. Brown, Inspector General

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

1801 L Street, NW, Suite 3001

Washington, DC 20507

800-849-4230 

Stephen G. Smith, Inspector General

Farm Credit Administration

1501 Farm Credit Drive

McLean, VA 22102

800-437-7322 or 703-883-4316

H. Walker Feaster, III, Inspector 

General

Federal Communications Commission

445 12th Street, SW, Room 2-C762

Washington, DC 20554

202-418-0473

Lynne A. McFarland, Inspector 

General

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW, Room 940

Washington, DC 20463

202-694-1015

Edward Kelley, Inspector General

Federal Housing Finance Board

1777 F Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006

800-276-8329 or 202-408-2900

Francine C. Eichler, Inspector 

General

Federal Labor Relations Authority

607 14th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20424

800-331-3572

Tony P. Kominoth, Inspector General

Federal Maritime Commission

800 N. Capitol St., Rm. 1054

Washington, DC 20573

202-523-5865

Frederick J. Zirkel, Inspector 

General

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20580

202-326-2581

Robert G. Andary, Inspector General

Government Printing Office

N. Capitol and H Streets, NW (Stop: IG)

Washington, DC 20401

800-743-7574

Len Koczur, Acting Inspector General

Legal Services Corporation

750 First Street, NE, 11th Floor

Washington, DC 20002-4250

800-678-8868 or 202-336-8936

Paul Brachfeld, Inspector General

National Archives and Records 

Administration.

8601 Adelphi Road

College Park, MD 20740

800-786-2551 or 301-837-3000

Herbert Yolles, Inspector General

National Credit Union Admin.

1775 Duke Street

Alexandria, VA 22314-3428

800-778-4806 or 703-518-6357

Daniel L. Shaw, Inspector General

National Endowment for the Arts

1100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20506

202-682-5402

Sheldon L. Bernstein, Inspector 

General

Nat’l. Endowment for the Humanities

1100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Room 419

Washington, DC 20506

202-606-8423

Jane E. Altenhofen, Inspector 

General

National Labor Relations Board

1099 14th Street, NW, Room 9820

Washington, DC 20570

800-736-2983

Christine C. Boesz, Inspector 

General

National Science Foundation

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 1135

Arlington, VA 22230

800-428-2189

Charles D. Smith, Inspector General

Peace Corps

1111 20th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20526

800-233-5874

Deborah Stover-Springer, Acting 

Inspector General

Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation

1200 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

800-400-7242 or 202-326-4030

Walter Stachnik, Inspector General

Securities and Exchange Commission

450 Fifth Street, NW, Stop 1107

Washington, DC 20549

202-942-4460

Thomas D. Blair, Inspector General

Smithsonian Institution

Victor Bldg., Suite 4200

750 Ninth St., NW

Washington, DC 20560

202-275-1671

Kenneth F. Clarke, Inspector General

U.S. International Trade Commission

500 E Street, SW, Room 515

Washington, DC 20436

800-500-0333 or 202-205-2210

Karla W. Corcoran, Inspector 

General

United States Postal Service

1735 N. Lynn Street

Arlington, VA 22209-2005

888-USPS-OIG (888-877-7644)
Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 71

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition

Academy Inspector General Criminal Investigator Academy

AID Agency for International Development

ARC Appalachian Regional Commission

APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

CDL Commercial Drivers License

CFTC Commodity Futures Trading Commission

CFO Chief Financial Officer

CIO Chief Information Officer

CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

CNCS Corporation for National and Community Service

CPSC Consumer Product Safety Commission

CPB Corporation for Public Broadcasting

Customs U.S. Customs Service

DCIS Defense Criminal Investigative Service

DDS Disability Determination Service

DOC Department of Commerce

DOD Department of Defense

DOE Department of Energy

DOI Department of the Interior

DOJ Department of Justice

DOL Department of Labor

DOS Department of State

DOT Department of Transportation

ECIE Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

ED Department of Education

EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

E-Government Electronic Government

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

ERMS Earnings Record Maintenance System

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAM Financial Audit Manual

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

FCA Farm Credit Administration

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

FEC Federal Election Commission

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
72 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary

FFIS Foundation Financial Information System

FHA Federal Housing Authority

FHFB Federal Housing Finance Board

FLRA Federal Labor Relations Authority

FMC Federal Maritime Commission

FRB Federal Reserve Board

FSIS Food Safety and Inspection Service

FTC Federal Trade Commission

FY Fiscal Year

GAO General Accounting Office

GISRA Government Information Security Reform Act

GPEA Government Paperwork Elimination Act

GPO Government Printing Office

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act

GSA General Services Administration

HHS Department of Health and Human Services

HMNLC Hermandad Mexicana Nacional Legal Center

HRDN Human Resources Data Network

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

I&E Inspections and Evaluations

IG Inspector General

IGATI Inspectors General Auditor Training Institute

INS Immigration and Naturalization Service

IRS Internal Revenue Service

IT Information Technology

ITC International Trade Commission

JTTF Joint Terrorism Task Force

LSC Legal Services Corporation

NARA National Archives and Records Administration

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NCUA National Credit Union Administration

NEA National Endowment for the Arts

NEH National Endowment for the Humanities

NLRB National Labor Relations Board

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSF National Science Foundation

OCSE Office of Child Support Enforcement

OGE Office of Government Ethics

OIG Office of Inspector General

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary

A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001 73

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPM Office of Personnel Management

OSC Office of Special Counsel

PBGC Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

PC Peace Corps

PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PCIE President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency

PDD Presidential Decision Directive

RRB Railroad Retirement Board

RSM Retirement Systems Modernization

SBA Small Business Administration

SBU Sensitive But Unclassified

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission

SI Smithsonian Institution

SSA Social Security Administration

SSN Social Security number

TIGTA Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

Treasury Department of the Treasury

TVA Tennessee Valley Authority

UCMJ Uniform Code of Military Justice

USDA Department of Agriculture

USPS U.S. Postal Service

VA Department of Veterans Affairs

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
74 A Progress Report to the President • Fiscal Year 2001

President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency - Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency

Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary
Fiscal Year 2001 Results of OIG Efforts

The work of more than 9,600 employees of Offices of the Inspector

General government-wide during FY 2001 contributed to results that include:

• Potential savings of over $24.5 billion (includes management decisions on 

 OIG recommendations that funds be put to better use and questioned 

 costs)

• Recovery Actions of over $3.7 billion

• More than 7,600 successful prosecutions

• Suspensions or debarments of nearly 9,000 individuals or businesses

• More than 2,000 civil or personnel actions

• Almost 5,000 Indictments and Criminal Informations

• More than 70 testimonies before the Congress on issues of national interest.

These accomplishments reflect the work of the 57 Offices of 

Inspector General, whose combined FY 2001 budgets totaled 

about $ 1.4 billion.
A Progress Report to the President

PCIE ECIE 2001