SIGTARP - 1

Special Inspector General for 

TARP

2014 President’s Budget 
SIGTARP - 2

Table of Contents

Section 1 – Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 3

1A – Mission Statement.............................................................................................................. 3

1.1 – Appropriations Detail Table .............................................................................................. 3

1B – Vision, Priorities and Context............................................................................................ 3

Section 2 – Budget Adjustments and Appropriation Language............................................... 9

2.1 – Budget Adjustments Table................................................................................................. 9

2A – Budget Increases and Decreases Description..................................................................... 9

2.2 – Operating Levels Table.................................................................................................... 11

2B – Appropriations Language and Explanation of Changes................................................... 12

2C – Legislative Proposals........................................................................................................ 12

Section 3 – Budget and Performance Plan ............................................................................... 13

3A – Audit................................................................................................................................. 13

3.1.1 – Audit Budget and Performance Plan............................................................................. 15

3B – Investigations ................................................................................................................... 15

3.1.2 – Investigations Budget and Performance Plan ............................................................... 18

Section 4 – Supplemental Information...................................................................................... 19

4A – Summary of Capital Investments..................................................................................... 19
SIGTARP - 3

Section 1 – Purpose

1A – Mission Statement

To advance economic stability by promoting the efficiency and effectiveness of the management 

of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), through transparency, coordinated oversight, and 

robust enforcement against those persons and entities, whether inside or outside of government, 

who waste, steal, or abuse TARP funds.

1.1 – Appropriations Detail Table

Dollars in Thousands

 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2012 to FY 2014

Special Inspector General for TARP Enacted Annualized Request $ Change % Change

Resources 

 CR Rate 

 FTE AMOUNT FTE AMOUNT FTE AMOUNT FTE AMOUNT FTE AMOUNT

New Appropriated Resources:

Audit 83 14,626 83 14,716 83 12,220 0 (2,406) 0.00% -16.45%

Investigations 109 27,174 109 27,340 109 22,703 0 (4,471) 0.00% -16.45%

Subtotal New Appropriated Resources 192 $41,800 192 $42,056 192 $34,923 0 ($6,877) 0.00% -16.45%

Other Resources:

Unobligated Balances from Prior Years 0 2,536 0 437 0 8,663 0 6,127 NA 241.60%

Available PPIP Funds 0 1,264 0 1,618 0 1,728 0 464 NA 36.71%

Subtotal Other Resources 0 $3,800 0 $2,055 0 $10,391 0 $6,591 NA 173.45%

Total Budgetary Resources 192 $45,600 192 $44,111 192 $45,314 0 ($286) 0.00% -0.63%

Unobligated funds from prior years include funds provided by P.L. 110-343 for general operating expenses, and by 

P.L. 111-22 which provided funds to ―prioritize the performance of audits or investigations of recipients of nonrecourse Federal loans made under any‖ Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, P.L. 110-343 program.

1B – Vision, Priorities and Context

The Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) was 

established by Section 121 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (―EESA‖). 

Under EESA, the Special Inspector General has the duty, among other things, to conduct, 

supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of the purchase, management, and sale of 

assets under TARP. SIGTARP commenced operations on December 15, 2008. Of the four 

primary oversight bodies referenced in EESA, (i.e., SIGTARP, the Financial Stability Oversight 

Board, the Congressional Oversight Panel, and the Government Accountability Office), 

SIGTARP stands as the sole TARP oversight body charged with criminal law enforcement 

responsibility. In addition, SIGTARP is the only agency solely charged with the mission of:

 Transparency – Promote transparency in the Government’s response to the financial crisis 

including TARP programs;

 Oversight - Advise and provide recommendations to Treasury and the Federal banking 

regulators to facilitate effective oversight and to prevent fraud, waste and abuse;

 Robust Enforcement - Prevent, detect, investigate, and refer for prosecution cases of fraud, 

waste, and abuse related to TARP.
SIGTARP - 4

Under the authorizing provision of EESA, SIGTARP is to carry out its duties until the 

Government has sold or transferred all assets and terminated all insurance contracts acquired 

under TARP. In other words, SIGTARP will remain ―on watch‖ as long as TARP assets remain 

outstanding.

As of October 3, 2010, Treasury had obligated $474.8 billion to 13 announced TARP programs. 

Subsequent to the expiration of Treasury’s investment authority, Treasury has deobligated funds 

previously designated for some programs. As of December 31, 2012, $466.2 billion is obligated 

to TARP programs. Of that amount, $418.1 billion had been spent and $40.5 billion remained 

obligated and available to be spent. Taxpayers are owed $67.3 billion as of December 31, 2012. 

According to Treasury, as of December 31, 2012, it had written off or realized losses of $27.1

billion that taxpayers will never get back, leaving $40.2 billion in TARP funds outstanding. 

These amounts do not include $6.4 billion in TARP funds spent on housing programs, which are 

designed as a Government subsidy, with no repayments to taxpayers expected. 

SIGTARP’s oversight responsibilities includes providing recommendations related to TARP to 

Treasury and other Federal agencies to facilitate effective oversight and transparency and to 

prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. For every $1 in cumulative annual funding invested in 

SIGTARP, the American people have received $42 in orders for the return of ill-gotten gains. 

As of January 30, 2013, SIGTARP has made 114 recommendations. In addition to oversight, 

SIGTARP brings transparency through audits and evaluations. SIGTARP has published 20

audits and evaluations. 

SIGTARP continues to work hard to deliver the accountability the American people demand and 

deserve. As of January 10, 2013, SIGTARP had more than 150 ongoing criminal and civil 

investigations, many in partnership with other law enforcement agencies in order to leverage 

resources throughout the Government. 

SIGTARP supports and complements two of Treasury’s five enumerated strategic goals: (1) to 

repair and reform the financial system and support the recovery of the housing market by 

assessing the effectiveness of Treasury’s activities and (5) to manage the government’s finances 

in a fiscally responsible manner as they relate to TARP. SIGTARP’s FY 2014 budget request of 

$34,923,000 will provide resources to:

 Quickly detect, stop and investigate fraud related to TARP;

 Provide significant oversight and transparency over the largest remaining TARP investments, 

including American International Group, Inc. (AIG), General Motors Company (GM), Ally 

Financial Inc. (ALLY) and 335 financial institutions remaining in TARP as of December 31, 

2012;

 Protect taxpayer investments in the Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP) and the Term 

Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF), which are scheduled to last as late as 2017;

 Provide oversight and transparency over TARP-funded programs for which the Government 

has contracts or guarantees that last as long as 2020.

In accordance with the requirements of Section 6(f)(1) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (as 
SIGTARP - 5

amended), SIGTARP submits the following information related to the FY 2014 budget 

submission:

 The aggregate budget request for the operations of SIGTARP is $34,923,000

 The portion of this amount needed for SIGTARP training is $455,000;

 The portion of this amount needed to support the Council of the Inspectors General on 

Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is estimated at $80,000; and

 The amount requested for training satisfies all SIGTARP training needs for fiscal year 2014.

Key Accomplishments and Challenges

Since its commencement in December of 2008, SIGTARP has been extraordinarily productive: 

publishing 17 comprehensive quarterly reports to Congress concerning TARP, opening over 150

investigations, initiating 29 audits and four evaluations, issuing 20 audit and evaluation reports, 

issuing 114 recommendations, leveraging oversight resources, testifying or providing written 

testimony at more than 25 Congressional hearings, building infrastructure, and hiring staff. In 

the latter regards, SIGTARP has secured permanent office space and equipment for staff; has 

contracted with public and private vendors for procurement assistance, publication consulting, 

data processing and analysis, and office equipment and services. SIGTARP’s headquarters are 

in Washington, DC, with regional offices in New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and 

Atlanta. SIGTARP anticipates having 192 staff on board by the end of FY 2013. Staff includes

managers, lawyers, auditors, investigators, and other professionals with a wealth of experience in 

program auditing, criminal law enforcement, securities enforcement, and other relevant curricula. 

To successfully overcome hiring challenges, SIGTARP relies on direct hire authority and 

reemployed annuitant salary offset waiver authority delegated by the Office of Personnel 

Management, as well as authority provided by the Special Inspector General for the Troubled 

Asset Relief Program Act of 2009, P.L. 111-15.

Quarterly Reports to Congress: SIGTARP has issued 17 quarterly reports to Congress, 

describing the activities and plans of SIGTARP; explaining and evaluating the various TARP 

programs; reviewing the operations of the Office of Financial Stability which administers TARP; 

and recommending changes to TARP programs and procedures to increase transparency and 

effective oversight and decrease the potential for fraud, waste and abuse. SIGTARP’s reports 

satisfy the requisite reporting requirements of SIGTARP’s authorizing statute by detailing its 

operations; describing the categories of troubled assets purchased or otherwise procured by 

Treasury; explaining the reasons Treasury deemed it necessary to purchase each troubled asset; 

listing each financial institution from which such troubled assets were purchased; listing and 

detailing biographical information on each person or entity hired to manage such troubled assets; 

estimating the total amount of troubled assets purchased, the amount of troubled assets held, the 

amount of troubled assets sold, and the profit or loss incurred on each sale or disposition of each 

such troubled asset; and listing the insurance contracts issued. During 

FY 2012, SIGTARP also released two special reports, issued within the April and July quarterly 

reports and as separate reports, on the subjects of (1) TARP and SBLF and the impact on 

community banks and (2) AIG remaining in TARP as the largest TARP investment. SIGTARP 

anticipates that it will continue to release special reports in future quarterly reports, and in fact 

has done so in the January 2013 quarterly report issuing one on Ally. SIGTARP’s quarterly 

reports are available at http://www.sigtarp.gov/pages/reportsaudits.aspx.
SIGTARP - 6

As of January 30, 2013, SIGTARP’s quarterly reports include 114 detailed recommendations to 

facilitate effective oversight and transparency and to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. Treasury 

and the Federal banking regulators have implemented 35 of these recommendations and partially 

implemented 18 recommendations and 6 recommendations are in the process of being 

implemented. The current quarterly report dated January 30, 2013, includes discussions of four

additional recommendations made to Treasury in connection with a recently released evaluation 

report on excessive executive compensation. 

Investigative Activities: SIGTARP’s Investigations Division (ID) is a sophisticated whitecollar law enforcement agency. Currently, ID has more than 150 ongoing criminal and civil 

investigations, many in partnership with other law enforcement agencies in order to leverage 

resources throughout the Government. SIGTARP investigates white-collar fraud related to 

TARP. These investigations include accounting fraud, securities fraud, insider trading, bank 

fraud, mortgage fraud, mortgage modification fraud, fraudulent advance-fee schemes, false 

statements, obstruction of justice, money laundering, and tax crimes.

In August 2012, SIGTARP’s Investigations Division also passed its mandated external peer 

review with the highest rating possible, a peer review rating of compliance with the quality 

standards established by the CIGIE and the applicable Attorney General Guidelines.

Significant public developments that occur in SIGTARP’s cases may be reviewed at 

http://www.sigtarp.gov/pages/investigations.aspx.

In addition, SIGTARP’s investigations have delivered substantial results, including:

 Criminal actions against 119 individuals, including 82 senior officers Chief Executive 

Officers, owners, founders, or senior executives) of their organizations;

 Criminal convictions of 83 defendants, of whom 35 have been sentenced to prison (others are 

awaiting sentencing); 

 Civil cases against 58 individuals (including 44 senior officers) and 47 entities (in some 

instances an individual will face both criminal and civil charges);

 SIGTARP’s investigations have also resulted in sizeable recoveries and prevented the loss of 

millions of TARP dollars. This includes restitution orders entered for $3.7 billion, forfeiture 

orders entered for $170.4 million, and civil judgments and other orders entered for $281.9 

million. The ultimate recovery of these amounts is not known.

 Savings of $553 million in TARP funds that SIGTARP prevented from going to the nowfailed Colonial Bank.

Audit Activities: SIGTARP’s Audit Division (AD) conducts, supervises, and coordinates 

programmatic audits and evaluations related to TARP. The audit results identify program 

deficiencies or weaknesses and their impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of the program, 

how funds were expended, and recommendations to improve the operations of TARP and to 

prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. Since its inception, SIGTARP has initiated a total of 29 audits 

and 4 evaluations. SIGTARP has issued 20 published audits and evaluations. In addition, nine

audits and evaluations are in progress. 
SIGTARP - 7

In September 2012, SIGTARP’s Audit Division passed its mandated external peer review with 

the highest rating possible, a peer review rating of pass in accordance with Government Auditing 

Standards and guidelines established by CIGIE.

SIGTARP’s audits and the findings, including the following released since October 1, 2011, may 

be reviewed in their entirety at http://www.sigtarp.gov/pages/audit.aspx.

 ―The Special Master’s Determinations for Executive Compensation of Companies Receiving 

Exceptional Assistance Under TARP‖: On January 24, 2012, SIGTARP released this report, 

which examined the Office of the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation’s 

(―OSM‖) process and decisions for pay packages for the Top 25 employees at seven 

companies that received exceptional assistance from taxpayers under TARP. SIGTARP 

found that the Special Master could not effectively rein in excessive compensation because 

he was under the constraint that his most important goal was to get the companies to repay 

TARP and that OSM’s pay determinations are not likely to have long lasting impact at the 

seven companies that received exceptional assistance or at other companies. 

 ―Factors Affecting Implementation of the Hardest Hit Fund Program‖ (―HHF‖): On April 

12, 2012, SIGTARP released this report finding that after two years HHF has experienced 

significant delay in providing help to homeowners due to several factors including a lack of 

comprehensive planning by Treasury and a delay and limitation in participation in the 

program by large servicers and the Government Sponsored Enterprises (―GSEs‖) (Fannie 

Mae and Freddie Mac). As of December 31, 2011, the latest data available when the report 

was issued, the HHF had spent only $217.4 million to provide assistance to 30,640 

homeowners — approximately three percent of the TARP funds allocated to HHF and 

approximately seven percent of the minimum number of homeowners that the state HFAs 

estimate helping over the life of the program, which ends in 2017. Nearly all (98 percent) of 

the help provided to homeowners under the HHF has been related to unemployment 

assistance or reinstatement of past due amounts, the only types of assistance for which the 

GSEs had directed servicers to participate. Unless there is a drastic change in the assistance 

the GSEs and their conservator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will support, the HHF

may be much narrower in scope and scale than what was originally expected due to the lack 

of servicer and GSE support for certain programs. Without significant change, while the 

HHF may be able to reach unemployed homeowners as was originally intended, it is likely to 

be limited in addressing negative equity for homeowners who are underwater.

 

 The Net Present Value (NPV) Test’s Impact on the Home Affordable Modification Program

(HAMP): On June 18, 2012, SIGTARP released this report which identified concerns, based 

upon its most recent analysis from its sample, with the NPV test that may stand as barriers to 

homeowners getting much-needed help from HAMP.

 Excessive Executive Compensation: In the January 2013 report, ―Treasury Continues 

Approving Excessive Pay for Top Executives at Bailed-Out Companies‖, SIGTARP 

reviewed the process and decisions of Treasury’s Office of the Special Master for TARP 

Executive Compensation (―OSM‖) in setting 2012 pay packages at the three remaining 

TARP exceptional assistance companies: American International Group, Inc. (―AIG‖), 
SIGTARP - 8

General Motors Company (―GM‖), and GMAC, Inc., later rebranded as Ally Financial Inc. 

(―Ally‖). SIGTARP found that Treasury failed to make any meaningful reform from 

SIGTARP’s prior findings or fully implement SIGTARP’s recommendations. It is not 

surprising that without meaningful reform to its process, Treasury continued to approve 

excessive pay packages in 2012 for the top 25 employees at AIG, GM, and Ally. Indeed, in 

2012, Treasury approved pay packages of $3 million or more for 54 percent of the 69 Top 25 

employees at AIG, GM, and Ally – 23 percent of these top executives (16 of 69) received 

Treasury-approved pay packages of $5 million or more, and 30 percent (21 of 69) received 

from $3 million to $4.9 million. In fact, in 2012, Treasury approved pay of more than $1 

million for all but one top 25 employee at AIG, GM, and Ally. The report also included four 

new recommendations to Treasury regarding compensation.
SIGTARP - 9

Section 2 – Budget Adjustments and Appropriation Language

2.1 – Budget Adjustments Table

Dollars in Thousands

Special Inspector General for TARP FTE Amount

FY 2012 Enacted 192 $41,800

FY 2013 Annualized CR Rate 192 $42,056

Changes to Base:

Adjustment to Request - ($1,831)

Non-Recur CR Increase - ($256)

Non-Recur Operations Partly Funded from No-Year Resources from 

FY 2013 - ($1,575)

Maintaining Current Levels (MCLs): - $433

Pay-Raise - $240

Non-Pay - $193

Efficiency Savings: - ($5,815)

Operations Partially Funded from No-Year Resources - ($5,815)

Subtotal Changes to Base - ($7,213)

Total FY 2014 Base 192 $34,843

Program Changes:

Program Increases: - $80

Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency - $80

Total FY 2014 Request 192 $34,923

2A – Budget Increases and Decreases Description

Adjustment to Request ..............................................................................-$1,831,000 / +0 FTE

Non-Recur CR Increase -$256,000 / +0 FTE 

The across-the-board 0.612 percent increase provided in the CR through March 27, 2013 is nonrecurred.

Non-Recur Operations Partly Funded from No-Year Resources from FY 2013 -$1,575,000 / +0 

FTE 

Reduction in general operating costs will occur from the annual account. SIGTARP will 

continue to use its mandatory funding.

Maintaining Current Levels (MCLs) .........................................................+$433,000 / +0 FTE

Pay-Raise +$240,000 / +0 FTE 

The President’s Budget proposes a 1 percent pay-raise for federal employees in 2014.

Non-Pay +$193,000 / +0 FTE 

Funds are requested for inflation adjustments in non-labor costs such as travel, contracts, rent, 

supplies, and equipment.

Efficiency Savings ......................................................................................-$5,815,000 / +0 FTE

Operations Partially Funded from No-Year Resources -$5,815,000 / +0 FTE 

Reduction in general operating costs to occur from the annual account. SIGTARP will instead 

continue to use its mandatory funding.
SIGTARP - 10

Program Increases .........................................................................................+$80,000 / +0 FTE

Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency +$80,000 / +0 FTE 

The Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) has assessed SIGTARP 

$80,000 for FY 2014 to support coordinated Government-wide activities that identify and review 

areas of weakness and vulnerability in Federal programs and operations with respect to fraud, 

waste, and abuse.
SIGTARP - 11

2.2 – Operating Levels Table

Dollars in Thousands

Special Inspector General for TARP FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

 Annualized President's

Object Classification Actual CR Rate Budget

11.1 - Full-time permanent 16,072 17,821 19,829

11.3 - Other than full-time permanent 2,710 2,764 2,578

11.5 - Other personnel compensation 1,727 1,898 1,806

11.9 - Personnel Compensation (Total) 20,509 22,483 24,213

12.0 - Personnel benefits 5,147 5,797 6,392

Total Personnel and Compensation Benefits $25,656 $28,280 $30,605

21.0 - Travel and transportation of persons 1,209 1,230 1,066

23.2 - Rental payments to others 226 250 254

23.3 - Communication, utilities, and misc charges 72 68 67

24.0 - Printing and reproduction 189 145 145

25.1 - Advisory and assistance services 3,224 4,059 3,008

25.2 - Other services 577 559 503

25.3 - Other purchases of goods & serv frm Govt accounts 7,795 8,141 8,174

26.0 - Supplies and materials 565 462 456

31.0 - Equipment 865 916 1,035

42.0 - Insurance claims and indemnities 0 1 1

Total Non-Personnel 14,722 15,831 14,709

Total Budgetary Resources $40,378 $44,111 $45,314

Budget Activities:

Audit 14,354 15,682 16,123

Investigations 26,024 28,429 29,191

Total Budgetary Resources $40,378 $44,111 $45,314

FTE 164 192 192

This table includes all available resources, including annual and available multi-year appropriations, reimbursable resources,

offsetting collections and user fees.
SIGTARP - 12

2B – Appropriations Language and Explanation of Changes

Appropriations Language Explanation of Changes

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE TROUBLED 

ASSET RELIEF PROGRAM

Federal funds

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Special Inspector 

General in carrying out the provisions of the Emergency 

Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–343), 

$34,923,000.

2C – Legislative Proposals

SIGTARP has no legislative proposals.
SIGTARP - 13

Section 3 – Budget and Performance Plan

3A – Audit

($12,220,000 from direct appropriations): 

SIGTARP estimates that $3,903,000 from unobligated balances from prior-years will be used in 

FY 2014 for Audit activities. Public Law 111-22 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act 

of 2008 (―EESA‖) provided SIGTARP with an initial allocation of $50 million, (available until 

expended) to fund its operations. In FY 2014 SIGTARP estimates that $3,032,000 of these 

remaining funds will be used to cover specific operating expenses in support of the Audit 

program since appropriated funds are insufficient for these expenses. Public Law 111-22 

provided an additional $15 million to prioritize the performance of audits or investigations of 

recipients of non-recourse Federal loans, including the Public Private Investment Program 

(―PPIP‖) and the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility Program (―TALF‖) made under 

any ―Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, Public Law 110-343 program. These 

funds are available until expended; $871,000 will be used in FY 2014 for personnel and other 

operating expenses related to PPIP/TALF. 

The Audit program supports SIGTARP’s priority of coordinated oversight by providing 

recommendations to Treasury so that TARP programs can be designed or modified to facilitate 

effective oversight and transparency to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. This program also 

supports and complements Treasury’s strategic goal to repair and reform the financial system 

and support the recovery of the housing market by assessing the effectiveness of Treasury’s 

activities in TARP. It also supports Treasury’s strategic goal to manage the government’s 

finances in a fiscally responsible manner as they relate to TARP.

The Audit Division (AD) conducts, supervises, and coordinates programmatic audits with 

respect to Treasury’s operation of TARP as well as evaluations of TARP policies and 

procedures. With respect to auditing, the division is designed to provide SIGTARP with 

maximum flexibility in the size, timing, and scope of audits so that, without sacrificing the rigor 

of the methodology, audit results, whenever possible, can be generated rapidly both for general 

transparency’s sake and so that the resulting data can be used to improve the operations of 

TARP. 

Regarding policy review and technical assistance, a particular focus of AD is ensuring that 

appropriate internal controls are in place and are complied with, both by Treasury in its 

management of TARP and by the recipients of TARP funds, including vendors and the entities in 

which money is invested. Where controls or compliance are found to be lacking, or where 

particular aspects or policies risk being ineffective at reaching TARP’s goals, AD assists the 

Special Inspector General to fashion recommendations to resolve such issues. 

The goal owner for this budget activity is Bruce Gimbel, Acting Assistant Deputy Special 

Inspector General Audit, and Evaluations.
SIGTARP - 14

Description of Performance: 

One of the primary functions of SIGTARP is to ensure that members of Congress remain 

adequately and promptly informed of developments in TARP initiatives and of SIGTARP’s 

oversight activities. To fulfill that role, the Special Inspector General and staff meet regularly 

with Congress and staff. In FY 2012 SIGTARP met its performance goal, ―Congressional 

Requests for Testimony Completed‖ by completing four testimonies by July 10, 2012. 

SIGTARP anticipates that Congress will continue to have interest in SIGTARP’s work and will 

continue to request at least four testimonies in FY 2013 and FY 2014.

The performance goal, ―Number of Completed Audit Products‖ includes issuing audit reports, 

and memoranda that promote the efficiency and effectiveness of the TARP. SIGTARP 

developed an audit plan using a risk-based planning process to identify projects that will provide 

the maximum benefit to TARP, Congress and the taxpayers. The maximum benefit is to assure 

the general public that TARP funds are not expended by recipients or other entities on waste, 

fraud, or abuse. Presently there are three on-going audits and two evaluations that have been 

requested by Congress in addition to SIGTARP’s four self-initiated reviews. The ongoing audits 

and evaluations cover a variety of TARP-related areas including the Capital Purchase Program, 

General Motors, Hardest Hit Fund and Public Private Investment Program Trading Activity. 

SIGTARP completed 13 audit products in FY 2012, exceeding the goal of 12 during the 

reporting period. The number of audit products is reduced to 10 in FY 2013 and continue at the 

same level in FY 2014. Throughout this process, SIGTARP’s risk assessment plan will be used 

to determine audit requirements as well as requests made by Congress and the required quarterly 

report. 

To reflect AD’s performance and the fact that corrective actions span multiple periods, 

SIGTARP has as a metric ―Percent of Recommendations Agreed to by the Office of Financial 

Stability‖ for FY 2013 with a target goal of 70 percent. Since SIGTARP does not have control 

over Treasury’s decision to implement SIGTARP recommendations, this metric will be 

discontinued in FY 2014. SIGTARP will continue to make recommendations to improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of TARP and will continue to work with Treasury and the Federal 

banking regulators to implement these recommendations and follow the status of the planned 

corrective actions that span multiple reporting periods. 

SIGTARP’s recommendations may be reviewed in their entirety at

http://www.sigtarp.gov/Quarterly%20Reports/January_30_2013_Report_to_Congress.pdf pages 

185-203.
SIGTARP - 15

3.1.1 – Audit Budget and Performance Plan

Dollars in Thousands

Audit Budget Activity

Resource Level FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Annualized CR 

Rate

Request

 Appropriated Resources $0 $9,900 $10,581 $14,626 $14,716 $12,220

Budget Activity Total $0 $9,900 $10,581 $14,626 $14,716 $12,220

Measure FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Target

Congressional Requests for 

Testimony Completed (Units)

N/A N/A 9 7 5 4 4 4

Number of Completed Audit 

Products (Units)

N/A N/A 3 9 13 13 10 10

Percent of Recommendations 

Agreed to by the Office of 

Financial Stability

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70.0 DISC

Key: N/A - Not in Effect; DISC - Discontinued; B - Baseline

3B – Investigations

($22,703,000 from direct appropriations): 

SIGTARP estimates that $6,488,000 from unobligated balances from prior-years will be used in 

FY 2014 for Investigations activities. Public Law 111-22 of the Emergency Economic 

Stabilization Act of 2008 (―EESA‖) provided SIGTARP with an initial allocation of $50 million, 

(available until expended) to fund its operations. In FY 2014 SIGTARP estimates that 

$5,631,000 of these remaining funds will be used to cover specific operating expenses in support 

of the Investigations program since appropriated funds are insufficient for these expenses. 

Public Law 111-22 provided an additional $15 million to prioritize the performance of audits or 

investigations of recipients of non-recourse Federal loans, including the Public Private 

Investment Program (―PPIP‖) and the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility Program 

(―TALF‖) made under any ―Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, Public Law 110-

343 program. These funds are available until expended; $857,000 will be used in FY 2014 for 

personnel and other operating expenses related to PPIP/TALF. 

The Investigations program supports SIGTARP’s priority of robust enforcement by preventing, 

detecting, investigating, and referring for prosecution cases of fraud, waste, and abuse related to 

TARP. This program also supports and complements Treasury’s strategic goal to repair and 

reform the financial system and support the recovery of the housing market by assessing the 

effectiveness of Treasury’s activities. It also supports Treasury’s strategic goal to manage the 

government’s finances in a fiscally responsible manner as they relate to TARP.
SIGTARP - 16

The Investigations Division (ID) supervises and conducts criminal and civil investigations into 

those persons and entities, whether inside or outside of government, who waste, steal, or abuse 

TARP funds or programs. The division is comprised of experienced financial and corporate 

fraud investigators, including not only special agents, but also forensic analysts, and 

investigative attorneys. This structure provides SIGTARP with a broad array of expertise and 

perspectives in developing the most sophisticated investigations. In the interests of maximizing 

criminal and civil enforcement, ID coordinates closely with other law enforcement agencies with 

the goal of forming law enforcement partnerships, including task force relationships, across the 

Federal government and state governments to leverage SIGTARP’s expertise and unique 

position. 

The goal owner for this budget activity is Scott Rebein, Deputy Special Inspector General 

Investigations Division.

Description of Performance: 

One of SIGTARP’s primary investigative priorities is to operate the SIGTARP Hotline that 

provides a simple, accessible way for the American public to report concerns, suggestions, 

information, and evidence of violations of criminal and civil laws in connection with TARP. 

From its inception in February 2009, the SIGTARP Hotline has received and analyzed more than 

31,756 Hotline contacts. During FY 2012, considerable effort was spent reviewing and referring 

complaints to meet the public’s demand for action regarding the mortgage crisis. In FY 2012 the 

―Percentage of Hotline Complaints Responded to or Referred for Investigation or Further Action 

within 14 days of Receipt‖ were 77, exceeding the annual goal of 70 percent. These contacts run 

the gamut from expressions of concern over the economy to serious allegations of fraud 

involving TARP. Overall, there are more than 150 ongoing investigations as of January 10, 

2013, a number of which were generated as a result of a Hotline contact. These investigations 

include accounting fraud, securities fraud, insider trading, bank fraud, mortgage fraud, mortgage 

modification fraud, fraudulent advance-fee schemes, false statements, obstruction of justice, 

money laundering, and tax crimes. SIGTARP anticipates a 70 percent referral rate for FY 2013 

and FY 2014. In addition, SIGTARP continues to streamline the complaint referral process 

through the use of information technology, additional training for staff members, and concerted 

outreach to prosecutorial agencies.

The ―Percentage of Investigations Accepted for Consideration by Prosecutors‖, including 

criminal or civil investigations that a federal, state, or local prosecutor has formally accepted for 

consideration for criminal prosecution or civil or administrative action, was 95 percent in 

FY 2012, exceeding the target of 55 percent. This success is directly related to the still 

significant public interest in TARP related cases and the well-crafted investigative files 

developed by SIGTARP’s Investigations Division. SIGTARP’s investigative strategies have 

already produced significant cases; bringing to justice those who have sought to profit criminally 

from TARP. As of January 10, 2013, the results are: criminal charges against 119 individuals, 

including 82 senior officers (CEOs, owners, founders, or senior executives) of their 

organizations; criminal convictions of 83 defendants, of whom 35 have been sentenced to prison 

(others are awaiting sentencing); civil cases against 58 individuals (including 44 senior officers) 

and 47 entities (in some instances an individual will face both criminal and civil charges); orders 

of restitution and forfeiture and civil judgments entered for more than $4.15 billion. Although the 
SIGTARP - 17

ultimate recovery of these amounts is not known, SIGTARP has already assisted in the recovery 

of $160.9 million; a savings of $553 million in TARP funds that SIGTARP prevented from 

going to the now-failed Colonial Bank. SIGTARP anticipates a 60 percent acceptance rate in 

FY 2013. SIGTARP has seen an increase in press coverage due to several high profile mortgage 

fraud and bank fraud cases, resulting in numerous arrests and convictions. This has caused a 

sustained interest among prosecutors when considering TARP related cases for prosecution; 

therefore this performance metric has been increased from 60 percent to 70 percent in FY 2014. 

The Investigations Division will continue to aggressively engage the U.S. Attorneys across the 

nation capable of prosecuting sophisticated white-collar criminal investigations involving TARPrelated fraud to ensure their understanding of the importance and viability of SIGTARP 

investigations, the magnitude, and complexity of the fraud in our investigations, and the impact 

these investigations have on the economic crisis. SIGTARP investigations have a major 

deterrent effect not only on those currently participating in financial fraud, but also deterring 

those considering participation in future fraud schemes.

A preliminary investigation is the period during which the investigator gathers fundamental 

information to evaluate the need to continue the case by converting it to a full investigation or to 

close the case. In FY 2012, the ―Percentage of Preliminary Investigations Converted to Full 

Investigations within 180 days‖ was 77 percent, exceeding the goal of 45 percent. SIGTARP’s

success is attributed to proactively identifying indicators of fraud related to TARP, receiving 

substantial case leads and complaint referrals from other agencies as ID has developed its 

identity as a premier white collar crime law enforcement agency. As ID has expanded, so has 

the depth and complexity of the cases under investigation. SIGTARP has increased staff to 

enable ID to handle its growing inventory and to expedite these investigations. In FY 2013, 

SIGTARP will increase this metric to 50 percent because as ID’s workforce has expanded, so has 

the ability to respond quickly to allegations and to devote the necessary resources. SIGTARP 

has involved the prosecutors in the early stages of the preliminary investigations to ensure that 

allegations, if proven, will be prosecuted. This resulted in a greater number of preliminary 

investigations being converted to full investigations or closed within the 180-day timeframe; 

therefore this performance metric will increase to 50 percent in FY 2013 and to 60 percent in 

FY 2014. The Investigations Division will continue to prioritize leads and fraud allegations and 

make effective, informed decisions when opening preliminary investigations to ensure an 

appropriate commitment of investigative resources are available to devote to these investigations.

As previously mentioned, SIGTARP ID coordinates closely with other law enforcement agencies 

with the goal of forming law enforcement partnerships, across Federal, state and local 

government, to leverage SIGTARP’s expertise and unique position. Frequently other Federal 

law enforcement partners may pursue a lead or open a case and then request SIGTARP’s 

expertise and resources to lead the case. In FY 2012, the ―Percentage of cases that are joint 

agency/task force Investigations‖ with other law enforcement agencies was 65 percent, 

exceeding the target of 40 percent. This was driven by the significant number of high profile 

cases opened in FY 2012. SIGTARP continues to work both as an independent entity and with 

other law enforcement partners as cases dictate. SIGTARP is projecting a goal of 45 percent for 

FY 2013 and FY 2014.
SIGTARP - 18

3.1.2 – Investigations Budget and Performance Plan

Dollars in Thousands

Investigations Budget Activity

Resource Level FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Annualized CR 

Rate

Request

 Appropriated Resources $0 $13,339 $25,433 $27,174 $27,340 $22,703

Budget Activity Total $0 $13,339 $25,433 $27,174 $27,340 $22,703

Measure FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Target

Percentage of Hotline Complaints 

Responded to or Referred for 

Investigation or further action 

within 14 days of Receipt (%)

N/A N/A 77 74 76 77 70 70

Percentage of Investigations 

Accepted for Consideration by 

Prosecutors (%)

N/A N/A 95 100 94 95 60 70

Percentage of Preliminary 

Investigations Converted to Full 

Investigations Within 180 Days 

(%)

N/A N/A 50. 80 88 77 50 60

Percentage of cases that are joint 

agency/task force investigations 

(%)

N/A N/A 60 50 40 65 45 45

Key: N/A - Not in Effect; DISC - Discontinued; B – Baseline
SIGTARP - 19

Section 4 – Supplemental Information

4A – Summary of Capital Investments

IT funding has been critical in enabling SIGTARP to fulfill its mission of transparency, 

coordinated oversight, and robust enforcement. SIGTARP uses the services provided by 

Treasury Departmental Offices and Government Security Operations Center as part of 

Treasury’s headquarters operations. SIGTARP relies on the Treasury’s Office of the CIO and 

Departmental Offices Operations to provide a secure, independent infrastructure that is fully 

capable of supporting the mission and administrative requirements of a completely functional, 

bureau-level government agency with the technology requirements appropriate to an audit and 

investigative organization. 

SIGTARP’s IT strategy was to establish its mission systems and IT infrastructure in the initial 

years of operation with plans to limit its IT investments beginning in FY 2012 to updates, 

modifications, maintenance and equipment refreshment, consistent with its role as a temporary 

agency. For FY 2014, SIGTARP expects only ongoing infrastructure charges for headquarters 

and for remote office operations and routine maintenance, enhancements and modifications of its 

existing systems required to support its mission. SIGTARP has no capital investments.

Non-Major IT Investment Summary

The non-major IT investments are for the acquisition, installation, integration, training and 

modifications of mission essential systems such as hotline information management, 

investigative case management, investigations database, counsel case management, forensic 

system management, SIGTARP website and intranet, video teleconferencing, and asset 

management which were established by SIGTARP because they were not provided by Treasury. 

SIGTARP migrated most of these systems to Treasury for hosting services and began to use 

Treasury’s shared services offerings (―cloud computing‖) for content management such as 

document management, Freedom of Information Act tracking, and records management. 

Non-IT Investment Summary

SIGTARP’s non-IT investments include technical surveillance equipment. The Investigations 

Division requires specialized surveillance equipment in order to conduct criminal investigations 

in cooperation with the Federal Bureau of Investigations, Internal Revenue Service-Criminal 

Investigation, other Federal agencies, and state/local law enforcement agencies. This specialized 

equipment ensures officer/agent safety to obtain evidence for prosecution while allowing 

interoperability with equipment used by the other agencies. 

A summary of capital investment resources, including major information technology and nontechnology investments, can be viewed/downloaded here: http://www.treasury.gov/about/budgetperformance/Pages/summary-of-capital-investments.aspx