jurisdiction: US

text: b' United States Department of State\n and the Broadcasting Board of Governors\n\n Office of Inspector General\nOffice of Inspector General\n\n Semiannual Report to the Congress\n\n\n April 1 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c Summary of OIG Accomplishments\n\n\nFinancial Results:\nQuestioned costs\n Issued during the reporting period $ 5,816,000\n Management decision during the reporting period $34,000\nRecommendations for funds to be put to better use\n Issued during the reporting period $0\n Management decision during the reporting period $0\n\nInvestigative recoveries $881,055\n\nInvestigative Results:\nCases opened ............................................................................................................. 109 \n\nCases closed ............................................................................................................... 36 \n\nJudicial actions ............................................................................................................ 189\n\nAdministrative actions................................................................................................. 3\n\nHotline and complaint activity ..................................................................................... 399\n\n\n\n\n\nReports Issued: 52\n\n Picture on the front cover: Embassy Amman, Jordan\n Site of OIG\xe2\x80\x99s new Middle East Regional Of\xef\xac\x81ce\n Picture provided by Of\xef\xac\x81ce of Overseas Buildings Operations\n\n Requests for additional copies of this\n publication should be addressed to:\n\n Of\xef\xac\x81ce of Inspector General\n U.S. Department of State\n OIG/EX, Room 810\n 1700 North Moore Street\n Arlington, VA 22209\n\n\n\n Department of State Publication 11462\n Of\xef\xac\x81ce of Inspector General\n\x0c TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n\n\nMESSAGE FROM THE ACTING INSPECTOR GENERAL...................................... 1\n\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................3\n\nCONGRESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AND OUTREACH ................................................9\n\n\nDEPARTMENT OF STATE\nMIDDLE EAST REGIONAL OFFICE ........................................................................21\n\nAUDITS........................................................................................................................23\n\nINSPECTIONS .............................................................................................................35\n\nINVESTIGATIONS .....................................................................................................61\n\nAPPENDIX 1: DEPARTMENT OF STATE INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITES ............67\n\nAPPENDIX 2: REPORTS ISSUED .............................................................................69\n\nAPPENDIX 3: SAVINGS AND MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES\n\n Table 1: Questioned Costs..................................................................................73\n\n Table 2: Funds To Be Put To Better Use .........................................................74\n\nAPPENDIX 4: RESOLUTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n Previously Reported Significant Recommendations Pending Final Action .......75\n\n Revised Management Decisions ........................................................................82\n\n Significant Management Success in Resolving and Implementing\n Recommendations .........................................................................................82\n\n Summary of Audit Reports Without Management Decision for More Than\n\n Six Months ....................................................................................................83\n\nAPPENDIX 5: AUDITS PERFORMED BY CONTRACTORS..................................87\n\nAPPENDIX 6: MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE CHALLENGE................89\n\n\nBROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS\nINSPECTIONS .............................................................................................................93\n\nAPPENDIX 1: BBG INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITES..................................................95\n\nAPPENDIX 2: REPORTS ISSUED .............................................................................97\n\nAPPENDIX 3: SAVINGS AND MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES\n\n Table 1: Questioned Costs....................... .........................................................99\n\n Table 2: Funds To Be Put To Better Use .......................................................100\n\n\nLIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................101\n\n\x0c\x0c MESSAGE FROM THE ACTING INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\n I am pleased to present this Office of Inspec-\n tor General (OIG) semiannual report for the\n Department of State (Department) and the\n Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) for\n the period ending September 30, 2008, as re-\n quired by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as\n amended.\n\n The last time I had the pleasure of signing out\n the OIG Semiannual Report to the Congress\n as acting Inspector General was 1994. When\n I returned to OIG this past June, I found an\n organization far different from the one I left 13\n years ago. More than a decade of essentially flat\n Acting Inspector General, \n\n Harold W. Geisel\n\t\n budgets had decimated OIG\xe2\x80\x99s personnel, infra-\n structure, and morale. OIG\xe2\x80\x99s FY 2007 budget\nwas at basically the same level it had been when I arrived in OIG in 1994, before the\n1996 merger of the United States Information Agency (USIA) Office of Inspector\nGeneral and its staff and responsibilities. As a result of this and other challenges,\nstaffing was at its lowest point since the early years of the establishment of an inde-\npendent OIG at the Department.\n\nSince then, I am happy to say, OIG has set itself solidly on the road to recovery.\nWith a strong cadre of dedicated employees and nearly $24 million in new funding\nsince 2007, OIG has increased staffing, begun rebuilding its core capabilities, and\nexpanded its fledgling overseas presence. Our Middle East Regional Office (MERO)\nin Amman, Jordan, is well-established and rapidly turning out a series of key reviews\nthat are having a real impact on Department operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the\nMiddle East. Office of Investigations (INV) staffing has more than doubled in the\nlast year, and INV will be adding a Middle East division in the coming months. Be-\ntween now and the end of the calendar year, MERO and INV will be putting boots\non the ground in Baghdad, Kabul, and Cairo\xe2\x80\x94substantially enhancing OIG\xe2\x80\x99s ability\nto provide oversight and assistance for high-cost, high-risk Department and BBG\nprograms in the Middle East. We are grateful to Congress for the support that has\nmade this expansion possible. I also would like to commend the staff of the OIG\nfor the accomplishments, professionalism, and dedication they have demonstrated\nduring this transitional period.\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 1\n\x0c Obviously, one does not overcome the effects of a decade of inadequate resources\n in less than a year. OIG staffing, despite significant growth in recent months, is still\n nearly 20 percent below the level it was when the Department and USIA OIGs\n merged in 1996. The $20.5 million in supplemental and bridge funding that has made\n this rejuvenation possible expires at the end of FY 2009, with no guarantee that\n it will continue into future fiscal years\xe2\x80\x94particularly given the burden of the eco-\n nomic situation facing the U.S. Government and the American people. This situation\n requires that our efforts to restore capabilities be prudently and efficiently managed\n to provide flexibility as we work to provide a compelling return on investment that\n justifies the confidence and encouragement that Congress has demonstrated with\n the funding provided thus far. We look forward to the continued support of the\n Congress as we assist the Department and BBG to improve management; strengthen\n integrity and accountability; and ensure the most efficient, effective, and economical\n use of their resources.\n\n\n\n\n Harold W. Geisel\n Acting Inspector General\n\t\n\n\n\n\n2 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\n\nThis semiannual reporting period was marked by a limited Office of Inspector\nGeneral (OIG) review of Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) controls over access to\npassport records in the Department of State\xe2\x80\x99s (Department) Passport Information\nElectronic Records System (PIERS), issuance of the first two reports from OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nnew Middle East Regional Office (MERO), and inspections of the Department\xe2\x80\x99s\nBureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO). In furtherance of its mission to\npromote effective management, accountability, and positive change in the Depart-\nment, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), and the foreign affairs commu-\nnity, OIG conducted audits, inspections, and investigations resulting in $5.9 million\nin cost efficiencies, fines, and recoveries; six convictions and three administrative\nactions from investigations; and issuance of 52 reports with recommendations to\nimprove Department and BBG programs and operations. A full list of reports issued\nby OIG during this period can be found in Appendix 2 of each agency section of\nthis report. This report summarizes work carried out by OIG during the period\nApril 1 through September 30, 2008.\n\n\n\nPassport Information Electronic Records System\nIn March 2008, after reports of breaches of a presidential candidate\xe2\x80\x99s passport\nrecords, the OIG Office of Audits initiated a limited review of CA controls over\naccess to the Passport Information Electronic Records System (PIERS) to determine\nwhether the Department adequately protects passport records and data contained in\nPIERS from unauthorized access and responds effectively when incidents of unau-\nthorized access occur. OIG made 22 recommendations to address the control weak-\nnesses found, including the development of policies and procedures to accurately\nidentify the users of passport information, to detect unauthorized access to passport\nand applicant information, and to respond effectively when unauthorized access has\nbeen determined. All recommendations are considered resolved, but remain open\npending further action.\n\nOn July 10, 2008, Acting Inspector General Harold Geisel and Assistant Inspector\nGeneral for Audits Mark Duda testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on the\nJudiciary on the final OIG report Controls and Notification for Access to Passport Records\nin the Department of State\xe2\x80\x99s Passport Information Electronic Records System (PIERS). In his\ntestimony, the Acting Inspector General cited the \xe2\x80\x9cmany control weaknesses\xe2\x80\x9d that\nOIG had found regarding \xe2\x80\x9cthe prevention and detection of unauthorized access\nto passport and applicant information and the subsequent response and disciplin-\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 3\n\x0cary processes when a potential unauthorized access is substantiated.\xe2\x80\x9d The Acting\nInspector General said that the Department \xe2\x80\x9cshould make resources available to\nconduct the [necessary vulnerability and risk] assessments\xe2\x80\x9d of all passport systems\nas quickly as possible and commended CA and the Bureau of Administration for the\nimmediate actions taken.\n\nIn related work, OIG conducted an investigation of a Department contract employ-\nee who improperly accessed PIERS by looking up the passport files of presidential\ncandidates, as well as other individuals, for nonofficial purposes. The investigation\ndetermined that the contract employee electronically accessed through PIERS ap-\nproximately 200 different passport applications without authorization. The contract\nemployee was terminated from his assignment with the contractor and pleaded guilty\nto unauthorized computer access in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1030(a)(2)(B).\n\n\n\nMiddle East Regional Office\nIn January 2008, OIG established its first overseas office at the American Embassy in\nAmman, Jordan. During this reporting period, MERO issued reports on the Depart-\nment\xe2\x80\x99s management of the Iraqi special immigrant visa (SIV) program and the Iraqi\nrefugee resettlement program.\n\nA MERO evaluation to determine whether the Department is effectively managing\nthe Iraqi SIV programs found that the Department effectively met congressional al-\nlocations for issuing SIVs to former Iraqi interpreters and translators, but more than\n25 percent of approved applicants did not meet the program\xe2\x80\x99s criteron of working\nprimarily as an interpreter or translator. The Department was still in the process of\nformulating guidance to bureaus and embassies in the region on administering the\nnew SIV program. OIG identified resource allocation, eligibility screening, and fraud\nprevention as significant challenges facing the program.\n\nMERO also evaluated whether the Department is effectively managing the Iraqi\nrefugee resettlement program found that the U.S. Government is on track to meet,\nand possibly exceed, its FY 2008 goal of resettling 12,000 Iraqi refugees in the\nUnited States. However, the continued cooperation of the Syrian Government and a\nstable security environment in Lebanon are necessary to conduct refugee-processing\noperations. OIG identified a number of factors indicating that a smaller-scale pro-\ncessing operation, geared toward addressing the relatively limited number of compel-\nling cases that are unable to process out of Amman, may be more appropriate for\nBaghdad.\n\n\n\n4 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cOffice of Audits\nDuring this reporting period, OIG auditors completed the last of the mandated\nreviews of export controls, conducted jointly with the Inspectors General of the\nDepartments of Commerce, Defense, Energy, Homeland Security, and the Trea-\nsury; the Central Intelligence Agency; and the United States Postal Service. From\n2000 through 2006, the OIGs jointly issued nine interagency reports and 40 agency-\nspecific reports containing 273 recommendations to improve Federal export con-\ntrol policies and procedures, 29 of which were made to the Department. The 2008\ninteragency report determined that action on 234 of the recommendations, including\n28 of the recommendations addressed to the Department, had been completed. The\nremaining recommendation, stating that the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Directorate of Defense\nTrade Controls should \xe2\x80\x9cestablish performance measures that detail benchmarks and\ntimeframes for reducing and eliminating the number of unfavorable post-license\nend-use checks,\xe2\x80\x9d remains unresolved while the office considers \xe2\x80\x9cwhether such mea-\nsures, along with time-lines and benchmarks, would be of value in its compliance and\nlicensing functions.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nIndependent external contractors also issued reports and related management letters\non the 2007 and 2006 financial statements of the Department; the International\nBoundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, U.S. Section; and the\nForeign Service Retirement and Disability Fund. Under the provisions of Office of\nManagement and Budget (OMB) Circulars A-122, A-110, and A-133, certified public\naccounting firms contracted by OIG performed agreed-upon procedures of indirect\ncost rates proposed by seven Department grantees, identifying over $5 million in un-\nsupported questioned costs. OIG also completed 14 analytical desk reviews of single\naudit reports for six entities, with Department expenditures totaling nearly $35.7 mil-\nlion, to ensure whether the audit reports met reporting standards and requirements\nand to identify issues requiring management attention.\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspections\nDuring this semiannual reporting period, OIG inspectors conducted inspections of\nOBO and full and limited-scope inspections of 25 overseas missions.\n\nThe OBO inspection found an organization that had successfully completed 54 new\nembassy compounds (NEC) and annex office buildings between 2001 and 2008 but\nwas facing major challenges. The Director Ad Interim took charge in January 2008,\nquickly correcting a number of organizational deficiencies; improving coordination\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 5\n\x0cand communication between regional bureaus, overseas posts, and other agencies;\nand pursuing major realignments of functions and responsibilities, including efforts\nto fix major operational problems in information management and human resources.\n\nInspectors found that the Department\xe2\x80\x99s goal of constructing 150 NECs by 2018, at\na total cost of $17.5 billion, may be unrealistic, given escalating construction, com-\nmodity, and labor costs and the depreciation of the dollar. In response to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nglobal customer survey of diplomatic missions and a detailed analysis of 12 com-\npleted NECs, many posts commented favorably on the new facilities, but expressed\nconcerns about commissioning, post-occupancy use, and NEC maintenance. OBO\xe2\x80\x99s\norganizational structure was overly complex, with a lack of effective coordination,\ncommunication, and accountability, and the contracting process was cumbersome\nand complicated. Costs to support and maintain the Department\xe2\x80\x99s legacy facilities\nwere increasing, with no effective systems in place to plan, budget, and track opera-\ntion and maintenance costs.\n\nAn October 8, 2008, cable (STATE 00109155) from OBO to all diplomatic and con-\nsular posts said that the OIG report on the inspection of OBO was useful in OBO\xe2\x80\x99s\nrecently completed realignment of offices, which was done with the goal of stream-\nlining the organization and improving its business processes to support its main\nmission\xe2\x80\x94providing safe, secure facilities for colleagues stationed abroad.\n\nOIG also reviewed how the Department was organized and the procedures that were\nin place to carry out its statutory responsibilities to identify and designate terrorist\nentities and those supporting terrorism, making those entities subject to sanctions,\nand to ensure that U.S. assistance funds would not inadvertently go to terrorists.\nOIG reviewed both aspects of the Department\xe2\x80\x99s process for vetting the names of\norganizations and individuals being considered for assistance against lists of desig-\nnated terrorist entities, focusing particularly on the Office of the Coordinator for\nCounterterrorism (S/CT) and the Office of Terrorism Finance and Economic Sanc-\ntions Policy in the Bureau of Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs (EEB). The\ninspection reaffirmed a 2006 inspection recommendation that S/CT, in coordination\nwith the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, should facilitate the work of S/CT\xe2\x80\x99s\nDesignation Unit by giving it better communications capabilities and easier access to\nall source intelligence. While the review was in progress, the Deputy Secretary issued\ntimely guidance reemphasizing the responsibility of senior officials at the Depart-\nment and the U.S. Agency for International Development to apply due diligence\nprocedures to prevent U.S. Government assistance money from inadvertently going\nto terrorists. The guidance also established an interoffice committee chaired by EEB\nto coordinate and strengthen vetting policies and procedures throughout the Depart-\nment.\n\n\n6 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cOffice of Investigations\nDuring this reporting period, OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Office of Investigations opened 109 investi-\ngations and closed 35, resulting in six convictions, two indictments, more than 14\nyears in imprisonment and probation, and over $880,000 in fines and recoveries.\nConflict of interest investigations resulted in termination of two employees and\njudgments valued at more than $800,000.\n\nThe Office of Investigations also began a large scale investigative project involv-\ning Department employees and contract employees who were improperly ac-\ncessing PIERS to look up the records of prominent American citizens, including\nthree Presidential candidates. The first of these cases to be resolved concluded in\nSeptember 2008 when a former contract employee pleaded guilty to accessing\nover 200 different PIERS files without authorization. The Office of Investigations\nanticipates that there will be additional prosecutions and administrative sanctions\ngoing forward\n\n\n\nInternational Broadcasting\nIn response to a congressional request, OIG reviewed actions taken by Alhurra, an\nentity of the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Inc., to strengthen its procedures\nand policies, particularly its policies involving terrorists or those who support them.\nOIG found that in the past year, Alhurra had taken significant steps to tighten its\nprocedures and policies, including updating its 2005 Journalistic Code of Ethics,\nimplementing new management controls over programming, and creating a journal-\nistic training program.\n\nOIG inspectors identified as a best practice the development by Embassy Asun-\ncion\xe2\x80\x99s public diplomacy section of a computerized system that downloads Voice of\nAmerica News with hourly updates. The recordings, made available to journalists\nthrough a toll-free telephone line, ensure that small local media outlets have free ac-\ncess to up-to-date world news.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 7\n\x0c8 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c CONGRESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AND OUTREACH\n\n\n\nTestimony\nDuring this reporting period, Acting Inspector General Harold W. Geisel and As-\nsistant Inspector General for Audits Mark Duda testified before the Senate Judiciary\nCommittee July 10, 2008, on OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Controls and Notification for Access to\nPassport Records in the Department of State\xe2\x80\x99s Passport Information Electronic Records System\n(PIERS), AUD/IP-08-29, July 2008.\n\nOn June 18, 2008, Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Inspections Frank Ward\nand OIG General Counsel Erich Hart testified before the House Oversight and\nGovernment Reform Subcommittee on National Security and the Foreign Affairs\nSubcommittee on OIG\xe2\x80\x99s report Rule of Law Program in Afghanistan, ISP-I-08-09,\nJanuary 2008.\n\n\n\nCongressional Mandates and Requests\nIn response to legislative mandates and requests from Congress, OIG conducted\nthe following reviews during this semiannual period. Any classified work undertaken\nat Congress\xe2\x80\x99s request is addressed in a separate classified annex to this semiannual\nreport.\n\nIn House Report 110-97 (H.R. Rep. No. 110-147, at 17 [2007]) for the State, Foreign\nOperations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2008, the Committee on Ap-\npropriations requested that OIG review the current programming policies and pro-\ncedures at Alhurra, particularly its policies involving terrorists or those who support\nthem. In the subsequent explanatory statement of the Committee on Appropriations\nto the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161), dated December 27,\n2007, this language did not appear. However, the House subcommittee asked OIG\nto prepare a report discussing actions taken by Alhurra to strengthen its procedures\nand policies. Based on this request, OIG issued the inspection Alhurra\xe2\x80\x99s Programming\nPolicies and Procedures, ISP-IB-08-45.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 9\n\x0c Testimony on the PIERS Report\n\nOn July 10, 2008, the Acting Inspector General and the Assistant Inspector General for Audits\n(AIGA) testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary on the OIG report Con-\ntrols and Notification for Access to Passport Records in the Department of State\xe2\x80\x99s Passport\nInformation Electronic Records System (PIERS).\n\nIn March 2008, after reports of breaches of a Presidential candidate\xe2\x80\x99s passport records, OIG\ninitiated a limited review of Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) controls over access to passport\nrecords in PIERS. The review was to determine whether the Department adequately protects\npassport records and data contained in PIERS from unauthorized access and responds ef-\nfectively when incidents of unauthorized access occur.\n\nIn his testimony, the Acting Inspector General cited the \xe2\x80\x9cmany control weaknesses\xe2\x80\x9d that OIG\nhad found regarding \xe2\x80\x9cthe prevention and detection of unauthorized access to passport and\napplicant information and the subsequent response and disciplinary processes when a poten-\ntial unauthorized access is substantiated.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nIn his testimony, the AIGA said the Department had stated that in some cases the lack of\nresources contributed to the lack of controls and to the Department\xe2\x80\x99s ability to assess vulner-\nabilities and risk. OIG described security and management practices used by the Internal\nRevenue Service and the Social Security Administration as examples of where the Depart-\nment could make similar improvements, and it made 22 recommendations to address the\ncontrol weaknesses found with safeguarding passport records.\n\nThe AIGA further stated that OIG did not verify instances of unauthorized access. However,\nOIG did conduct a judgmentally determined study at the initiation of the review to identify the\nfrequency with which the records for 150 high-profile individuals were accessed in PIERS\nbetween September 2002 and March 2008. The AIGA said that the results revealed \xe2\x80\x9cseveral\npatterns that raised serious concerns about the potential for undetected unauthorized access\nto passport records.\xe2\x80\x9d Specifically, of the 150 names included in the study, records of 127\nindividuals (85 percent) had been accessed at least once. The query results showed a total\nof 4,148 hits to the passport information for these individuals. The AIGA said that OIG had not\nmade a determination as to whether the hits represented authorized or unauthorized access\nand that although an 85 percent hit rate appears to be \xe2\x80\x9cexcessive,\xe2\x80\x9d the Department lacks\ncriteria to determine whether this is actually \xe2\x80\x9can inordinately high rate.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nThe Acting Inspector General said that the Department \xe2\x80\x9cshould make resources available\nto conduct the [necessary vulnerability and risk] assessments\xe2\x80\x9d of all passport systems \xe2\x80\x9cas\nquickly as possible\xe2\x80\x9d and that CA should \xe2\x80\x9censure the accuracy of Privacy Impact Assessments\nfor PIERS and for all other passport systems to accurately reflect security controls for and\nrisks to personally identifiable information [PII].\xe2\x80\x9d However, the Acting Inspector General com-\nmended CA and the Bureau of Administration for the \xe2\x80\x9cimmediate actions taken,\xe2\x80\x9d which includ-\ned \xe2\x80\x9cissuing interim guidance on the various steps to be followed and decisions to be made\nin response to a potential incident of unauthorized access to passport records and applicant\n[PII], and a Department-wide [PII] breach response policy.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\n\n\n 10 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAs mandated by the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002\n(FISMA) (44 U.S.C. \xc2\xa7 3545), OIG issued the report Review of the Information Security\nProgram of Sensitive Compartmented Information Systems at the Department of State, AUD/\nIT-08-33, which is summarized in the classified annex to this report.\n\nAs mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2000 (P.L. 106-65),\nTitle XIV, a joint review was conducted by the Departments of State, Commerce,\nDefense, Energy, Homeland Security, Agriculture, and the Treasury; the Central\nIntelligence Agency; and the United States Postal Service. The report was entitled\nInteragency Review of Prior Inspector General Recommendations Related to U.S. Export Controls\nD-2008-095, September 2008.\n\nAs mandated in the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leader-\nship Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008\n(P.L. 110-293), the Department\xe2\x80\x99s OIG participated in developing a coordinated audit\nplan for fiscal year 2009 that was finalized in response to P.L. 110-293 to provide\noversight to programs implemented under this act. It was signed by the Inspectors\nGeneral for the Department, Health and Human Services (HHS), and U.S. Agency\nfor International Development (USAID) on September 26, 2008.\n\nAs mandated by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-576, as amend-\ned), OIG directed and monitored the following financial statement audits and other\nwork conducted by an independent external auditor:\n\n\nAUD/FM-08-04 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Department\n of State 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n\nAUD/FM-08-24 Independent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the International Bound\n ary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, U.S.\n Section, 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n\nAUD/FM-08-25 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the International\n Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico,\n U.S. Section, 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n\nAUD/FM-08-26 Independent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Foreign Service Retire\n ment and Disability Fund 2007, 2006, and 2005 Financial\n Statements\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 11\n\x0cAUD/FM-08-27 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Foreign Ser\n vice Retirement and Disability Fund 2007, 2006, and\n 2005 Financial Statements\n\nAUD/FM-08-38 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures: Retirement, Health Benefits, and\n Life Insurance Withholdings/Contributions and\n Supplemental Semiannual Headcount Report\n Submitted to the Office of Personnel Management\n\n\n\nMedia Assistance and Outreach\n\t\nDuring this semiannual period, OIG made its reports available to and responded to\nan increased number of media inquires about work it performed and other related\nmatters. During this period, OIG responded to 31 media inquires related to 17 dif-\nferent issues.\n\nListed in order of issues that drew the most inquiries, OIG responded to the follow-\ning from major media:\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Audit and investigation into allegations that Department contract employees ac-\n cessed passport records of presidential candidates without authorization. (6)\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Middle East Regional Office reviews of Iraq Special Immigrant Visas and Iraq\n Refugee Processing (2)\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Inquiries into OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Web site and disclosure policy (2)\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 Oversight work related to AEY, Inc. and contracting issues in Albania. (2)\n\nAn additional 10 inquiries were received regarding work currently in process.\n\n\n\n\nOutreach\n\nAs part of continuing efforts to promote accountability through better awareness of\nOIG\xe2\x80\x99s role, mission, and services, the OIG staff participated in the following out-\nreach activities during this semiannual period:\n\n\n\n 12 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG senior staff from the Offices of Audits, Inspections, Investigations, and\n General Counsel made presentations in response to requests by the senior staff\n of the House and Senate Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Foreign\n Operations, the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Rela-\n tions Committee, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee,\n and the Senate Homeland Security and Government Reform Committee.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t With \xe2\x80\x9cboots on the ground,\xe2\x80\x9d OIG conducted briefings for members of a Con-\n gressional staff delegation in Baghdad on August 25, 2008. The Office of Audits\n briefed the delegation on the ongoing audit of the Blackwater world-wide pro-\n tective services contract, and the Middle East Regional Office provided an over-\n view of its mission and oversight activities. OIG\xe2\x80\x99s General Counsel accompanied\n the delegation on its two-day schedule of meetings with Embassy Baghdad\xe2\x80\x99s\n leadership and representatives of various U.S. and Iraqi oversight, programmatic,\n and law enforcement offices.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG changed its Web posting policies and practices in April 2008 to facilitate\n public access to many more OIG products. Since the old OIG Web posting\n policy was changed, 93 additional inspections, reviews and audits, dating from\n 2003 through 2009 have been posted on OIG\xe2\x80\x99s public Web site. New oversight\n products are now routinely posted on the site following appropriate reviews and\n clearances.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t MERO staff made presentations to numerous Embassy officials in Baghdad\n and other locations in the Middle East to explain how OIG\xe2\x80\x99s new Middle East\n Region Office would operate in the Middle East.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Senior Office of Investigations staff engaged in fraud awareness meetings with\n 22 senior embassy officials in Kabul, Baghdad, and Amman in anticipation of\n increased investigative Middle East presence.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG senior staff from the Offices of Audits, Investigations, and Inspections\n senior staff made presentations at four ambassadorial seminars, two deputy\n chief of mission courses, and four Foreign Service officer orientations, as well as\n financial management, general services officer, and other courses offered by the\n Foreign Service Institute.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG senior staff also met with Ambassadors and deputy chiefs of mission\n preparing to depart for new assignments to discuss areas of emphasis in their\n missions and provide suggestions to assist in the management of their missions.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 13\n\x0c\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t In September 2008, as part of its recruitment process, OIG hosted an open\n house for Civil Service and Foreign Service personnel interested in career oppor-\n tunities within OIG.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG staff from the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security recently\n attended OIG\xe2\x80\x99s New Inspectors Training Course.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Investigations staff gave a fraud awareness presentation to a class at the National\n Defense Intelligence College.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t Senior OIG staff from the Department and USAID briefed the Department\xe2\x80\x99s\n new coordinator for Iraq anticorruption programs on work the OIGs have con-\n ducted or planned in Iraq.\n\n\n\nInteragency Coordination\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG is providing assistance to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan\n Reconstruction in establishing an office and operations in Afghanistan.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG senior staff works closely with the Department of Defense OIG, USAID\n OIG, Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, and Special\n Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction to coordinate and plan audits and\n reviews in Iraq and Afghanistan.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t OIG senior staff works closely with the Offices of Inspectors General for\n USAID, HHS, Peace Core, Labor, and Defense to coordinate and plan audits\n and reviews related to the United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,\n Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 and the President\xe2\x80\x99s\n Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.\n\n\n\nLegislation Monitored\nOIG reviewed and monitored the following legislation during this semiannual report\nperiod:\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 2642, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008, now P.L. 110-252 signed\n into law on June 30, 2008, which provided OIG supplemental funding as well as\n 2009 bridge funding.\n\n\n14 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 2764, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Appropri-\n ations Act of 2008, which includes $33.7 million in funding for OIG for Fiscal\n Year 2008.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R.1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, now\n P.L. 110-181 (Sec. 1229), as it pertains to language establishing a Special Inspec-\n tor General for Afghanistan Reconstruction and audit requirements for Private\n Security Detail Contracts hired by the State Department in Iraq.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t S. 2731, Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against\n HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, which\n would require that the Inspectors General of the Department of State, USAID,\n and HHS jointly develop five coordinated annual plans for oversight activity\n (financial audits and performance reviews) for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 for\n programs authorized under this Act and Section 104A of the Foreign Assistance\n Act.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 2740, the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act Expansion and Rein-\n forcement Act of 2007, which would require Inspectors General working in\n any military theater of operations to coordinate their work with a newly created\n theater investigative unit within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 928, S.1723, and S.2324, Improving Government Accountability Act, as\n introduced in both the House and the Senate, which amend the 1978 Inspector\n General Act.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 2420, International Climate Cooperation Re-Engagement Act of 2007,\n which would assign oversight responsibility for the newly created International\n Clean Energy Foundation to OIG.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t S. 1825, Commission on Wartime Contracting Establishment Act, which would\n assign oversight review of security, intelligence, and reconstruction in Iraq and\n Afghanistan to the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction in con-\n junction with State OIG and the Inspectors General from the Defense Depart-\n ment and USAID.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 2764, Division D \xe2\x80\x93 Financial Services and Government Appropriations\n Act, 2008, Title VII, which would place certain requirements on the Web sites of\n the Department and OIG.\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2\t\t H.R. 1469 and S. 991, the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act of\n 2007, as introduced in the House and Senate. Both bills assign oversight respon-\n sibilities for the newly created foundation to OIG.\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 15\n\x0cImplementation of the Government Performance \n\nand Results Act and the President\xe2\x80\x99s Management \n\nAgenda\nIn support of the Government Performance and Results Act and the President\xe2\x80\x99s\nManagement Agenda, OIG reviewed mission and bureau strategic plans, as well as\nrightsizing and consolidation issues for each mission and office inspected during this\nreporting period.\n\n\n\n\nPerformance Measures\n\nFrom 2000 to 2006, OIG participated in issuing nine interagency reports and 40\nagency-specific reports on U.S. export controls. As a result, 29 recommendations\nwere made to the Department, 28 of which are closed. As of the compliance fol-\nlowup review during this SAR reporting period, only one recommendation remains\nunresolved\xe2\x80\x94that the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Directorate of Defense\nTrade Controls (PM/DDTC), should \xe2\x80\x9cestablish performance measures that detail\nbenchmarks and timeframes for reducing and eliminating the number of unfavorable\npost-license end-use checks.\xe2\x80\x9d PM/DDTC stated that over the next year it would\nconsider \xe2\x80\x9cwhether such measures, along with time-lines and benchmarks, would be\nof value in its compliance and licensing functions.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\n\n\n\nRightsizing\n\nThe OIG team found that Embassy Tokyo made a comprehensive review of person-\nnel resource requirements, identified a significant number of American and LE staff\nthat could either be reprogrammed or eliminated, and submitted their recommenda-\ntions to the Department. The Embassy was able to initiate actions addressing the LE\nstaff, and some American positions have remained vacant since the departure of the\nincumbents.\n\nAlthough various offices in the Department have praised the study, the Department\nhas not initiated actions necessary to either eliminate or reprogram 23 identified\npositions. If the Department\xe2\x80\x99s cited $505,000 cost of support for each American\n\n\n16 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cdirect-hire employee were to be applied to these positions, the potential for signifi-\ncant savings exists.\n\nThe methodology employed by Embassy Tokyo was similar to that used in the pri-\nvate sector and should be a model for the Department to emulate. The Tokyo right-\nsizing exercise was designed to increase productivity and efficiency while decreasing\nwaste and duplication. The focus was not only on Department elements but on the\nentire mission. Agencies and activities were encouraged to think about performing\nassigned missions better by doing things differently and approaching the function\nas if they were just starting a mission in Japan. The head of every section, agency,\nand department was asked to explain his or her organizational chart as well as the\nduties and functions performed by each individual. As a result, every position in the\nEmbassy was closely reviewed, thus enabling management to recognize overlap and\nduplication. This process gave supervisors and managers an opportunity to recom-\nmend changes that could increase productivity and reduce costs.\n\nOIG recommended that the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, in coordina-\ntion with the Bureau of Human Resources (HR), abolish or reprogram the 23 posi-\ntions identified in Embassy Tokyo\xe2\x80\x99s review.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 17\n\x0c18 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cU.S. Department of State\n\x0c20 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c MIDDLE EAST REGIONAL OFFICE\n\n\n\n\nStatus of Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa\nPrograms (MERO-IQO-08-01)\n\nThe Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Middle East Regional Office\n(MERO) conducted an evaluation to determine whether the Department is effec-\ntively managing the Iraqi special immigrant visa (SIV) programs.\n\nThe Department effectively met congressional allocations for issuing SIVs to former\nIraqi (and Afghan) interpreters and translators for FYs 2006 and 2007, and is on pace\nto meet the FY 2008 goal. However, OIG\xe2\x80\x99s analysis of a large sample of completed\nand active case files, indicated more than 25 percent of approved applicants did not\nmeet the program\xe2\x80\x99s criteria of working primarily as an interpreter or translator, but\nrather in a wide variety of positions, such as medical doctors, warehouse workers,\nand caterers. Furthermore, OIG identified a number of cases that appeared to be\noutside the intent of the program, as expressed by members of Congress. These\ncases resulted in SIV issuances that should have gone to either those in fear of their\nor their families\xe2\x80\x99 safety if they stayed in Iraq, other qualified individuals, or applicants\nwith no other options for obtaining visas.\n\nThe Department was still in the process of formulating guidance to bureaus and\nembassies in the region regarding administering the new SIV program, known as the\nKennedy Bill, for Iraqis employed by the U.S. Government. OIG identified (1) al-\nlocating resources, (2) screening for eligibility, and (3) fraud prevention as significant\nchallenges for executing this program.\n\n\n\n\nStatus of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Processing\nfor Iraqi Nationals (MERO-IQO-08-02)\n\nMERO conducted an evaluation to determine whether the Department is effectively\nmanaging the Iraqi refugee resettlement program.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 21\n\x0cThe U.S. Government is on track to meet, and possibly exceed, its goal of resettling\n12,000 Iraqi refugees in the United States in FY 2008. An important caveat is the\ncontinued cooperation of the Syrian Government and a stable security environment\nin Lebanon to conduct refugee processing operations. There are currently large-\nscale Iraqi refugee processing operations in Syria, Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon, with\nsmaller programs in Egypt and other countries in the region.\n\nThe Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act of 2007 requires the establishment of a refugee\nprocessing mechanism in Iraq. OIG has identified a number of factors that indicate\na smaller-scale processing operation, geared toward addressing the relatively limited\nnumber of compelling cases that are unable to process out of Amman, may be more\nappropriate for Baghdad.\n\n\n\n\n 22 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c AUDITS\n\n\n\nReview of Controls and Notification for Access\nto Passport Records in the Department of\nState\xe2\x80\x99s Passport Information Electronic Records\nSystem (PIERS) (AUD-IP-08-29)\n\nIn March 2008, media reports surfaced that the passport files maintained by the\nDepartment of three U.S. Senators, who were also presidential candidates, had been\nimproperly accessed by Department employees and contract staff. On March 21,\n2008, following the first reported breach and at the direction of the Acting Inspector\nGeneral, the Office of Audits initiated a limited review of CA\xe2\x80\x99s controls over access\nto passport records in the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Passport Information Electronic Records\nSystem. Specifically, this review focused on determining whether the Department (1)\nadequately protects passport records and data contained in PIERS from unauthor-\nized access and (2) responds effectively when incidents of unauthorized access occur.\n\nOIG found many control weaknesses\xe2\x80\x94including a general lack of policies, proce-\ndures, guidance, and training\xe2\x80\x94relating to the prevention and detection of unauthor-\nized access to passport and applicant information and the subsequent response and\ndisciplinary processes when a potential unauthorized access is substantiated. In some\ncases, Department officials stated that the lack of resources contributed to the lack\nof controls and to the Department\xe2\x80\x99s ability to assess vulnerabilities and risk. OIG\nmade 22 recommendations to address the control weaknesses found, including the\ndevelopment of policies and procedures to accurately identify the users of passport\ninformation, to detect unauthorized access to passport and applicant information,\nand to respond effectively when unauthorized access has been determined. All of the\nrecommendations are considered resolved, but remain open pending further action.\n\n In addition, after the passport record breaches were publicized, the Department\ntook some immediate actions, which included issuing interim guidance on the vari-\nous steps to be followed and decisions to be made in response to a potential incident\nof unauthorized access to passport records and personally identifiable information\n(PII) of an applicant, and a Department-wide PII breach response policy. Additional\nactions are underway by the Department, including conducting vulnerability and risk\nassessments of all passport systems.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 23\n\x0cBased on this report, the Acting Inspector General and the Assistant Inspector\nGeneral for Audits testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 10, 2008,\nregarding controls and notification for access to passport records in PIERS.\n\n\n Interagency Review of Prior Inspector General\n Recommendations Related to U.S. Export Controls\n (D-2008-095, September 2008)\n\n The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2000, Public Law 106-\n 65, mandates that the Inspectors General of certain agencies conduct\n and report the results of a joint review to determine whether manage-\n ment effectively addressed export control recommendations made pur-\n suant to the Act. There are annual reporting requirements for 8 years\n under this Act.\n\n Participants in this review were from the Offices of Inspector General\n for the Departments of State, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Homeland\n Security, and the Treasury; the Central Intelligence Agency; and the\n United States Postal Service. Although the Act requires the Federal\n Bureau of Investigation to participate in the review, it did not participate\n because it does not have an active role in the licensing process for\n export control technology.\n\n From 2000 to 2006, the OIGs participated in issuing nine interagency\n reports and 40 agency-specific reports on U.S. export controls. The\n OIGs made 273 recommendations in these 49 reports to improve\n Federal export control policies and procedures. The 2008 interagency\n report, which satisfies the eighth and final statutory reporting require-\n ment under the Act, determined that 234 of the recommendations were\n closed and that Federal managers needed to take additional actions to\n implement the 39 remaining (open) recommendations.\n\n From 2000 to 2006, 29 recommendations were made to the Depart-\n ment, 28 of which are closed. As of the final report, only one recom-\n mendation remained unresolved\xe2\x80\x94that the Bureau of Political-Military\n Affairs, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (PM/DDTC), should \xe2\x80\x9ces-\n tablish performance measures that detail benchmarks and timeframes\n for reducing and eliminating the number of unfavorable post-license\n end-use checks.\xe2\x80\x9d PM/DDTC stated that it would consider, over the next\n year, \xe2\x80\x9cwhether such measures, along with time-lines and benchmarks,\n would be of value in its compliance and licensing functions.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\n\n\n\n24 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cManagement Letter Related to the Audit\nof the Department of State 2007 and 2006\nFinancial Statements (AUD/FM-08-04)\n\nDuring the audit of the Department\xe2\x80\x99s 2007 and 2006 financial statements, the in-\ndependent external auditor identified internal control weaknesses relating to fund\nbalance with Treasury, accounts receivable and payable, payroll accruals, payroll\ndocumentation, heritage assets, deferred maintenance, compliance with the Improper\nPayments Information Act, non-personnel expenses, prompt payments, controls\nover cash and cash receipts at posts, information technology security, indirect cost\nallocation for construction in progress, personal property, and the Foreign Service\nRetirement and Disability Fund\xe2\x80\x99s actuarial liability. The auditor recommended that\nthe Department take appropriate action to address these weaknesses.\n\n\n\nIndependent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the\nInternational Boundary and Water\nCommission, United States and Mexico, U.S.\nSection, 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n(AUD/FM-08-24)\n\nThe independent external auditor issued an unqualified opinion on the International\nBoundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, U.S. Section\xe2\x80\x99s financial\nstatements as of September 30, 2007 and 2006, and did not identify any material\nweaknesses related to internal control or material instances of noncompliance.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 25\n\x0cManagement Letter Related to the Audit\nof the International Boundary and Water\nCommission, United States and Mexico, U.S.\nSection, 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n(AUD/FM-08-25)\n\nDuring the audit of the International Boundary and Water Commission, United\nStates and Mexico, U.S. Section\xe2\x80\x99s (USIBWC) 2007 and 2006 financial statements,\nthe independent external auditor identified internal control weaknesses relating to\nUSIBWC\xe2\x80\x99s internal audits and evaluations, property and equipment, contract ac-\ncruals, personnel issues, and financial reporting. The independent external auditor\nrecommended that USIBWC take appropriate action to address these weaknesses.\n\n\n\nIndependent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Foreign\nService Retirement and Disability Fund 2007, 2006,\nand 2005 Financial Statements (AUD/FM-08-26)\n\nThe independent external auditor issued an unqualified opinion on the Foreign\nService Retirement and Disability Fund financial statements as of September 30,\n2007, 2006, and 2005, and did not identify any material weaknesses related to internal\ncontrol or material instances of noncompliance.\n\n\n\nManagement Letter Related to the Audit of\nthe Foreign Service Retirement and Disability\nFund 2007, 2006, and 2005 Financial\nStatements (AUD/FM-08-27)\n\nDuring the audit of the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Fund\xe2\x80\x99s (FSRDF)\nfinancial statements as of 2007, 2006, and 2005, the independent external auditor\nidentified an internal control weakness relating to overpayments to annuitants. The\nDepartment was not consistent in establishing an accounts receivable in a timely\nmanner after it discovered overpayments to annuitants. The independent external au-\nditor recommended that the Department establish accounts receivable for collection\n\n\n26 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cof overpayments to annuitants as soon as overpayments are discovered. The inde-\npendent external auditor also noted opportunities for the Department to improve its\nactuarial report related to FSRDF.\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures:\nRetirement, Health Benefits, and Life\nInsurance Withholdings/Contributions\nand Supplemental Semiannual Headcount\nReport Submitted to the Office of Personnel\nManagement (AUD/FM-08-38)\n\nUnder OIG\xe2\x80\x99s direction, an independent external auditor performed agreed-upon\nprocedures, as required by Office of Management and Budget Bulletin No. 07-04,\nAudit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. These procedures were performed\nsolely to assist the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in assessing the reason-\nableness of the retirement, health benefits, and life insurance withholdings and con-\ntributions, as well as enrollment information, submitted by the Department through\nthe Semiannual Headcount Report. The auditor identified two instances in which\ninformation on health insurance election submitted by the Department and informa-\ntion OPM had in its files was inconsistent, two instances in which information on\nbasic life insurance election submitted by the Department and information OPM\nhad in its files was inconsistent, and four instances of reportable differences between\nOPM\xe2\x80\x99s calculations of life insurance coverage withholdings and the amounts submit-\nted by the Department.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 27\n\x0cIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Reports\nDuring this reporting period, OIG contracted with two certified public accounting\nfirms, as specified, to perform agreed-upon procedures of indirect cost rates and\na final buyout claim, under the provisions of OMB (Office of Management and\nBudget) Circulars A-122, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations; A-110, Uniform\nAdministrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements With Institutions of Higher Education,\nHospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations; and A-133, Audits of States, Local Govern-\nments, and Non-Profit Organizations. The organizations reviewed and the results of the\nagreed-upon procedures are as follows:\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nIndirect Cost Rates Proposed by American\nRefugee Committee, Inc. (AUD/CG-08-22)\n\nLeonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP, Certified Public Accountants, determined\nthat the American Refugee Committee had properly calculated and reported its pro-\nposed indirect cost rates for the years ended December 31, 2006, and 2005. Also, the\nCommittee\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system was adequate for accumulating and reporting indirect\ncosts under the provisions of Circulars A-122 and A-110. The accountants recom-\nmended that the Department accept and finalize the Committee\xe2\x80\x99s indirect cost rates\nfor the years specified, as proposed by the Committee and as recommended in the\naccountants\xe2\x80\x99 report.\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nIndirect Cost Rates Proposed by Council on\nInternational Educational Exchange, Inc.\n(AUD/CG-08-23)\n\nOIG contracted L.F. Harris & Associates, Certified Public Accountants, P.A., to\nperform certain agreed-upon procedures to determine whether the indirect cost rates\nproposed by the Council on International Educational Exchange, Inc., for the fiscal\n\n\n28 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cyears ended August 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, complied with applicable regulations.\nThe accountants found that although the Council had charged some unallowable\ncosts to federal programs, its accounting system was adequate to accumulate and\nreport indirect costs under the provisions of Circulars A-122 and A-110.\n\nThe accountants noted, in reviewing the Council\xe2\x80\x99s indirect costs, that the base used\nto calculate the rates was incorrectly computed, including participant support costs.\nAlso, the indirect cost rate calculation submitted to the Department by the Council\nincorrectly calculated indirect costs as a percentage of total costs instead of indirect\ncosts as a percentage of direct costs. As a result, the accountants adjusted the base\nand recomputed the rates reported by the Council for FYs 2005, 2004, and 2003. In\naddition, the accountants questioned as unallowable Council indirect expenses of\n$1,953,607, $587,049, and $2,388,577 for FYs 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.\nThe accountants recommended that the Department accept and finalize the indirect\ncost rates for FYs 2005, 2004, and 2003, as recommended in the report.\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nFinal Buyout Claim by Enviro-Management &\nResearch, Inc., Under Contract No. S-FBOAD-\n98-D0010 (AUD/CG-08-28)\n\nLeonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP, Certified Public Accountants, determined\nthat the January 30, 2008, final buyout claim submitted by Enviro-Management &\nResearch, Inc. (EMR), under Contract No. S-FBOAD-98-D0010 was reasonable,\nallocable, and allowable under relevant federal cost principles and the terms and con-\nditions of the contract. The accountants concluded that the claim made by EMR was\nwithout merit and that the Department had overpaid the amount financed for this\nproject. The accountants recommended that the Department decline to pay EMR\xe2\x80\x99s\n$146,757 buyout claim and require the contractor to reimburse the Department for\noverpayments totaling $15,607.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 29\n\x0cIndependent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nthe Indirect Cost Rate Proposed by Church\nWorld Service, Inc. (AUD/CG-08-30)\n\nLeonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP, Certified Public Accountants, determined\nthat the indirect cost rate proposed by Church World Service, Inc. (CWS), for the fis-\ncal year ended June 30, 2006, was properly calculated and reported. The accountant\nfound CWS\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system to be adequate for accumulating and reporting indi-\nrect costs under the provisions of OMB Circulars A-122 and A-110. The accountant\nrecommended that the Department accept and finalize CWS\xe2\x80\x99s indirect cost rate for\nthe fiscal year stated, as recommended in the report.\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nthe Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by Project\nHarmony, Inc. (AUD/CG-08-31)\n\nProject Harmony, Inc., is a not-for-profit organization that provides professional and\ntraining programs in a variety of settings in the United States and in countries of the\nformer Soviet Union. L.F. Harris & Associates, P.A., Certified Public Accountants,\ndetermined that Project Harmony\xe2\x80\x99s proposed indirect cost rates for the fiscal years\nended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, were properly calculated. Also, Project Harmo-\nny\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system was adequate for accumulating and reporting indirect costs\nunder the provisions of OMB Circulars A-122 and A-110. The accountants recom-\nmended that the Department accept and finalize Project Harmony\xe2\x80\x99s indirect cost\nrates for the three fiscal years stated, as recommended in the report, \xe2\x80\x9cfully consider-\ning any additional payments by the Department or Project Harmony, as necessary, to\naccount for differences between the final and the recommended indirect rates.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\n\n\n\n30 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nIndirect Cost Rates Proposed by Nacel Open\nDoor, Inc. (AUD/CG-08-32)\n\nL.F. Harris & Associates, P.A., Certified Public Accountants, performed certain\nagreed-upon procedures to determine whether the indirect cost rates proposed by\nNacel Open Door, Inc. for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003,\ncomplied with applicable regulations. The accountants found Nacel\xe2\x80\x99s accounting\nsystem to be inadequate for accumulating and reporting indirect costs under the\nprovisions of OMB Circulars A-122, A-110, and A-133. Specifically, Nacel\xe2\x80\x99s current\naccounting system did not meet the requirements of the circulars, and Nacel had\nbeen experiencing \xe2\x80\x9congoing problems\xe2\x80\x9d with the accounting system for many years.\nThe May 2004 OIG report Application of Agreed-Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates\nProposed by Nacel Open Door, Inc. (AUD/CG-04-30), prepared by other independent\naccountants, also found Nacel\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system to be inadequate for accumulat-\ning and reporting indirect costs under the provisions of the circulars. Consequently,\nat that time, the independent accountants were not able to express an opinion on the\nrates proposed by Nacel for grant years 1994 through 2001. Officials in the De-\npartment\xe2\x80\x99s Office of Logistics Management, Office of Acquisitions Management,\nInternational Programs Division, said that they had not approved provisional or final\nindirect cost rates for Nacel for the period 1998 through 2007.\n\nThe accountants were unable to confirm Nacel\xe2\x80\x99s proposed indirect costs rates for\n2005, 2004, and 2003 because Nacel did not provide sufficient documentation to\nsupport its rates. Also, Circular A-122 requires that expenses incurred under federal\ngrants be adequately documented, be reasonable for the performance of the grant,\nand be allocable. Based on their sampling of Nacel\xe2\x80\x99s expenditures incurred under the\ngrants during 2003, 2004, and 2005, the accountants found unsupported costs total-\ning $94,524 for the 3 years.\n\nThe accountants recommended that the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs\n(ECA) require Nacel to fully comply with the provisions of applicable OMB circu-\nlars within 60 days of the date of the report and provide ECA with verification of its\ncompliance by an independent public accountant. OIG also recommended that ECA\nwithhold funding for future grants and payments under existing grants until Nacel\nwas in full compliance with the applicable circulars. Further, OIG recommended that\nECA require Nacel to establish appropriate policies and procedures to ensure that\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 31\n\x0ccosts under the grants are documented and accounted for in accordance with the\napplicable circulars and that Nacel provide information so that ECA can make an\nappropriate determination on the unsupported costs of $94,524.\n\n\n\n\nIndependent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the\nApplication of Agreed-Upon Procedures on\nthe Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by The\nGraduate School, USDA (AUD/CG-08-34)\n\nLeonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP, Certified Public Accountants, performed\ncertain agreed-upon procedures to determine whether the indirect cost rates pro-\nposed by The Graduate School, USDA, for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2007,\n2006, and 2005, complied with applicable regulations. The accountants found the\nSchool\xe2\x80\x99s accounting system to be adequate for accumulating and reporting indirect\ncosts under the provisions of applicable requirements. Also, the School had properly\ncalculated its indirect cost rates for 2006. However, it had not always properly cal-\nculated its indirect cost rates for 2007 and 2005. For example, facility rental costs of\n$5.6 million and product design costs of $2.8 million were omitted from the calcula-\ntions in 2007 and 2005, respectively. The accountant recommended that the Depart-\nment accept and finalize the indirect cost rates for 2007, 2006, and 2005, as recom-\nmended in the report.\n\n\n\nNonfederal Audits of Nonprofit Institutions\nOMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations,\nestablishes audit requirements for specified entities receiving federal awards. Public\naccounting firms employed by nonfederal entities conduct the audits. The firms file\nthese single audit reports with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, and OIG reviews\naudit reports involving Department funds and provides quality assurance and general\noversight.\n\nOIG conducted its reviews using the President\xe2\x80\x99s Council on Integrity and Effi-\nciency\xe2\x80\x99s Uniform Guide for Initial Review of A-133 Audit Reports. The objectives of the\nreviews were to determine whether the audit reports meet applicable reporting stan-\ndards and OMB Circular A-133 reporting requirements and to identify issues that\nmay require management attention. During this reporting period, OIG completed 14\n\n\n 32 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0canalytical desk reviews of single audits for six entities, with Department expenditures\ntotaling $35,656,367. OIG recommended that the Department ensure that internal\ncontrol weaknesses and instances of noncompliance are corrected.\n\n\n\n Report Grantee Fiscal Department Other Total Federal\n Number Year of State Federal Expenditures\n Expenditures Agency\n Expenditures\n08-A133003 Scholastic, Inc. 2005 $3,875,062 0 $3,875,062\n08-A133004 Foundation 2005 1,732,531 0 1,732,531\n for Enterprise\n Development 2006 2,352,394 0 2,352,394\n\n08-A133005 William Davidson 2004 278,121 $228,697 506,818\n Institute at the\n University of 2005 492,519 314,318 806,837\n Michigan\n 2006 578,658 256,771 835,429\n\n08-A133006 World Relief of 2005 475,502 182,957 658,459\n Minnesota\n 2006 487,721 171,092 658,813\n\n08-A133007 AFS-USA, Inc. 2004 3,645,578 0 3,645,578\n\n 2005 4,660,282 0 4,660,282\n\n 2006 4,346,370 0 4,346,370\n\n08-A133008 LASPAU: Academic 2004 4,544,477 0 4,544,477\n and Professional\n Program for the 2005 4,322,827 0 4,322,827\n Americas, Inc.\n 2006 3,864,325 0 3,864,325\n\n TOTAL $35,656,367 $1,153,835 $36,810,202\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 33\n\x0c34 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAfghanistan INSPECTIONS\n\n\nDomestic Operations\n\n\n\nInspection of the Bureau of Overseas\nBuildings Operations (ISP-I-08-34)\n\nThe Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) successfully completed 54\nnew embassy compounds (NEC) and annex office buildings under the Construction\nSecurity Program, placing over 17,000 embassy employees in secure facilities between\n2001 and 2008. Current OBO leadership endeavored to build on this record by\nmaintaining the pace of construction while improving relations with other Depart-\nment bureaus and missions abroad that felt left out of the planning process.\n\nThe Director Ad Interim took charge in January 2008. He quickly corrected a num-\nber of organizational deficiencies and improved coordination and communication\nbetween regional bureaus, overseas posts, and other agencies. During the inspec-\ntion, he was pursuing major realignments of functions and responsibilities, including\nefforts to fix major operational problems in information management and human\nresources. The Director Ad Interim has made tremendous strides in a short time, but\nprogress has been slow and much remains to be done.\n\nThe ultimate goal of the Department is to construct 150 NECs by 2018, at a total\ncost of $17.5 billion. Escalating construction, commodity, and labor costs, and the\ndepreciation of the dollar threaten to prevent the attainment of that very important\ngoal. Either the program must be scaled back, additional resources identified, or the\nprogram stretched beyond 2018.\n\nOIG conducted a global customer survey of diplomatic missions and a detailed anal-\nysis of 12 completed NECs. Posts commented favorably about their new facilities.\nMany have received positive feedback from their host governments that the facilities\nare architecturally attractive and appropriate. At the same time, posts expressed con-\ncern about commissioning, post-occupancy use, and NEC maintenance.\n\nOBO\xe2\x80\x99s continuing use of the design-build and Standard Embassy Design concepts\nwas effective. However, the organizational structure of OBO was overly complex,\nwith entities operating in semi-isolation resulting in the lack of effective coordina-\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 35\n\x0ction, communication, and accountability. The contracting process was cumbersome\nand complicated, and must be streamlined. Organizational problems ultimately add\nto the cost of construction projects.\n\nThe Department does not know the future costs of operating and maintaining its\nfacilities overseas, although OBO was addressing the problem. Costs to support and\nmaintain the Department\xe2\x80\x99s legacy facilities were increasing. There were no effective\nsystems in place to plan, budget, and track operation and maintenance costs. The\nDepartment must do a better job of identifying the resources necessary to protect its\nmultibillion-dollar investment.\n\n\n\n\nReview of the Process for Sharing\nDepartment Cables via the Net-Centric\nDiplomacy Program (SIA-08-04)\n\nThe Net-Centric Diplomacy (NCD) program was accomplishing its intended pur-\npose of facilitating the sharing of classified and unclassified cables originating from\nthe Department and overseas posts with other U.S. Government agencies that have\nSecret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) access.\n\nSome posts were not sharing cables with other government agencies via the SIPRNet\ndistribution (SIPDIS) caption because of the mistaken belief that posting cables to\nthe NCD database requires SIPRNet access.\n\nThe Department had not provided adequate guidance regarding the specific types of\npersonally identifiable information that should be excluded from cables posted to the\nNCD, so as to avoid the potential for violations of the Privacy Act.\n\n\n\n\n36 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c Limited-Scope Review of Department of State Counterter-\n rorism Designation and Vetting Procedures (ISP-I-08-26)\n\n OIG reviewed how the Department was organized and the procedures\n that were in place to carry out its statutory responsibilities in two aspects\n of the fight against terrorism. First, the Department was mandated to iden-\n tify and designate terrorist entities and those supporting terrorism, mak-\n ing those entities subject to sanctions. Second, the Department and U.S.\n Agency for International Development (USAID) were required by law and\n regulation to ensure that U.S. assistance funds would not inadvertently\n go to terrorists. One important method to prevent this was by vetting the\n names of organizations and individuals being considered for assistance\n against lists of designated terrorist entities. OIG reviewed both aspects\n of this process, focusing particularly on two offices with central roles: the\n Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism (S/CT) and the Office of\n Terrorism Finance and Economic Sanctions Policy in the Bureau of Eco-\n nomic, Energy, and Business Affairs (EEB).\n\n The OIG team also revisited S/CT\xe2\x80\x99s inability to comply with a 2006 in-\n spection recommendation that S/CT, in coordination with the Bureau of\n Intelligence and Research, facilitate the work of S/CT\xe2\x80\x99s Designation Unit\n by giving it better communications capabilities and easier access to all\n source intelligence. This review reaffirmed the old recommendation, and\n recognized the commitment and specific steps that the two offices agreed\n upon to reach this goal. The S/CT Designations Unit was unable to fully\n and quickly engage its interagency counterparts because it did not have\n access to Intelligence Community Electronic Mail. OIG focused on this\n problem and obtained commitments from S/CT and the Bureau of Intel-\n ligence and Research that would result in Intelligence Community Elec-\n tronic Mail being provided to the Designations Unit.\n\n While the review was in progress, the Deputy Secretary issued timely\n guidance reemphasizing the responsibility of senior officials at the De-\n partment and USAID to apply due diligence procedures to prevent U.S.\n Government assistance money from inadvertently going to terrorists. The\n guidance also established an interoffice committee chaired by EEB to\n coordinate and strengthen vetting policies and procedures throughout the\n Department. The Director for U.S. Foreign Assistance issued instructions\n to all Department bureaus and USAID that FY 2008 funding requests must\n include a statement of compliance with the Deputy Secretary\xe2\x80\x99s guidelines.\n This timely guidance also reiterated the importance of vetting.\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 37\n\x0c Review of Department\xe2\x80\x99s Use of Its Defense Export\n Licensing Watchlist in the Acquisition Process\n (SIA-I-08-05)\n\n\n\n The purpose of this review was to determine the Department\xe2\x80\x99s use of its\n defense export licensing Watchlist in the acquisition process, with specific\n focus on AEY, Inc. Reportedly, AEY was put on the Watchlist as early as\n April 2006. Subsequently it was awarded four contracts by the Depart-\n ment, one in December 2006, two in February 2007, and one in June\n 2007.\n\n This review found that Department officials are not using the Watchlist in\n the acquisition process, as much of the information in the Watchlist does\n not relate to contract performance. The Watchlist was not created for the\n acquisition process but for the purpose of alerting defense export licens-\n ing officers and compliance specialists when reviewing a party\xe2\x80\x99s applica-\n tion for an arms export license. However, in response to the U.S. House\n of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,\n hearing regarding AEY and its contracts with the U.S. Government on\n June 24, 2008, Department representatives have been meeting with\n Department of Defense acquisition experts to develop contract clause\n language that would allow the use of Watchlist information in the acquisi-\n tion process.\n\n During fiscal years 2004 through 2007, the Department issued 39 pur-\n chase orders to AEY for arms and munitions, totaling approximately $5.9\n million. Of these 39 purchase orders, one was cancelled, and another\n was partially cancelled. In February 2006, AEY was flagged by the De-\n partment for its inability to deliver according to its bid specifications, and,\n as a result, activity with AEY was temporarily suspended. Activity with\n AEY was reactivated in March 2006 following discussions between De-\n partment and company officials regarding the need to improve the com-\n pany\xe2\x80\x99s business practices. AEY was again flagged in November 2006,\n whereupon Department acquisition officials ceased issuing new purchas-\n es to the company. This review contains no recommendations.\n\n\n\n\n38 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cOverseas Missions\n\nBureau of African Affairs\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Abidjan, Cote d\xe2\x80\x99Ivoire\n(ISP-I-08-10A)\nOIG\xe2\x80\x99s inspection of Embassy Abidjan found\nthat the recently arrived Ambassador and depu- During this semiannual reporting\nty chief of mission (DCM) were giving prior- period, OIG issued 10 classified\nity to improving communications and morale annexes to overseas mission in-\nwithin the mission. The inspection noted that spections in Abidjan, Cote d\xe2\x80\x99Ivoire;\ndeficiencies in management operations were Abuja, Nigeria; Ottawa, Canada;\ncompounded by poor communication within Rangoon, Burma; Tokyo, Japan;\nthe management section, as well as between the Port Louis, Mauritius; Geneva,\nmanagement section and other mission ele- Switzerland; Managua, Nicaragua;\nments. La Paz, Bolivia; and Asuncion,\n Paraguay. These annexes are\nEmbassy participation on the school board and summarized in the classified annex\nattention to school administration had been to this Semiannual Report to the\nminimal, at best. There appeared to be no writ- Congress.\nten record of a lease agreement granting the\nschool permission to lease U.S. Government-\nowned property (the school\xe2\x80\x99s former location) to the United Nations. The Embassy\ndid not know how the $2 million received from the leased property had been spent.\nOIG made recommendations to address this situation.\n\nThe NEC was designed and constructed when Embassy Abidjan was a much larger\nmission that served as a regional support center for West Africa. Ongoing political\nturmoil had resulted in major downsizing of mission staff, leaving the current occu-\npancy of the NEC at less than two-thirds of capacity. The Embassy and OBO were\ndevising plans to close off large sections of the facility to reduce operating expenses.\nHowever, post management should also develop options for relocating other U.S.\nGovernment activities from elsewhere in Abidjan into vacant embassy office space.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 39\n\x0cThe President\xe2\x80\x99s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) managed an active and\ncohesive program for prevention, treatment, and mitigation of HIV and AIDS under\nthe leadership of the Ambassador and PEPFAR coordinator. Embassy Abidjan was\nmaintaining a very active public diplomacy program out of its Information Resource\nCenter within the embassy compound and three American Corners throughout the\ncountry. Management oversight of the American Corners, including the accountabil-\nity of funds, was deficient.\n\n\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Abuja and Consulate\nGeneral Lagos, Nigeria (ISP-I-08-25A)\n\nThe inspection occurred at a time when Embassy Abuja leadership had changed\nentirely, with a new Ambassador, DCM, and principal officer in Lagos. This change\nprovided embassy leadership with the opportunity for a forward-looking approach\xe2\x80\x94\nworking together to tackle the challenges and craft constructive solutions for the U.S.\npresence in Nigeria.\n\nForeign assistance funding for Nigeria was heavily weighted toward PEPFAR at 87\npercent of the total. The likelihood of even more PEPFAR funding was engendering\npressures for staff growth in several agencies. The mission\xe2\x80\x99s administrative platform,\nhowever, could not support large increases. The Ambassador was exercising her\nauthority judiciously in reviewing requests for new positions while ensuring the fiscal\nand human resources to support them. OIG recommended that Embassy Abuja fol-\nlow National Security Decision Directive-38 guidelines to perform and document a\ncomprehensive analysis of both programmatic and administrative requirements prior\nto deciding on requests to increase personnel.\n\nDespite a robust package of incentives, staffing Lagos and Abuja was hard, with\nmany officers in stretch assignments, working out-of-cone, on excursion tours, or on\ndirected first assignments. These staffing woes, an operating budget that was lag-\nging behind program funding, and aging facilities in Lagos reduced the efficiency of\ndiplomatic operations.\n\nBoth the consulate office building and many U.S. Government-owned residences\nin Lagos had suffered physical neglect, based partly on the view that operations in\nLagos would get smaller when the Embassy moved to Abuja in 2000. This shrinkage\nis unlikely to happen. To support staff morale, the FY 2009 timetable for renova-\ntions and physical security upgrades at the consulate office building and housing\nunits must not be allowed to slip.\n\n40 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cThe chancery annex to be built in Abuja will not provide adequate work space for\nthe number of employees slated to work in it. The Department should amend the\nproject design to increase available work space. It appeared that the Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s ef-\nforts to find a new, affordable warehouse in Abuja had succeeded.\n\nConsular operations in Nigeria are atypical and difficult to manage, coordinate, and\nstaff. Sophisticated patterns of fraud have an impact on protecting visa and pass-\nport integrity. Nonetheless, processes were essentially sound, management controls\nappeared effective, and consular leadership was tackling some of the persistent\nproblems systematically. In both Abuja and Lagos, the OIG team discussed ways to\nincrease efficiency in the nonimmigrant and immigrant visa units.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nMalabo, Equatorial Guinea (ISP-I-08-33)\n\nThe U.S. Government had well-defined interests in both oil and gas exploration and\nexploitation in Equatorial Guinea\xe2\x80\x99s territorial waters, and in security and stability in\nthe Gulf of Guinea that justified a broad and serious engagement with the govern-\nment of Equatorial Guinea. Engagement with the Government of Equatorial Guin-\nea also offered the opportunity to promote a more open democratic society where\nthe benefits of the oil boom would bring transparency, respect for human rights, and\neffective delivery of social services. Embassy Malabo had identified its priorities to\nadvance these goals.\n\nIn its efforts to strengthen ties with the Government of Equatorial Guinea, Embassy\nMalabo met opposition from Washington, which was based on a legacy of negative\nthinking about the country that stemmed from serious human rights abuses of the\npast. The Embassy also met opposition from those who insisted that, despite the\nimportance of U.S. interests in Equatorial Guinea, the Embassy should remain small.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nCotonou, Benin (ISP-I-08-28)\n\nOperating from a run-down embassy complex, the Ambassador was energetically\npromoting key U.S. interests in Benin, and assertively trying to upgrade the tools of\nengagement necessary to promote U.S. interests. Given the comparatively limited U.S.\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 41\n\x0cengagement with Benin, apart from the various aid channels, the Ambassador and\nthe DCM had appropriately made assistance the centerpiece of their attention.\n\nEmbassy Cotonou was performing well in promoting U.S. business, which sold ap-\nproximately $200 million in goods to Benin in 2007, double the previous year. This\nresult was all the more impressive given the small size of Benin\xe2\x80\x99s economy. In addi-\ntion, a U.S. firm landed a $67 million power plant construction project.\n\nSince August 2007, Embassy Cotonou\xe2\x80\x99s consular section had been led by a mid-level\nofficer who replaced a series of entry-level officers routinely rotated from the con-\nsular section to the political-economic section. This position upgrade should enhance\ncontinuity and expertise, and ensure that good management practices are followed.\nThe OIG team made several informal recommendations to improve the consular\nsection\xe2\x80\x99s signage, Web site, scheduling, and records handling.\n\nEmbassy Cotonou\xe2\x80\x99s ongoing academic advising was highly effective. Services include\nday-long Internet-based examinations on behalf of the New Jersey-based Education-\nal Testing Service to test the English language capabilities of prospective students\nintending to study at U.S. universities.\n\nGeneral services operations had overcome resistance to implementing rules and had\nupgraded workspaces and created attractive open areas for community activities. The\nOIG team made informal recommendations to improve consolidated motor vehicle\noperations.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nLibreville, Gabon (ISP-I-08-31)\n\nEmbassy Libreville was working to overcome prolonged staffing gaps in furthering\nits key democracy, regional security, and commercial objectives. The responsibilities\nof many officers at Embassy Libreville exceeded their grade or experience, leading to\ninefficiencies and a prolonged learning phase. Within the constraints of its staffing,\nthe Embassy was assertively and effectively promoting U.S. national interests in the\noil-rich Gulf of Guinea.\n\nOIG identified two issues with the international school. To resolve the first issue,\nOIG recommended Embassy Libreville review and revise the memorandum of\nunderstanding between the Embassy and the school to reflect what services the\nEmbassy will provide, including mail and pouch services for educational materials\nonly, and medical services only for designated teachers. The second issue related to\n\n42 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cthe school occupying U.S. Government-owned property. OIG found no documenta-\ntion indicating that the Embassy collected any lease costs from the school for the use\nof the property. OIG recommended Embassy Libreville conduct a market survey to\ndetermine a reasonable market value to charge the school annually for occupying the\nproperty or determine a market value for the property and sell it.\n\nOIG identified drainage and water problems, including open drains within the gen-\neral services annex that back-up with raw sewage and standing water that serves as\nbreeder grounds for malarial mosquitoes. OIG recommended that Embassy Libre-\nville and OBO fix septic systems and rain water catchments, and cover drainage\nchannels.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Lome,\nTogo (ISP-I-08-32)\n\nEmbassy Lome was using its assets to the maximum to advance the chief policy\ngoals of furthering democracy, relative prosperity, and health. With an outstanding\nrange of contacts within the government, Embassy Lome was well positioned to\nadvance U.S. law enforcement concerns, including counterterrorism and counternar-\ncotics. The Ambassador and DCM had forged a flexible, productive embassy with a\nstrong desire to do well as a team.\n\nEmbassy Lome\xe2\x80\x99s management section was working very well. The general services\nsection had exemplary accomplishments that included the move to the new embassy\ncompound. The OIG team made informal recommendations to improve the Equal\nEmployment Opportunity and Federal Women\xe2\x80\x99s Programs, review local staffing lev-\nels, and train staff on the Department\xe2\x80\x99s WebPass administrative application.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nWindhoek, Namibia (ISP-I-08-43)\n\nEmbassy Windhoek was a successful mission sharply focused on the assistance\nprograms that dominate the U.S.-Namibian relationship and on the need to keep\nNamibia\xe2\x80\x99s Government on a democratic track. The massive PEPFAR program was\nanchoring all U.S. assistance activity in Namibia and, in a sense, serving as the center-\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 43\n\x0cpiece for Embassy Windhoek\xe2\x80\x99s overall work. PEPFAR was promoting mission unity\namong the agencies directly involved. This work in Namibia was compelling a new\nlevel and type of interagency collaboration because of the sheer complexity and size\nof the program.\n\nEmbassy Windhoek had repeatedly proposed that the U.S. Trade and Development\nAgency work with the U.S. Department of Commerce to ensure that any trade leads\nwould be widely disseminated via its Trade Opportunities Program, but the U.S.\nTrade and Development Agency had declined to act on this embassy initiative. Simi-\nlarly, with the Millennium Challenge Corporation soon to be investing in Namibia on\na major scale, it, too, could benefit American business by instituting a linkage system\nbetween its projects and Commerce\xe2\x80\x99s Trade Opportunities Program. The OIG team\nrecommended that Embassy Windhoek, in coordination with EEB, request that the\nU.S. Trade and Development Agency and the Millennium Challenge Corporation\ncreate direct links between their grants and the dissemination of trade leads to U.S.\nfirms.\n\nThe small management section was exceeding expectations. For example, the Embas-\nsy had no maintenance staff; consequently, the Embassy used many Blanket Purchase\nAgreements for goods and services. These multiple awards ensured competition\nat the micro-purchase threshold and demonstrated the Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s commitment to\ncustomer service.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Port\nLouis, Mauritius (ISP-I-08-49A)\n\nOIG\xe2\x80\x99s inspection of Embassy Port Louis found the Ambassador particularly attuned\nto security issues. He was engaged in promoting American business and commer-\ncial interests, and had good access to key decision makers in both government and\nthe private sector. OIG found that measures were needed to reduce the workload\nexpected of the small political-economic section, and recommended that the De-\npartment determine which mandated reports could be submitted by Embassy Port\nLouis on a biennial rather than annual basis. In response to inadequacies found in the\nconsular waiting area, OIG recommended that the processing of visa applicants be\nmodified to address crowd control, security, and personal comfort issues.\n\n\n\n\n44 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cBureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs\n\t\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Rangoon, Burma (ISP-I-08-36A)\n\nThe charg\xc3\xa9 d\xe2\x80\x99affaires and the DCM provided strong leadership to Embassy Rangoon\non policy and program issues during a period of Burmese political crisis and intensi-\nfied U.S. policy focus. They engaged heavily in the design and successful implementa-\ntion of very imaginative small grants and public diplomacy programs, and the charg\xc3\xa9\ncommunicated effectively in shaping U.S. policy. However, leadership and manage-\nment of the mission by the charg\xc3\xa9 and DCM have been inconsistent and have failed\nto provide necessary communication, coordination, problem solving, and fairness to\nfoster a genuine sense of teamwork.\n\nThe entire embassy staff worked together to accomplish a successful move into a\nnew chancery in September 2007, despite road closures, violent street demonstra-\ntions, heavy monsoon rains, and disruptions to power and communications. The new\nchancery is bright and well equipped, and the embassy staff was functioning well\nwithin the new facility.\n\nFaced with the challenges of a hostile political environment and tightly controlled\naccess to Burmese Government officials and other contacts, the charg\xc3\xa9 and the\nEmbassy had reached out effectively to the political opposition and civil society.\nThe political-economic section had produced a steady flow of reliable reporting and\nanalysis of value to U.S. policy makers at the highest levels, before, during, and after\nthe September 2007 political crisis. In an environment where traditional public out-\nreach is severely limited, the active and effective public diplomacy programs of the\nAmerican Center enable the mission to reach out in a number of innovative ways to\nthe Burmese people.\n\nOIG identified several areas in the human resources section that needed to be ad-\ndressed. These include employment procedures for eligible family members, imple-\nmentation of a wage increase for the locally employed (LE) staff, updating the LE\nstaff handbook, and ensuring the proper storage of sensitive personal information.\nIn addition, OIG recommended determining the appropriate size of some manage-\nment units and abolishing local positions in others.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 45\n\x0cInspection of Embassy Tokyo, Japan, and\nConstituent Posts (ISP-I-08-39A)\n\nThe Ambassador was the driving force for an internal rightsizing exercise that\nengaged each office and agency in a bottom-up examination of staffing levels that\ncould reduce Department of State and other agency staffing considerably over sev-\neral years. Embassy Tokyo\xe2\x80\x99s rightsizing exercise was designed to increase productivity\nand decrease waste in every section and agency. OIG made a recommendation that\nthe Department implement the recommendations that arose from the rightsizing\nexercise.\n\nThe political and economic sections were providing substantial, high-quality report-\ning in a good mix of cable and e-mail form. The political-military unit was leading\nimportant negotiations on a range of security issues and coordinating closely with\nU.S. military and civilian officials in Japan, U.S. Pacific Command, and Washington.\nOIG recommended that Embassy Tokyo conduct a complete review of the rela-\ntive workload of all personnel in the political-military and security policy unit of\nthe political section, with a view to providing better balance in the workload, greater\nguidance and career development for all U.S. officers, and greater clarity and delinea-\ntion of the workload of the unit\xe2\x80\x99s two LE staff workers.\n\nPublic diplomacy planning was well conceived, but additional steps needed to be\ntaken to implement the public diplomacy plan. OIG recommended that Embassy\nTokyo develop and implement a mission-wide public diplomacy plan based on cur-\nrent Mission Strategic Plan goals. In addition, OIG recommended that Embassy\nTokyo conduct a customer and management review of the media analysis and\ntranslation team production to identify and eliminate duplicative and low-priority\nproducts and reduce outside translation by bringing this function within the media\nanalysis and translation team.\n\nConsular services were being performed efficiently in the Embassy and constituent\nposts, but nonimmigrant visa workload could increase substantially later this year,\ndepending on how the electronic travel authorization program is implemented. Child\ncustody issues in Japan are extremely difficult, and OIG recommended that Embassy\nTokyo prepare and implement a strategic plan to persuade the Japanese Government\nto sign and ratify The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child\nAbduction and assist consular officers in gaining access to American children in\nJapan who are the subject of child-custody disputes.\n\n\n\n 46 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cManagement operations, overall, were outstanding and focused on providing very\ngood customer service to the large mission and the consulates. OIG made recom-\nmendations that Embassy Tokyo review, revise, and reprogram some LE staff posi-\ntions. OIG also recommended that the Embassy encourage the LE staff association\nto dissolve the executive committee that presently exists and hold an election to\nselect committee members that can restore viability to the association.\n\nThe five constituent posts were providing a relatively small and low-cost, yet impor-\ntant, regional representation and outreach to the public and to major economic and\npolitical-military centers. Embassy Tokyo\xe2\x80\x99s intensive communications with, and good\nsupport for, the constituent posts was helping to assure that the consulates worked\nproductively and were well integrated into the mission.\n\n\n\n\nBureau of European and Eurasian Affairs\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nBratislava, Slovakia (ISP-I-08-27)\n\nThe OIG team commended Embassy Bratislava for its extensive rightsizing exercise\nthat produced significant cost savings and eliminated several LE staff and two Amer-\nican positions. Post management was making minor adjustments with the contractors\nwho replaced the LE staff. Embassy Bratislava should be rewarded by the Depart-\nment of State with a portion of the resulting financial savings, including those made\nin centrally held and post budgets.\n\nThe Ambassador and DCM were providing strong executive direction for Embassy\nBratislava. The Ambassador was seeking to improve coordination among sections\nby designating mission-wide managers for key issues. The FY 2010 Mission Strategic\nPlan was even tighter and clearer than the FY 2009 version praised by the Depart-\nment.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 47\n\x0cThe political/economic section had successfully lobbied the Slovak Government to\nmoderate draft laws restricting the press and nongovernmental organizations while\nreassigning responsibilities to cope with the unanticipated loss of an American politi-\ncal officer position. Return of the officer position in summer 2008 will allow the\nsection chief to clarify those responsibilities.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Tallinn,\nEstonia (ISP-I-08-38)\n\nEmbassy Tallinn maintained the lean organizational structure envisioned when the\nDepartment opened posts across the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Out-\nsourcing resulted in a relatively small LE staff, and regional support provided many\nother services.\n\nThe political-economic section was having difficulty managing the demands put on\nit by the Department of State, post management, and its own ambitious reporting\nplan. The OIG team recommended that the portfolios be redistributed more equita-\nbly and the timeliness of reporting given priority over editing.\n\nA well-managed public affairs section maintained an impressive mission-wide out-\nreach program and had a close working relationship with the media, which gave the\nEmbassy unusually broad opportunities to present U.S. views to the Estonian public.\n\nA low nonimmigrant visa refusal rate, coupled with Estonian progress on other leg-\nislative requirements of the revised Visa Waiver Program, made Estonia a good can-\ndidate to be included in the program early on under the security waiver. The well-run\nconsular section, with post management support, maintained a productive working\nrelationship with the Department of Homeland Security on this issue.\n\n\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Vilnius, Lithuania\n(ISP-I-08-42)\n\nEmbassy Vilnius\xe2\x80\x99 post management was successful in steering the bilateral relation-\nship, advancing key U.S. goals, and keeping policy makers aware that Lithuanians\nwere becoming more Eurocentric and likely to follow U.S. policy leads only when\nconvinced of their underlying good sense.\n\n\n48 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cDeveloping and rightsizing an LE staff profile more in tune with Lithuania\xe2\x80\x99s rapidly\ndeveloping economy and rising inflation was Embassy Vilnius\xe2\x80\x99 greatest challenge. LE\nstaff compensation had not changed in four years and required adjustment.\n\nA joint political-economic section was deeply engaged in promoting continued\nLithuanian participation in several peacekeeping operations, in working to resolve\noutstanding Jewish property issues dating from the Second World War, and in carry-\ning out numerous demarches from Washington.\n\nThe Visa Waiver Program was a major issue in the bilateral relationship. Although\nLithuania was on a path to meet its benchmarks in the roadmap for the inclusion of\nLithuania in the Visa Waiver Program, Lithuanian expectations had to be managed,\nand the Ambassador and his staff were doing an excellent job in that regard.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of the U.S. Mission\nto the United Nations Agencies in Rome\n(ISP-I-08-40)\n\nThe U.S. Mission to the United Nations Agencies in Rome (USUN Rome) was well\nmanaged and successfully pursuing U.S. goals in all six of the UN entities located\nin Rome. Coordination and teamwork on the Food and Agriculture Organization\nreform, a major U.S. priority, was particularly noteworthy.\n\nAdvocacy and reporting were well managed and coordinated at USUN Rome, no-\ntably with regard to the Food and Agriculture Organization, World Food Program,\nand International Development Law Organization. There was a need for closer\ncoordination between the Department of the Treasury, other Washington agen-\ncies, and USUN Rome to ensure that projects funded by the International Fund for\nAgricultural Development are clearly integrated into overall U.S. food and agriculture\nobjectives. The OIG team recommended that USUN Rome request, and the Depart-\nment fund, an LE position dedicated to facilitating the Department\xe2\x80\x99s evaluation of\nand advocacy of specific projects of the International Fund for Agricultural Devel-\nopment. The OIG team also made an informal recommendation that USUN Rome\nprepare scene-setter cables to the incoming Department of Treasury delegation to\nprovide some helpful project information prior to their arrival.\n\nThe Ambassador and public affairs officer had created and implemented a particu-\nlarly effective public diplomacy tool\xe2\x80\x94a media tour that groups them and important\njournalists on visits to projects in developing countries that are funded by the United\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 49\n\x0cStates through the Rome UN agencies. The OIG team recommended that USUN\nRome seek an increase in its public diplomacy base program budget aligned to its\nexpanded use of media tours and request an LE public diplomacy position to ensure\ncontinuity to this innovative program.\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nVatican, The Holy See (ISP-I-08-41)\n\nThe Vatican is actively engaged with a number of areas of interest to the United\nStates, including the Balkans, the Middle East, and China, as well as on global issues\naffecting human rights, population, terrorism, and trafficking in persons. At the time\nof the inspection, a newly arrived Ambassador had succeeded remarkably quickly\nin energizing this small embassy and had embarked on an ambitious agenda, tied to\ngoals in the Mission Strategic Plan for the coming year.\n\nAs recently as 2006, the Department decided not to have Embassy Vatican relo-\ncate to newly available space on the Embassy Rome compound. Embassy Vatican\nhas retained a small LE staff to provide services that might not be easily available\nfrom Embassy Rome, its main provider. The Embassy is housed in a leased building\nfronting on a busy street and in need of relatively costly upgrades. The OIG team\nrecommended that Embassy Vatican develop and implement a plan to relocate to the\nEmbassy Rome compound as soon as possible, with an eye toward cost savings and\nimproved security.\n\nA small but vibrant political section maintains good relations with Vatican officials\nand provided a steady stream of extremely well-drafted and insightful reporting to\nWashington readers. Making the international relations officer generalist more avail-\nable to the section will improve its already strong performance. The OIG team also\nrecommended that Embassy Vatican work out a program with Embassy Rome to\nprovide regular training assignments and exposure for the public affairs officer in\nthat Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s public diplomacy section.\n\n\n\n\n50 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cInspection of U.S. Mission to the\nUnited Nations and Other International\nOrganizations, Geneva (ISP-I-08-51A)\n\nThe U.S. Mission to the United Nations and Other International Organizations has\nworked diligently and with success to meet its priority strategic goal of promoting\nthe interests of the United States in multilateral UN organizations based in Geneva.\nThe achievement of some key policy goals in human rights, economic, and other\nareas has been inhibited by unclear policy guidance and the lack of a single point of\ncontact in the Department corresponding to a country desk.\n\nAfter a number of years of static budgets and increasing costs, the mission offered\nbuyouts to senior LE staff in order to meet a mandated budget rescission this fiscal\nyear. This action, coupled with several severances for cause, resulted in 12 vacant\npositions in the management section, leaving it critically understaffed and in danger\nof becoming unable to provide adequate services to its clients.\n\nThe arrangements for staffing and funding the mission\xe2\x80\x99s conference services office\nwere not sustainable and were inherently inefficient. OIG recommended that this\nstrongly performing office, which supports 4,000 delegates per year, be reviewed and\nregularized.\n\n\n\nBureau of Central and South Asian Affairs\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nAshgabat, Turkmenistan (ISP-I-08-46)\n\nEmbassy Ashgabat was a high-functioning mission successfully advancing U.S. policy\ngoals of developing cooperation with the new Turkmenistan Government in the\nareas of energy, security, education, health, and economic and political reform, in-\ncluding democracy and human rights. Turkmenistan had been without an accredited\nU.S. ambassador for two years and was likely to remain so for another year. This was\nperceived negatively by Turkmenistan and reduces U.S. influence.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 51\n\x0cEmbassy Ashgabat\xe2\x80\x99s chancery was an extremely overcrowded, prefabricated build-\ning completed in 1995 and intended to accommodate a staff half the present size.\nSeveral mission offices were located in three off-site locations. OBO has scheduled\nAshgabat for a new embassy compound in FY 2018. The Embassy needs to prepare\na rightsizing study to advance the process.\n\nThe Embassy was operating at peak capacity, with officers under some stress from\nthe heavy workload. The prospective infusion of $50 million dollars of U.S. coun-\nternarcotics assistance into Turkmenistan over the next two years, in addition to\nother program activities, may require additional American and LE staff positions.\nThe Embassy had included the need for additional positions in its Mission Strategic\nPlan.\n\n\n\n\nLimited-Scope Inspection of Embassy\nTashkent, Uzbekistan (ISP-I-08-50)\n\nEmbassy Tashkent was successfully advancing U.S. policy objectives in the difficult\nenvironment of Uzbekistan. Under the leadership of the Ambassador and the depu-\nty chief of mission, the mission was widening cooperation in areas welcomed by the\nhost government, such as border security and counternarcotics, while continuing to\nadvocate for progress in more sensitive areas such as democracy and human rights.\n\nThe inspection of resource management and management controls revealed no\nidentifiable weaknesses, and resources appeared well managed. The OIG team made\nrecommendations covering some administrative and information management is-\nsues.\n\n\n\n\n52 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cBureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs\n\t\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Ottawa, Canada, and\nConstituent Posts (ISP-I-08-35A)\n\nInteragency coordination, while complicated by the proliferation of U.S. federal\nagencies represented in Canada, was robust and collegial, with one exception: the\nDepartment of Homeland Security\xe2\x80\x99s (DHS) Customs and Border Protection pre-\nclearance sites across Canada, although under chief of mission control, continued\nto operate as virtually autonomous entities, raising questions as to Embassy Ottawa\xe2\x80\x99s\nresponsibility for security and internal control measures at these sites.\n\nFunding for public diplomacy activities in Canada was so low that many opportuni-\nties to influence attitudes of key constituencies were not used. Public affairs officers\nwere making excellent use of target-of-opportunity speakers and events to fill fund-\ning gaps.\n\nConsular sections across Canada had experienced growth in demand for visitor visa\nservices. The facilities in both Vancouver and Toronto will require physical altera-\ntions to adapt to this increased workload. Demand for citizenship services will\nincrease as the requirement for all U.S. citizens residing in Canada to present a valid\ncitizenship document in order to cross the border comes into force.\n\nThe hundreds of new American direct-hire positions, primarily in the law enforce-\nment and security areas, approved for the mission over the last five years have not\nbeen properly factored into the administrative support system. As a result, the\nplatform for provision of administrative support services, as well as some security\nservices, is inadequate to meet mandatory requirements.\n\n\n\n\nInspection of the U.S. Mission to the\nInternational Civil Aviation Organization in\nMontreal, Canada (ISP-I-08-44)\n\nThe U.S. Mission to the International Civil Aviation Organization (USICAO) was\na lean operation that had taken on increased importance following September 11,\n2001, the first time that civil aircraft were used as weapons of mass destruction. This\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 53\n\x0cevent emphasized the priority of enhanced global civil aviation security, along with\nother priorities such as safety and environmental protection. OIG\xe2\x80\x99s review of\nUSICAO found that the mission is effective in advancing U.S. civil aviation policy.\n\nOIG had reservations on the adequacy of the budget to support the expanded focus\nof the mission. OIG recommended that USICAO assess its budget requirements in\nthe next Mission Strategic Plan submission based on increased International Civil\nAviation Organization\xe2\x80\x99s (ICAO) strategic objectives and U.S. operational responsibili-\nties.\n\nOn occasion, USICAO was not receiving instructions in a timely fashion. At times,\nthis was due to policy differences among offices or agencies in Washington. OIG\nrecommended that USICAO\xe2\x80\x99s Washington desk in the Bureau of International Orga-\nnizations be more active in brokering resolution to cross-cutting differences so that\ninstructions are clear and timely.\n\nDue to the small size of the mission but the increased importance of policy issues, it\nis imperative that the mission has continuity of leadership to maintain policy coordi-\nnation and advocacy in ICAO. OIG recommended that the Bureau of International\nOrganizations closely monitor staffing assignments to avoid transferring the Ambas-\nsador and DCM on the same cycle.\n\n\n\n\nInspection of Embassy Managua, Nicaragua\n(ISP-I-08-54A)\n\nEmbassy Managua was highly successful in the execution of policy and appropriately\nrecalibrated the relationship with the Nicaraguan Government to reflect the harsher\nnew realities of dealing with Sandinista leader Ortega as an elected president. In\nclose coordination with the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Embassy Mana-\ngua effectively implemented Washington\xe2\x80\x99s strategy of sustained engagement, along\nwith assistance, to allow the United States maximum influence in preserving democ-\nracy and market-based economic development in Nicaragua.\n\nInteragency relationships were smooth and productive. Embassy Managua\xe2\x80\x99s robust\npublic diplomacy outreach ensured that official U.S. positions gained a hearing in\nNicaragua. The consular section was productive and efficient, but needed an addi-\ntional officer and modification of the new consular waiting area. Embassy Managua,\nwith strong support from the Ambassador and deputy chief of mission, seamlessly\nintegrated its security program into the structure and operations of the newly con-\nstructed embassy.\n54 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cInspection of Embassy La Paz, Bolivia\n(ISP-I-08-56A)\n\nThe OIG team observed first hand that Embassy La Paz prepared well for, and the\nregional security officer managed effectively, the internal defense of the chancery\ncompound during a recent violent demonstration.\n\nEmbassy La Paz recently submitted a rightsizing report identifying the staffing levels\nrequired to support its Mission Strategic Plan goals. However, the report did not\naddress how the current difficulties in the bilateral relationship impede the ability\nof several mission elements to accomplish their goals and how staff levels could be\nadjusted to reflect these conditions. The Embassy had developed and implemented\neffective programs of support for democracy and the rule of law in the face of\nBolivian Government criticism and attempted interference.\n\nThe Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s effective counternarcotics programs aimed at interdiction, coca eradi-\ncation, and alternative development were preserving the longstanding U.S. invest-\nment in counternarcotics efforts in the world\xe2\x80\x99s third-largest coca producing country.\nThe Embassy was providing excellent reporting on the broad spectrum of political,\neconomic, and counternarcotics issues.\n\nThe International Cooperative Administrative Support Services service provider was\ndoing an excellent job of providing management support across virtually the entire\nrange of administrative operations at Embassy La Paz and the embassy branch of-\nfices in Santa Cruz, Cochabamba, and Trinidad. Opportunities existed for greater\nefficiency and economy by consolidating parallel management operations of the\nDepartment of State and other agencies at post. The mission had made initial efforts\nto consolidate housing and shipping operations, but further progress will require the\nactive engagement of the executive office and greater USAID cooperation.\n\nA management and legal stalemate in Washington has kept Embassy Bolivia from\nestablishing an American presence post in Santa Cruz and has hampered outreach\ninto this increasingly economically and politically important region.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 55\n\x0cInspection of Embassy Asuncion, Paraguay\n(ISP-I-08-57A)\n\nEmbassy Asuncion had moved aggressively to take advantage of Paraguay\xe2\x80\x99s in-\ncreased readiness to act against corruption and transnational criminal organizations\nby initiating coordinated programs to disrupt criminal activity, narcotics trafficking,\nand possible financing of terrorist organizations. The country team and the inter-\nagency law enforcement/counterterrorism working group were functioning collab-\noratively to advance these objectives under the leadership of the Ambassador and\ndeputy chief of mission. The Embassy had also supported Paraguay\xe2\x80\x99s transition to\nmore democratic institutions and was establishing constructive relations with the op-\nposition leaders who won the country\xe2\x80\x99s fairest election ever.\n\nThe Embassy had taken great public diplomacy advantage of Paraguayans\xe2\x80\x99 general\nagreement with U.S. foreign policy toward Paraguay to improve the image of the\nUnited States in Paraguay. The Ambassador had been very effective in underlining\npublicly, often using the Guarani national language, U.S. support for the Paraguayan\npeople, including private sector medical and scholarship contributions.\n\nThe Embassy had witnessed an explosive growth in Department of Defense person-\nnel, focused principally on training Paraguayan Armed Forces in peacekeeping and\nsupport for counterterrorism. Additional growth of U.S. military presence is not\ndesirable at this time, and the Embassy will need to continue assuring that U.S. armed\nforces\xe2\x80\x99 presence and activities in country do not overshadow other U.S. programs.\nThe Embassy was tracking closely proposed changes in personnel under Chief of\nMission authority and was adhering to National Security Decision Directive-38 pro-\ncedures. However, Defense personnel under the authority of an area military com-\nmander were receiving International Cooperative Administrative Support Services\nfor which they may not have been paying the appropriate amount. The Embassy\nwill need to restrict further personnel growth because of space constraints until the\ncompletion of the new embassy compound.\n\n\n\n\n56 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cBEST PRACTICES\n\n\nEmbassy Asuncion\n\nBest Practice: Toll-Free Telephone Access to Voice of America News\n\nIssue: Local media in less developed countries with marginal infrastructure still have\nconsiderable impact on local perceptions of the United States and issues of interest.\nThese institutions, however, do not have the budget to purchase wire services, nor\ndo they have reliable Internet access. Providing them with accurate reporting from\nVoice of America in a format that they can use easily helps the U.S. Government\nreach local populations and provide accurate understanding of the United States and\nits policies.\n\nResponse: The public diplomacy section developed a computerized system that\ndownloads Voice of America news, updating it hourly. These digital recordings are\nthen made accessible to journalists through a toll-free telephone line.\n\nResult: Small local media outlets now have free access to up-to-date world news.\nThe public diplomacy section tracks several dozen calls per week, but implementing\nthe system in larger underdeveloped countries could provide greater results.\n\n\n\n\nEmbassy La Paz\n\nBest Practice: Management of the Cell Phone and Telephone Database Program\n\nIssue: The financial management office wanted a way to accurately account for all\ncalls made by mission employees. In addition to providing accountability for calls\nmade, the office wanted to provide mission employees official billing statements in a\nmatter of minutes.\n\nResponse: The Information Service Center created a database that could account\nfor cell phone and telephone calls made by mission employees. The database allows\nusers to identify and separate their nonofficial from their official calls. The database\nalso gives the financial management office the tools to accurately collect reimburse-\nment from those that have exceeded the permitted amount for personal calls.\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 57\n\x0cResult: The phone program has proven to be very effective and continues to oper-\nate efficiently. As a result, the total number of financial management office person-\nhours was reduced by 99 percent, in addition to eliminating any possible loss in\ngovernment resources and funding. Several other posts worldwide have followed suit,\nadopting the database to their program.\n\n\n\n\nEmbassy Ottawa\n\nBest Practice: Inventory Control/Property Management\n\nIssue: Maintaining a timely and accurate inventory of the personal property at the\nAmbassador and DCM residences is a painstaking and laborious exercise.\n\nSolution: The Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s warehouse supervisor and the storekeeper have developed\na best practice for inventory control. Every piece of property at both residences has\nbeen digitally pictured, along with its nonexpendable property application property\nnumber, so that any item can be identified and traced, both by record book and by\ncomputer.\n\nResults: It is now much easier to complete an inventory or spot check on individual\nitems at either residence.\n\n\n\nBest Practice: Ecology Fair/Waste Management\n\nIssue: How to emphasize to the embassy community the cost savings of recycling\nand the benefits of using more efficient lighting (such as compact fluorescent lights).\n\nSolution: Embassy Ottawa has made the \xe2\x80\x9cgreening\xe2\x80\x9d of mission operations a prior-\nity, and it is included as a goal in the management affairs strategic plan. The conser-\nvation program began as a cost-saving measure several years ago and has blossomed\ninto a mission-wide commitment. Recycling bins are readily available throughout the\nmission, including at consulates general, and their use is encouraged. In the embassy\nbuilding, which receives generous amounts of natural light in its interior atrium, only\none-half of the lights are turned on, with no apparent detriment.\n\nIn early March 2008, the general services and facilities maintenance sections spon-\nsored an ecology fair in the embassy auditorium. The fair was the culmination of a\nmajor effort to track embassy-generated waste, in which the post actually measured\nthe pounds of paper, plastic, and other recyclables that were thrown out unsorted\n\n 58 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cand found that 39 percent of the material sent to the landfill was potentially recycla-\nble. Booths displayed graphically the break out of the \xe2\x80\x9cwaste audit\xe2\x80\x9d and what could\nhave been recycled. Other booths had examples of regular light bulbs and compact\nfluorescent light bulbs, which are 75 percent more efficient, and the differences in\nbrightness and energy usage. Again, graphs were used to portray how much could be\nsaved in energy costs if the embassy buildings and employee residences were fitted\nwith compact florescent light bulbs. (Mission Canada families\xe2\x80\x99 savings could be as\nhigh as $85,000.) Led by the Ambassador, many embassy employees attended the\nfair.\n\nResults: The embassy community is now better informed on the benefits of (and\nhopefully recruited into adopting) recycling and utilizing compact florescent lighting.\n\n\n\nEmbassy Tokyo\n\nBest Practice: Use of Mobile Phone Technology to Reach Younger Audiences\n\nIssue: How to most effectively provide younger Japanese information about the\nUnited States, the American Embassy, and public program opportunities in order to\nincrease contacts with this important audience.\n\nResponse: The Information Resource Center has created a cell phone Internet\nsite that users can access by scanning a two-dimensional bar code with their mobile\nphones. The site offers information on visas, the American Embassy, frequently\nasked questions, and links to material more easily accessed online. This site also\nenables the American centers throughout Japan to advertise upcoming programs\namong younger audiences. The Embassy and consulates have been actively promot-\ning this service with business cards providing the bar code.\n\nResult: The site has been in operation for approximately one year and has been\nsteadily gaining use. In February 2008, there were over 12,000 page views. Tokyo\xe2\x80\x99s\nuse of mobile-phone technology to reach younger audiences is an approach that may\nbe adaptable in other countries with a strong electronic infrastructure.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 59\n\x0cBest Practice: Telephone Information System\n\nIssue: Embassy Tokyo has a large telephone system that is used at the Embassy and\nthe housing compound for both business and personal calls. Keeping track of the\nbilling from the computerized telephone system and the variety of local telephone\ncompanies that are used is a complicated task.\n\nResponse: Embassy Tokyo\xe2\x80\x99s telephone information system is a locally developed\ntelephone billing application that separately bills official and personal calls. The ap-\nplication compares the data from the Embassy\xe2\x80\x99s telephone usage log against the data\nreceived from the various Japanese telephone companies to create the bills. Users\nmust dial 8 before making official calls and 9 before making personal calls. The indi-\nvidual section bills are printed and distributed in hard copy, and the personal bills are\ndistributed electronically by e-mail.\n\nResult: Prior to automating this billing process, two employees worked full time on\ntelephone billing. This job can now be done in a small fraction of the original time\nrequired and requires only part-time use of one staff position. The telephone infor-\nmation system also provides a comprehensive telephone directory accessible via the\nEmbassy\xe2\x80\x99s OpenNet. This service allows callers to find office extensions, cell phone\nnumbers, and home telephone numbers.\n\n\n\n\nBest Practice: Bottom-Up Approach to Rightsizing\n\nBest Practice: Utilize a private-sector \xe2\x80\x9cbottom-up\xe2\x80\x9d approach to maximize the ef-\nficiency of and rightsize Mission Tokyo operations.\n\nIssue: How best to right-size Mission Tokyo by identifying better ways to operate\nand identify positions no longer required.\n\nResponse: By employing the methodology used in the private sector that concen-\ntrates on increasing productivity and eliminating waste and duplication, all mission\nentities were analyzed. The need for and value of every person and position in every\nsection was questioned and justified. Employees were asked to determine if there\nwas a better way to operate. This approach enabled management to pinpoint duplica-\ntion and waste.\n\nResult: Potential savings are in the millions. A significant number of both American\nand LE staff positions were either eliminated or referred to the Department to be\nabolished or reprogrammed.\n\n\n60 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c\t\t\t INVESTIGATIONS\n\n\n\n\nCONFLICT OF INTEREST\n\nOIG conducted a joint investigation with the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS)\nconcerning a Consular Associate at an African post who accepted illegal gratuities in\nexchange for issuing visas. After lengthy plea negotiations with the Department of\nJustice, the Consular Associate agreed on May 13, 2008, to plead guilty to two counts\nof violating the conflict-of-interest statutes. As a result of the plea, the Consular\nAssociate was placed on one year probation and agreed to restitution to the govern-\nment in the amount of $505,115.\n\n\nOIG conducted an investigation of a senior Department manager who accepted il-\nlegal gratuities from Department contractors, including skybox tickets to a National\nFootball League (NFL) game worth over $400 a piece, and also pressured subcon-\ntractors to hire friends and members of his church. In addition, the senior manager\ntook trips with a subordinate at government expense for the purpose of engaging in\nan extramarital affair with the subordinate. The subordinate also accepted illegal gra-\ntuities, including the skybox NFL tickets, from Department contractors. The senior\nmanager also threatened to terminate a contract if the contractor did not give a raise\nto a personal friend. When interviewed, both employees admitted to all of the allega-\ntions. On May 21, 2008, HR proposed termination for both employees.\n\n\n\nOIG conducted an investigation involving a U.S. Ambassador who violated the Eth-\nics Reform Act by failing to report a substantial amount of earned outside income.\nOIG referred the matter to the Department of Justice, Civil Division. On June 17,\n2008, the Ambassador signed a Settlement Agreement wherein he agreed to pay\n$300,000 to the U.S. Treasury to resolve the matter involving his improper receipt of\noutside income. As part of the settlement, the United States agreed to take no fur-\nther action against the Ambassador. The agreement also stipulated that the Ambassa-\ndor would neither admit nor deny the validity of any of the claims against him.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 61\n\x0cTHREATS AND CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION\n\nOIG conducted a joint investiga-\ntion with the Federal Bureau of Investigator Receives FBI Award\nInvestigation (FBI) of a Department\n On August 11, 2008, Special Agent Stan\nemployee who made several threats\n Becton received the FBI\xe2\x80\x99s Director\xe2\x80\x99s Award\nvia telephone and electronic mail\n for outstanding investigative work. The\nto an Arab-American organization. Director\xe2\x80\x99s Award was presented to Special\nWhen interviewed by FBI and OIG Agent Becton for his diligent efforts work-\nagents, the employee admitted to ing with the FBI in conducting a hate crime\nmaking the threatening communica- case. The case resulted in the subject, a\ntions. The subject was indicted for former Department employee, being con-\nmaking threatening communications victed and sentenced to a year in prison.\nand subsequently pleaded guilty on\ntwo counts related to the violations.\nOn July 11, 2008, the subject was sentenced in U.S. District Court for the District of\nColumbia to 12 months and one day on each charge, to be served concurrently. The\nsubject was also ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and $125 special assessment to the\ncourt. Upon completion of incarceration, the subject will be placed on 36 months of\nprobation. The subject retired from the Department prior to his indictment and was,\ntherefore, not subject to disciplinary action. (07-002)\n\n\n\nEMBEZZLEMENT\n\nOIG conducted an investigation of a Foreign Service officer (FSO) who embezzled\napproximately $47,000 by issuing a contract to his brother for which the Department\ndid not receive any work. The FSO resigned from the Department, and both broth-\ners were indicted for their roles in the scheme. On May 19, 2008, the former FSO\npleaded guilty to a one-count charge of mail fraud and a one-count charge of money\nlaundering.\n\nOn June 23, 2008, the Federal trial of the brother commenced in the Eastern District\nof Tennessee. On June 25, 2008, the jury acquitted the brother on charges of con-\nspiracy to defraud the U.S. Government and conspiracy to commit money launder-\ning. During the trial, the former FSO took the stand as a witness for the defense and\ncommitted perjury by lying under oath about both his and his brother\xe2\x80\x99s involvement\nin the fraud. Sentencing for the former FSO is scheduled for October 2008. (04-027)\n\n\n\n 62 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cVISA FRAUD\n\nOIG conducted a joint investigation based upon a referral from the Bureau of Im-\nmigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that an immigration attorney based in\nArlington was involved in visa fraud by filing fraudulent immigration-related pa-\nperwork on behalf of some of her clients. The joint investigation with ICE, FBI,\nand Department of Labor OIG determined that the attorney was falsifying asylum\nclaims for her clients by taking their original claims and translating them into Eng-\nlish, incorporating false information so that they would qualify.\n\nOn April 15, 2008, the attorney pleaded guilty to one count of fraud related to visas,\npermits, and other immigration documents. On July 11, 2008, the attorney was sen-\ntenced to two month\xe2\x80\x99s incarceration, to be followed by a two-year supervised release,\nand was ordered to forfeit $60,000. (06-014)\n\n\n\nEMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT\n\nOIG conducted an investigation of a Department employee who forged the name\nof her supervisor on time-and-attendance documents and falsely claimed overtime\npayments. When interviewed, the subject admitted to making the falsifications.\nOn April 8, 2008, OIG was notified by HR that the employee had served a 10-day\nsuspension from March 24 through April 3, 2008. On May 30, 2008, the Bureau of\nResource Management notified OIG that the employee had repaid the Department a\ntotal of $840 for overtime payments received for time that she did not work. (07-\n036)\n\n\nOIG conducted an investigation of a Department contract employee who improp-\nerly accessed the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Passport Information Electronic Records System\n(PIERS) by looking up the passport files of presidential candidates, as well as other\nindividuals, for nonofficial purposes. The investigation determined that the contract\nemployee electronically accessed through PIERS approximately 200 different pass-\nport applications without authorization. The contract employee was terminated from\nhis assignment with the contractor. On September 22, 2008, the contract employee\npleaded guilty to a one-count criminal information in the U.S. District Court for the\nDistrict of Columbia to Unauthorized Computer Access in violation of 18 U.S.C.\nSection 1030(a)(2)(B). (08-014)\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 63\n\x0cFOLLOW-UP ACTIONS \n\n\n\nVISA FRAUD\n\nA joint investigation with the Department of Labor OIG, the Internal Revenue\nService, the FBI, and the DHS OIG revealed that an employment and immigration\nservices company based in Falls Church, Virginia, falsified employment-based visa\napplications on behalf of its employer clients by claiming the employers had an ex-\nisting need for skilled worker that could not be filled from the local job pool of U.S.\nworkers.\n\nThe investigation determined that false certifications were used to secure visas for\nforeign nationals to enter the United States. A search warrant was executed at four\nlocations, including the offices of the employment and immigration services compa-\nny. The investigation revealed the company filed at least 1,400 fraudulent visa appli-\ncations with the Department as part of this scheme. Illegal immigrants were charged\nas much as $120,000 each to obtain visas under false pretenses.\n\nA total of seven individuals were indicted or agreed to plead guilty in U.S. District\nCourt, Eastern District of Virginia, on charges of conspiracy to commit immigra-\ntion fraud, conspiracy to encourage an alien to unlawfully enter the United States,\nmoney laundering and misprision of a felony. On May 20, 2005, one defendant\nwas sentenced to two years\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment; two years\xe2\x80\x99 supervised release and fined\n$1,500. On August 12, 2005, another defendant was sentenced to two years impris-\nonment, two years\xe2\x80\x99 probation, and fined $750. On October 21, 2005, one defendant\nwas sentenced to 70 months\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment. On November 18, 2005, another defen-\ndant was sentenced to four months\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment, six months\xe2\x80\x99 community confine-\nment, three years\xe2\x80\x99 supervised release, and was fined $7,000. On Dec-\nember 2, 2005, the remaining three defendants were sentenced. One received 44\nmonths\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment and three years\xe2\x80\x99 supervised released. Another received 18\nmonths\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment and three years\xe2\x80\x99 supervised released. The third received 15\nmonths\xe2\x80\x99 imprisonment and two years\xe2\x80\x99 supervised release. The subjects also were\nrequired to forfeit over $3.2 million dollars in proceeds from the scheme.\n\nAt the time of the prosecutions, one of the co-defendants fled to China to escape\npunishment and was declared a fugitive. In early 2008, he was apprehended by\nChinese authorities and extradited to the United States. On May 9, 2008, he pleaded\nguilty an indictment charging him with conspiracy to commit immigration fraud and\n\n\n64 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cmaking false statements. On July 25, 2008, he was sentenced to 18 months\xe2\x80\x99 incarcera-\ntion, to be followed by three years of supervised release. (See OIG Semiannual Report,\nOctober 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006, pp 50-51) (05-019)\n\n\n\nOIG conducted a joint investigation with the U.S. Department of Labor, OIG;\nDHS\xe2\x80\x99s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and the Department\xe2\x80\x99s\nBureau of Diplomatic Security, of a construction company allegedly committing\nemployment-based visa fraud by filing labor certifications for workers they did not\nintend to employ. The investigation determined that the company filed more than 65\nlabor certifications for foreign workers, many of which never worked for the com-\npany and paid in excess of $20,000 for their labor certifications. The president of\nthe construction company pleaded guilty to a one-count criminal information charg-\ning him with conspiracy to commit visa/immigration fraud and making false state-\nments. The company president also agreed to an order of forfeiture in the amount\nof $250,000.\n\nOn September 12, 2007, the company vice president and another co-conspirator\nwere indicted on seven counts relating to the scheme. On November 8, 2007, the\ncompany president was sentenced to 21 months\xe2\x80\x99 incarceration, to be followed by two\nyears of supervised release. On January 23, 2008, the other co-conspirators pleaded\nguilty to one count each. The company vice president also agreed to a forfeiture or-\nder in the amount of $300,000. On April 11, 2008, one co-defendant was sentenced\nto 33 months\xe2\x80\x99 incarceration, to be followed by three years supervised release. He\nwas also ordered to comply with his consent order of forfeiture in the amount of\n$300,000. On April 18, 2008, the other co-defendant was sentenced to 24 months\xe2\x80\x99\nsupervised release, ordered to perform 50 hours of community service, and fined\n$5,000. (See OIG Semiannual Report, October 1, 2007, to March 31, 2008, pp 51) (05-046)\n\n\n\n\nPASSPORT FRAUD\n\nOIG conducted an investigation of a German national who assumed the identity of\na deceased infant to obtain a U.S. Passport. When interviewed by OIG the subject\nrelated the story of how she and her German national husband had come to the\nUnited States in 1975 to work on a cruise line. She said her ex-husband obtained the\nidentity documents of two deceased infants of American citizens for them to use.\nBoth she and her ex-husband established American citizenship using the false docu-\nments and then obtained U.S. passports.\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 65\n\x0c On August 23, 2007, the subject was indicted on two counts for making false state-\n ments on her application for a U.S. passport and application for citizenship. OIG\n agents arrested her the same day. On December 7, 2007, the subject pleaded guilty\n to one count of the indictment. On February 13, 2008, she was sentenced to time\n served and had her U.S. citizenship revoked.\n\n As a result of the information provided by the subject, on February 21, 2008, her\n ex-husband was indicted on five counts of using a passport secured by false means.\n OIG agents arrested him the next day. On April 4, 2008, the ex-husband pleaded\n guilty to one count of 18 USC \xc2\xa7 1542 - for knowingly and willfully using a U.S.\n passport to gain entry into the United States, and that such passport was secured by\n reason of false statement. On April 21, 2008, the husband was sentenced to \xe2\x80\x9ctime\n served,\xe2\x80\x9d ordered to pay a $100 court assessment, and was surrendered to the custody\n of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation proceedings. (See\n OIG Semiannual Report, October 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008, pp 52-53) (05-051 & 07-034)\n\n\n\n\n All Other, 10%\n Conflict of\n Passport & Interest, 6%\n Visa Fraud,\n 9%\n Contract &\n Procurement\n Fraud, 11%\n\n Employee\n Misconduct, False\n 43% Statements\n and Claims,\n 11%\n\n Embezzlement\n & Theft, 10%\n\n\n\n Hotline\n Referral To Other Offices for Action 200\n\n Held for Action Within OIG 57\n\n No Action Necessary 142\n\n Total Complaints Received 399\n\n\n66 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 1: DEPARTMENT OF STATE INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES\n\n\n\n\n Preliminary Inquiries\n Opened 22\n Closed 26\n\n Investigations\n Opened 109\n Closed 35\n Pending (9/30/08) 123\n\n Criminal Actions\n Referrals for Prosecution 7\n Indictments/Informations 2\n Convictions 6\n Sentencings (Months Imprisonment) 47\n Sentencings (Months Probation) 122\n Declinations 3\n\n Civil Actions\n Civil Referrals 1\n Civil Judgments 1\n\n Administrative Referrals\n Referrals for Personnel Action 2\n Suitability Referrals to DS 5\n\n Administrative Actions\n Removals 3\n Suspensions 0\n Reprimand/Admonishments 0\n Debarment Actions 0\n\n Monetary Recoveries\n Criminal Fines/Recoveries $580,215\n Civil Recoveries $300,000\n Administrative Recoveries $ 840\n Total Investigative Recoveries $881,055\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 67\n\x0c68 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c APPENDIX 2: REPORTS ISSUED\n\n\n AUD/CG-08-22\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by American\n Refugee Committee, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-23\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by Council on\n International Educational Exchange, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-28\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on Final Buyout Claim by Enviro-Management\n & Research, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-30\t Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on the Indirect Cost Rate Proposed by Church\n World Service, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-31\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on the Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by Project\n Harmony, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-32\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by Nacel Open\n Door, Inc.\n AUD/CG-08-34\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-\n Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by The\n Graduate School, USDA\n AUD/FM-08-04\t Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Department of\n State\xe2\x80\x99s 2007 & 2006 Financial Statements\n AUD/FM-08-24\t Independent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the International Boundary &\n Water Commission, United States & Mexico, U.S. Section, 2007\n & 2006 Financial Statements\n AUD/FM-08-25\t Management Letter Related to the Audit of the International\n Boundary & Water Commission, United States & Mexico, U.S.\n Section, 2007 &2006 Financial Statements\n AUD/FM-08-26\t Audit Report on the Foreign Service Retirement & Disability\n Fund 2007, 2006, & 2005 Financial Statements\n AUD/FM-08-27\t Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Foreign Service\n Retirement & Disability Fund 2007, 2006, & 2005 Financial\n Statements\n AUD/FM-08-38\t Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures: Retirement, Health Benefits, and\n Life Insurance Withholdings/Contributions and Supplemental\n Semiannual Headcount Report Submitted to the Office of\n Personnel Management\n AUD/IP-08-29\t Review of Controls & Notification for Access to Passport Records\n in the Department of State\xe2\x80\x99s Information Electronic Records\n System (PIERS)\n ISP-I-08-10A\t Inspection of Embassy Abidjan, Cote d\xe2\x80\x99Ivoire\n ISP-I-08-25A\t Inspection of Embassy Abuja & Consulate General Lagos,\n Nigeria\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 69\n\x0c ISP-I-08-26 Limited-Scope Review of Department of State Counterterrorism\n Designation & Vetting Procedures\n ISP-I-08-27 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Bratislava, Slovakia\n\n ISP-I-08-28 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Cotonou, Benin\n\n ISP-I-08-31 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Libreville, Gabon\n\n ISP-I-08-32 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Lome, Togo\n\n ISP-I-08-33 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Malabo, Equatorial Guinea\n\n ISP-I-08-34 Inspection of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations\n\n ISP-I-08-35A Inspection of Embassy Ottawa, Canada, and Constituent Posts\n\n ISP-I-08-36A Inspection of Embassy Rangoon, Burma\n\n ISP-I-08-38 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Tallinn, Estonia\n\n ISP-I-08-39A Inspection of Embassy Tokyo, Japan & Constituent Posts\n\n ISP-I-08-40 Limited-Scope Inspection of the U.S. Mission to the United\n Nations Agencies in Rome\n ISP-I-08-41 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Vatican City, The Holy See\n\n ISP-I-08-42 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Vilnius, Lithuania\n\n ISP-I-08-43 Inspection of Embassy Windhoek, Namibia\n ISP-I-08-44 Inspection of the U.S. Mission to the International Civil Aviation\n Organization in Montreal, Canada\n ISP-I-08-46 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Ashgabat, Turkmenistan\n ISP-I-08-49A Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Port Louis, Mauritius\n\n ISP-I-08-50 Limited-Scope Inspection of Embassy Tashkent, Uzbekistan\n\n ISP-I-08-51A Inspection of U.S. Mission to the United Nations and Other\n International Organizations, Geneva, Switzerland\n ISP-I-08-54A Inspection of Embassy Managua, Nicaragua\n ISP-I-08-56A Inspection of Embassy La Paz, Bolivia\n ISP-I-08-57A Inspection of Embassy Asuncion, Paraguay\n\n MERO-IQO-08-01 Status of Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa Programs\n\n MERO-IQO-08-02 Status of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Processing for Iraqi\n Nationals\n SIA-08-04 Review of the Process for Sharing Department Cables via the\n Net-Centric Diplomacy (NCD) Program\n SIA-08-05 Review of Department\xe2\x80\x99s Use of Its Defense Export Licensing\n Watchlist in the Acquisition Process\n\n70 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cClassified Reports Issued:\n\t\nAUD/IT-08-33\t\t Review of the Information Security Program for Sensitive\n Compartmented Information Systems at the Department of\n State\nISP-S-08-10A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Abidjan, Cote\n d\xe2\x80\x99Ivoire\nISP-S-08-25A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Abuja and\n Consulate General Lagos, Nigeria\nISP-S-08-35A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Ottawa and\n Constituent Post, Canada\nISP-S-08-36A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Rangoon,\n Burma\nISP-S-08-39A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Tokyo, Japan,\n and Constituent Posts\nISP-S-08-49A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Port Louis,\n Mauritius\nISP-S-08-51A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of U.S. Mission to the\n United Nations and Other International Organizations, Ge-\n neva, Switzerland\nISP-S-08-54A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Managua,\n Nicaragua\nISP-S-08-56A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy La Paz, Bo-\n livia\nISP-S-08-57A\t\t Classified Annex to the Inspection of Embassy Asuncion,\n Paraguay\n\n\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 71\n\x0c72 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 3: SAVINGS AND MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES\n\n\n\n Table 1\n\n INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED AUDIT REPORTS\n\n WITH QUESTIONED COSTS\n\n Type of Report Number of Question Costs Unsupported Costs\n Reports\n\n A. For which no management\n decision has been made by the\n commencement of the reporting 9 $8,396,000 $2,121,000\n period\n\n B. Which were issued during the\n reporting period 3 $5,816,000 $5,024,000\n\n Subtotals (A + B) 12 $14,212,000 $7,145,000\n\n C. For which a management\n decision was made during\n the reporting period based $34,000\n on formal administrative or\n judicial appeal\n 2 $34,000 $0\n (i) dollar value of disallowed\n costs\n (ii) dollar value of costs not $0\n disallowed\n D.\n For which no management\n decision has been made by the\n 10 $14,178,000 $7,145,000\n end of the reporting period\n\n\n Reports for which no\n management decision was\n 5 $1,855 $1,457\n made within six months of\n issuance\n\n\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 73\n\x0c Table 2\n\n INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED AUDIT REPORTS\n\n WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT FUNDS \n\n BE PUT TO BETTER USE\n\n\n\n Type of Report Number of Reports Dollar Value\n (in Thousands)\nA. For which no management decision has been 0 $0\n made by the commencement of the reporting\n period\n\nB. Which were issued during the reporting period 0 $0\n\n Subtotals (A + B) 0 $0\nC. For which a management decision was made\n during the reporting period\n $0\n 0\n (i) dollar value of recommendations that were\n agreed to by management\n -based on proposed management action 0\n $0\n\n -based on proposed legislative action\n 0\n $0\n (ii) dollar value of recommendations that were\n not agreed to by management\n\nD. For which no management decision has been 0 $0\n made by the end of the reporting period\n\n Reports for which no management decision was 0 $0\n made within six months of issuance\n\n\n\n\n74 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 4: RESOLUTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n\n\n\n Previously Reported Significant Audit Recommendations\n Pending Final Action\n\n\n Report Rec. Report Title First\n Number No. Recommendation Summary Reported\n SIO-A-02-55\t\t Memorandum Report Special Review of Main State Security 9/02\n 2\t\t OIG recommended the Department install interior hard\n lines that provide 15 minute forced-entry, ballistic-resistant\n protection at every Main State lobby. These hard lines\n should be supplemented with 15-minute forced entry, ballis-\n tic-resistance guard booths to ensure all passage through the\n hard line is controlled.\n\n AUD/FM-05-06\t\t Assessment of the Certification and Accreditation, Change Manage- 11/04\n ment, and Patch Management Process\n 1\t\t OIG recommended the Bureau of Information Resource\n Management revise the security test and evaluation of the\n certification and accreditation process to include a complete\n vulnerability scan of the systems being assessed.\n\n IT-I-06-03\t\t Review of the Information Security Program at the Department of 10/06\n State\n 1\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer verify\n that information security roles and responsibilities for the\n Department are clearly defined, to include, at a minimum,\n compliance with the Federal Information Security Manage-\n ment Act (FISMA).\n 2\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer develop\n and implement an agency-wide information security pro-\n gram plan based upon and supported by clearly defined\n information security roles and responsibilities.\n\n\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 75\n\x0c 3\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer verify\n that all information technology assets for the Department\n are reported and accounted for within a comprehensive\n inventory process.\n 4\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer imple-\n ment parameters (as defined in the Federal Information\n Security Management Act) to be used for identifying all\n contractor systems to be included in the Department\xe2\x80\x99s\n inventory.\n 6\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer estab-\n lish a comprehensive plan for the Information Systems\n Security Officer program that includes consistent prioritiza-\n tion of duties and training.\n 7\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer develop\n a process for determining an accurate total number of De-\n partment employees required to take information security\n awareness training.\n 8\t\t OIG recommended that the Chief Information Officer\n assign one entity with responsibility to manage the certifica-\n tion and accreditation process.\n 9\t\t OIG recommended the Chief Information Officer revise\n policies to ensure that information technology security\n findings and recommendations from external and internal\n reviews are being addressed in the plans of action and mile-\n stones process.\n\n\n\n\n76 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c AUD/IQO-07-20 Rec. No. Review of DynCorp International, LLC, Contract Number S-\n LMAQM-04-C-0030, Task Order 0338, for the Iraqi Police\n Training Program Support (Joint audit with the Special Inspector\n 1 General for Iraq Reconstruction)\n\n OIG recommended the Bureau of International Narcotics\n and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) present a plan to the\n U.S. Ambassador to Iraq for review and approval on the use\n of residential camp to house police trainers, as originally\n intended, or make arrangements to dispose of the camp.\n Because of the lengthy consideration already given to decid-\n ing what to do with the trailers, this action should be taken\n 2\n within the next 60 days.\n\n OIG recommended the Office of Acquisitions Manage-\n ment seek reimbursement from DynCorp of the improperly\n authorized payment of $4.2 million that represents contrac-\n tually unauthorized work directed by the Iraqi Ministry of\n Interior. This work included the relocation of the residential\n camp, the manufacture of additional VIP trailers, and the\n construction of an Olympic-size swimming pool.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 77\n\x0cAUD/SI-07-27 Rec. No. Audit of Emergency Preparedness at the Washington Metropolitan 3/07\n Facilities of the Department of State\n\n 2 OIG recommended the Bureau of Administration ensure\n the Office of Emergency Management\xe2\x80\x99s Planning and Pre-\n paredness Division has sufficient staffing to finalize 6 FAM\n 400, Office of Emergency Management Program, and the\n proposed 6 FAH-1 H-100, Domestic Emergency Hand-\n book, and ensure the emergency preparedness policies and\n procedures contained in these manuals are implemented\n and enforced in a timely manner.\n\n 3 OIG recommended the Secretary\xe2\x80\x99s Office of the Coordina-\n tor for Counterterrorism dedicate sufficient staff to finalize\n the National Incident Management System and to correct\n the inaccuracies in the National Response Plan, and submit\n the information to the Department of Homeland Security\n (DHS) in a timely manner.\n\n\n\n\n78 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c AUD/CG-07-25 Rec. No. Review of the Institute of International Education\xe2\x80\x99s Indirect Cost 4/07\n Rates for Fiscal Years 2002-05\n 1 OIG recommended the Bureau of Educational and Cultural\n Affairs grants officer require the Institute of International\n Education to consistently account for severance pay for\n FYs 2002-05 as indirect or direct costs, identify overpay-\n ments of severance and other benefits related to the sever-\n ance pay, reimburse the Department for unallowable sever-\n ance pay and benefits, reduce the fringe benefits pool by the\n overpayments, and recompute the fringe benefits pool for\n allocation to the other cost pools.\n 2 OIG recommended the Bureau of Educational and Cultural\n Affairs grants officer require the Institute of International\n Education to reimburse the Department for bond and loan\n interest, personal living, and other indirect costs classified\n as unallowable; reduce the indirect cost pools by the unal-\n lowable costs; and recompute the indirect cost rates in the\n appropriate pools.\n\n AUD/CG-07-29 Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-Up- 6/07\n on Procedures on Costs Claimed by Atlantic Corridor U.S.A., Inc.,\n Under Department of State Department of State Grants\n 1 OIG recommended the Bureau of Educational and Cultural\n Affairs require Atlantic Corridor to refund the Department\n the $226,705 in excess drawdowns related to Department\n grants and prohibit any future drawdowns until the funds\n are repaid and the grantee has established controls limiting\n any future requests of grant funds to the minimum amount\n necessary to cover allowable costs.\n 2 OIG recommended the Bureau of Educational and Cultural\n Affairs require Atlantic Corridor to refund the Department\n for $45,361 of unallowable costs related to the grants and\n to provide information so that the Department can make\n an appropriate determination on the unsupported costs of\n $97,388.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 79\n\x0cAUD/IP-07-47 Rec. No. Return-to-Work: An Important Program for the Department of 8/07\n State to Implement\n 1 OIG recommended the Bureau of Human Resources devel-\n op and implement a return-to-work program for workers\xe2\x80\x99\n compensation beneficiaries considering the best proactive\n elements discussed in this report.\n\n\nAUD/CG-07-37 Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed- 9/07\n Upon Procedures on Costs Claimed by Meridian International Center\n Under Department of State Cooperative Agreements\n 1 OIG recommended the Bureau of Educational and Cul-\n tural Affairs (1) determine whether the Center\xe2\x80\x99s use of the\n forgone opportunity costs concerning the Center\xe2\x80\x99s confer-\n ence facilities constitutes an appropriate cost-share amount\n under the cooperative agreement, and (2) following this\n determination, as appropriate, require the Center to pro-\n vide supporting documentation for the claimed cost-share\n amounts or an alternative cost-sharing proposal.\n\n\nAUD/IQO-07-48 Accounting for Government-Owned Personal Property Held by 9/07\n Selected Contractors in Afghanistan\n 1 OIG recommended the Department develop and imple-\n ment policies and procedures to achieve compliance with\n Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements for reviewing a\n contractor\xe2\x80\x99s property control system.\n 2 OIG recommended the Department take actions to ad-\n dress the $2.9 million in unallowable costs identified in this\n report, including reconciling contract requirements to the\n property acquired and invoiced by the contractors for which\n they were reimbursed and determine whether property in\n excess of amounts specified in the contract or task order\n was required to accomplish contract objectives; document-\n ing the reconciliation and determination, use them as\n the basis for approving the costs of any excess property\n deemed allowable, and issue a modification to the task order\n indicating the approval; and resolving any unallowable costs\n associated with property that was determined to be unnec-\n essary to the accomplishment of contract objectives.\n\n\n\n80 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c 3\t\t OIG recommended the Department take the following\n steps to address the $25.5 million in unsupported costs\n identified in this report: reconcile the property acquired and\n invoiced by the contractors for which they were reimbursed\n to the contractor\xe2\x80\x99s property lists by obtaining and reviewing\n contractor documentation detailing the types and quanti-\n ties of property acquired; determine whether the property\n was needed and consistent with contract requirements;\n and resolve any unsupported allowable costs associated\n with property that could not be supported with adequate\n documentation or was determined to be unnecessary to the\n accomplishment of contract objectives.\n 4\t\t OIG recommended the Department develop and imple-\n ment a process for reviewing the capitalized asset reports\n submitted by contractors to verify that reports are received\n for all contracts with contractor-held property and reconcil-\n ing, at least annually, the capitalized asset reports submitted\n by contractors to the contractors\xe2\x80\x99 property lists to verify\n that the capitalized asset reports are complete and accurate.\n\n 5\t\t OIG recommended the Department evaluate its current\n structure for monitoring government property held by con-\n tractors, assess the benefits of creating a property adminis-\n trator function, and use this evaluation to clearly define the\n authority and responsibility for property oversight for each\n member of its contract administration team.\n 6\t\t OIG recommended the Department develop and imple-\n ment policies and procedures for monitoring government\n property held by contractors.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 81\n\x0cPreviously Reported Significant Inspections\nRecommendations Pending Final Action\n\nReport Rec. Report Title First\nNumber No. Recommendation Summary Reported\n\nISP-C-07-04 Compliance Follow-up Review of the Inspection of the USIBWC 10/06\n 1 OIG recommended the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, in\n coordination with the Bureau of Legislative Affairs, the Office of the\n Legal Adviser, and the Bureau of Human Resources, seek legislation\n making the U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water\n Commission an entity of the Department of State.\n\nISP-I-07-16\t Inspection of the Bureau of Human Resources (Phase I) 5/07\n 13\t The Bureau of Human Resources, in coordination with the Foreign\n Service Institute, should establish an Executive Advisory Board\n to provide oversight of the Career Entry Program and include\n representatives from the Office of Civil Service Personnel Management\n (HR/CSP); Office of Recruitment, Examination and Employment (HR/\n REE); Foreign Service Institute (FSI); and an individual from outside the\n Department. (Action: HR, in coordination with FSI)\n 33\t The Bureau of Human Resources should, in coordination with the\n Bureau of Resource Management, establish a global savings mechanism\n to supplement the locally employed staff\xe2\x80\x99s retirement plan. (Action:\n HR, in coordination with RM)\n\nISP-I-07-21\t Inspection of the Bureau of Administration, Office of Logistics 5/07\n Operations and Office of Program Management and Policy\n 10\t OIG recommended the Bureau of Resource Management, in coordination\n with the Bureau of Administration, establish procedures in the Foreign\n Affairs Manual to require that all bureau and office heads, and chiefs\n of mission assure in their management controls certifications that an\n inventory was conducted and reconciled with property records and that\n the results were submitted.\n 13\t OIG recommended the Bureau of Administration revise regulations to\n eliminate the criteria allowing the authorization of adjustments when\n shortages total less than one percent of the stated inventory value\n and, when a shortage exists, instead require all domestic and overseas\n entities to submit either the applicable Property Survey Report or\n Property Disposal Authorization and Survey Report with the inventory\n certification.\n\n\n\n\n82 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c 22\t OIG recommended the Bureau of Resource Management, in coordination\n with the Bureau of Administration, establish and implement a system\n to pay the U.S. Postal Service and bill and collect reimbursement from\n other agencies for postal service provided to posts being converted to\n Department-managed postal operations.\n 27\t OIG recommended the Bureau of Human Resources, in coordination\n with the Bureau of Administration, establish a logistics management\n function skill code and a logistics certification program for logistics\n professionals worldwide.\n\n\n\n\nRevised Management Decisions\n\nNone to report.\n\n\n\n\nSignificant Management Success In Resolving\nand Implementing Recommendations\n\n\n Report Rec. Report Title\n Number No. Recommendation Summary\n\n ISP-I-07-12 5 Bureau of Administration\xe2\x80\x99s Office of the Procurement Executive, Office of\n Acquisitions Management, & Office of Small & Disadvantaged Business\n Utilization\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 83\n\x0c In the 2006 inspection of the Bureau of Administration\xe2\x80\x99s Office of\n the Procurement Executive, OIG recommended consolidating local\n guard program contracting in the Office of Acquisition Manage-\n ment (A/LM/AQM). Few areas of procurement in the Department\n called so obviously for reform as did local guard contracting which at\n the time was estimated to cost the Department approximately $218\n million.\n\n On September 2008, the Under Secretary for Management issued a\n Department-wide notice that A/LM/AQM had created a new branch\n that deals solely with local guard contracts. This initiative should im-\n prove oversight, standardize local guard contracting and reduce local\n guard costs worldwide. The regional security officers on-site would\n continue to be the CORs for the local guard contracts at their posts.\n While it may be difficult to contract for local guard services from\n Washington, enormous benefits should accrue from consolidating the\n work for most overseas posts. The result should be essential protec-\n tive services worldwide at the most cost-effective price.\n\n\n\n\nSummary of Audit Reports Without Management\nDecision for More Than Six Months\n\nReport Number: 00-FM-011\nSubject: Audit of Operations and Expenditures for Emergencies in the Diplomatic\nand Consular Services\nDate Issued: March 31, 2000\nReason for not being resolved: In a December 12, 2007, memorandum, the\nBureau of Resource Management (RM) stated the program is administered different-\nly than it was when the audit report was issued more than 7 years ago. RM suggested\na follow-up audit and said it considered action completed on all of the open recom-\nmendations. OIG, in its May 20, 2008, response, said that until a follow-up audit or\nadditional information is provided, the recommendations are still pertinent. RM did\nnot provide additional information requested by the September 30, 2008, date speci-\nfied in OIG\xe2\x80\x99s May 20 request.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\n\n84 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cReport Number: 01-FMA-R-078\nSubject: Information Technology Vulnerability Assessment at the Charleston\nFinancial Service Center\nDate Issued: September 11, 2001\nReason for not being resolved: RM had not responded to recommendations 13-15\nwhen the report was issued or to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s most recent request for a response, sent on\nJune 16, 2008. Therefore, the three recommendations remain unresolved.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/CG-05-26\nSubject: Review of Selected Grants Awarded to Institute for the Study and\nDevelopment of Legal Systems\nDate Issued: October 18, 2005\nReason for not being resolved: In an August 25, 2006, e-mail to OIG, the Bureau\nof Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) stated it lacked a sufficient number of\ngrants officers to address the report\xe2\x80\x99s recommendations and would not be able to ad-\ndress them until October 2006. As of September 30, 2008, ECA had not responded\nto OIG\xe2\x80\x99s January 24, March 4, and June 10, 2008, requests for a response to the\nrecommendations.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/CG-06-02\nSubject: Application of Agreed-Upon Procedures to George Mason University\nAwards\nDate Issued: February 24, 2006\nReason for not being resolved: In an August 25, 2006, e-mail to OIG, ECA stated\nit lacked a sufficient number of grants officers to address the report\xe2\x80\x99s recommenda-\ntions and would not be able to address them until October 2006. As of September\n30, 2008, ECA had not responded to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s January 24, March 4, and June 10, 2008,\nrequests for a response to the recommendations.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/FM-06-39\nSubject: Internal Controls Related to Travel Advances\nDate Issued: September 29, 2006\nReason for not being resolved: As of September 30, 2008, RM had not responded\nto the report\xe2\x80\x99s recommendations when the report was issued or to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s most re-\ncent request for a response, sent on June 16, 2008.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 85\n\x0cReport Number: AUD/FM-07-28\nSubject: Internal Procurement Practices at Embassy Berlin\nDate Issued: July 12, 2007\nReason for not being resolved: Embassy Berlin responded to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s recommenda-\ntions in a January 2008 cable. OIG will analyze the response to determine whether\nthe actions taken by the Embassy will satisfy the intent of the recommendations.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/IQO-07-20\nSubject: Review of DynCorp International, L.L.C, Contract Number S-LMAQM-\n04-C-0030, Task Order 0338, for the Iraqi Police Training Program Support\nDate Issued: January 30, 2007\nReason for not being resolved: The Bureau of Administration disagreed with OIG\non the recommendation (No. 6) pertaining to the establishment and enforcement of\ntenure limitations for contracting personnel. OIG is reviewing the Bureau\xe2\x80\x99s justifica-\ntion for not implementing this recommendation.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/CG-08-02\nSubject: Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-Upon\nProcedures on Costs Claimed by Young Men\xe2\x80\x99s Christian Association of\nGreater New York Under Department of State Grants\nDate Issued: December 19, 2007\nReason for not being resolved: As of September 30, 2008, the Bureau of Edu-\ncational and Cultural Affairs had not responded to OIG\xe2\x80\x99s most recent March 4 or\nJune 10, 2008, requests for a response to the report\xe2\x80\x99s recommendations.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\nReport Number: AUD/CG-08-11\nSubject: Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of Agreed-Upon\nProcedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed by Sister Cities International, Inc.\nDate Issued: January 17, 2008\nReason for not being resolved: As of September 30, 2008, the Bureau of Admin-\nistration, Office of Logistics Management, Office of Acquisitions Management, In-\nternational Programs Division, had not responded to the report\xe2\x80\x99s recommendation.\nProjected date of resolution: March 2009\n\n\n\n\n86 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 5: AUDITS PERFORMED BY CONTRACTORS\n\n AUD/CG-08-04 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Department\n of State 2007 and 2006 Financial Statements\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Financial Audit\n\n AUD/CG-08-22 Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed\n by American Refugee Committee, Inc.\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\n AUD/CG-08-23 Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed\n by the Council on International Educational Exchange, Inc.\n L.F. Harris & Associates, CPA, P.A.\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\n AUD/FM-08-24 Independent Auditor\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the International\n Boundary and Water Commission, United States and\n Mexico, U.S. Section, 2007 and 2008 Financial Statements\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Financial Audit\n\n AUD/FM-08-25 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the\n International Boundary and Water Commission,\n United States and Mexico, 2007 and 2006 Financial\n Statements\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Financial Audit\n\n AUD/FM-08-26 Audit Report on the Foreign Service Retirement and\n Disability Fund 2007, 2006, and 2005 Financial Statements\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Financial Audit\n\n AUD/FM-08-27 Management Letter Related to the Audit of the Foreign\n Service Retirement and Disability Fund 2007, 2006, and\n 2005 Financial Statements\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Financial Audit\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 87\n\x0cAUD/IP-08-28 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application\n of Agreed-Upon Procedures on Final Buyout Claim by\n Enviro-Management & Research, Inc., Under Contract No.\n S-FBOAD-98-D0010\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Final Buyout Claim Review\n\nAUD/CG-08-30 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on the Indirect Cost Rates\n Proposed by Church World Service, Inc.\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\nAUD/CG-08-31 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on the Indirect Cost Rate\n Proposed by Project Harmony, Inc.\n L.F. Harris & Associates, CPA, P.A.\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\nAUD/CG-08-32 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed\n by Nacel Open Door, Inc.\n L.F. Harris & Associates, CPA, P.A.\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\nAUD/CG-08-34 Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report on the Application of\n Agreed-Upon Procedures on Indirect Cost Rates Proposed\n by The Graduate School, USDA\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Indirect Cost Rate Review\n\nAUD/FM-08-38 Independent Accountant\xe2\x80\x99s Report on the Application\n of Agreed-Upon Procedures: Retirement, Health Benefits,\n and Life Insurance Withholdings/Contributions and\n Supplemental Semiannual Headcount Report Submitted to\n the Office of Personnel Management\n Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP\n Attestation Engagement\n\n\n\n\n88 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 6: MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE CHALLENGE\n\n\n\n\n The protection of personally identifiable information is a significant information\n security challenge for the Department. As of April 2008, the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Passport\n Information Electronic Records System (PIERS) contained records on about 192\n million passports for about 127 million passport holders. Bureau of Consular Affairs\n officials said that there were about 20,500 users with active PIERS accounts as of\n May 2008 and that about 12,200 of these users were employees or contractors of the\n Department. PIERS is also accessed by users at other federal departments and agen-\n cies to assist in conducting investigations, security assessments, and analyses. Based\n on the results of a 2008 OIG review, there are many control weaknesses\xe2\x80\x94including\n a general lack of policies, procedures, guidance, and training\xe2\x80\x94relating to the preven-\n tion and detection of unauthorized access to passport and applicant information and\n the subsequent response and disciplinary processes when a potential unauthorized\n access is substantiated.\n\n In some cases, Department officials stated that the lack of resources contributed to\n the lack of controls and to the Department\xe2\x80\x99s ability to assess vulnerabilities and risk.\n In response, the Bureaus of Consular Affairs and Administration took a number of\n corrective actions. These actions included issuing interim guidance on the various\n steps to be followed and decisions to be made in response to a potential incident of\n unauthorized access to passport records and applicant personally identifiable infor-\n mation and issuing a Department-wide personally identifiable information breach\n response policy. Additional actions to address the 22 recommendations made by\n OIG are underway by the Department, including conducting vulnerability and risk\n assessments of all passport systems.\n\n\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 89\n\x0c90 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cBroadcasting Board of Governors\n\x0c92 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c INSPECTIONS\n\n\n\n\nAlhurra\xe2\x80\x99s Programming Policies and\nProcedures (ISP-IB-08-45)\n\nThe Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Inc., is a nonprofit grantee of the Broad-\ncasting Board of Governors that operates Alhurra Television and Radio Sawa. In\nresponse to a congressional request, OIG reviewed actions taken by Alhurra to\nstrengthen its procedures and policies, particularly its policies involving terrorists\nor those who support them. This included how the Middle East Broadcasting Net-\nworks, Inc., had progressed in carrying out 24/7 streaming, archiving on Alhurra\xe2\x80\x99s\nWeb site of all original programs, and the random translation of Alhurra\xe2\x80\x99s original\nprogramming by an independent entity.\n\nOIG found that in the past year, Alhurra had taken significant steps to tighten its\nprocedures and policies in order to protect the credibility that is critical to fulfill-\ning its mission. These steps included updating its 2005 Journalistic Code of Ethics,\nimplementing new management controls over programming, and creating a journal-\nistic training program.\n\n\n\n\n Embassy Asuncion Best Practice\n\n\n In its inspection of Embassy Asuncion, Paraguay, OIG\n inspectors identified as a best practice the development by\n Embassy Asuncion\xe2\x80\x99s public diplomacy section of a comput-\n erized system that downloads Voice of America News with\n hourly updates. The recordings, made available to journal-\n ists through a toll-free telephone line, ensure that small local\n media outlets have free access to up-to-date world news.\n The public diplomacy section tracks several dozen calls per\n week, but implementing the system in larger underdevel-\n oped countries could provide greater results.\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 93\n\x0c94 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 1: BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS\n INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES\n\n Preliminary Inquiries\n Opened\n\t 0\n Closed\n\t 1\n\n Investigations\n Opened\n\t 0\n Closed\n\t 1\n Pending (9/30/08)\n\t 4\n\n Criminal Actions\n Referrals for Prosecution 0\n Indictments/Informations 0\n Convictions 0\n Sentencings (Months Imprisonment) 0\n Sentencings (Months Probation) 0\n Declinations 0\n\n Civil Actions\n Civil Referrals\n\t 0\n Civil Judgments\n\t 0\n\n Administrative Referrals\n Referrals for Personnel Action 0\n Suitability Referrals to DS 0\n\n Administrative Actions\n Removals\n\t 1\n Suspensions\n\t 0\n Reprimand/Admonishments\n\t 0\n Debarment Actions\n\t 0\n\n Monetary Recoveries\n Criminal Fines/Recoveries\n\t $0\n Civil Recoveries\n\t $0\n Administrative Recoveries\n\t $0\n Total Investigative Recoveries $0\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 95\n\x0c96 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c APPENDIX 2: REPORTS ISSUED\n\n\n\n\nISP-IB-08-45 Alhurra\xe2\x80\x99s Programming Policies and Procedures\n\n\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 97\n\x0c98 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0cAPPENDIX 3: SAVINGS AND MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES\n\n\n\n\n Table 1\n INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED AUDIT REPORTS\n\n WITH QUESTIONED COSTS\n\n\n Question Unsupported\n Number of Costs Costs\n Type of Report Reports (Dollars in (Dollars in\n Thousands) Thousands)\n A. For which no management\n decision has been made by the\n commencement of the reporting 0 $0 $0\n period\n\n B. Which were issued during the\n reporting period 0 $0 $0\n\n Subtotals (A + B) 0 $0 $0\n\n C. For which a management\n decision was made during $0 $0\n the reporting period based on\n formal administrative or judicial 0\n appeal $0 $0\n (i) dollar value of disallowed\n costs\n (ii) dollar value of costs not $0 $0\n disallowed\n D. For which no management\n decision has been made by the 0 $0 $0\n end of the reporting period\n\n Reports for which no\n management decision was made 0 $0 $0\n within six months of issuance\n\n\n\n\n Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 99\n\x0c Table 2\n INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUED AUDIT REPORTS\n\n WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT FUNDS \n\n BE PUT TO BETTER USE\n\n Type of Report Number of Dollar Value\n Reports (in Thousands)\nA. For which no management decision has been\n made by the commencement of the reporting\n period 0 $0\n\nB. Which were issued during the reporting period\n 0 $0\n Subtotals (A + B)\n 0 $0\nC. For which a management decision was made\n during the reporting period 0 $0\n (i) dollar value of recommendations that were\n agreed to by management\n - based on proposed management action 0 $0\n -based on proposed legislative action\n (ii) dollar value of recommendations that were\n not agreed to by management 0 $0\n\nD. For which no management decision has been\n made by the end of the reporting period\n 0 $0\n\n Reports for which no management decision was\n made within six months of issuance\n 0 $0\n\n\n\n\n100 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c ABBREVIATIONS\n\n\n\n\n AIGA Assistant Inspector General for Audits\n BBG Broadcasting Board of Governors\n CA Bureau of Consular Affairs\n CWS Church Worldwide Service\n DCM Deputy chief of mission\n Department U.S. Department of State\n DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security\n DS Bureau of Diplomatic Security\n DS/PSP/DEAV Office of Physical Security Programs, Defensive\n Equipment and Armored Vehicle Division, DS\n ECA Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs\n EEB Bureau of Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs\n EMR Enviro-Management & Research, Inc.\n FISMA Federal Information Security Management Act\n FSI Foreign Service Institute\n FSRDF Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Fund\n HR Bureau of Human Resources\n HR/CSP Office of Civil Service Personnel Management,\n HR\n HR/REE Office of Recruitment, Examination and\n Employment, HR\n ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization\n ICE Bureau of Immigration and Customs\n Enforcement, DHS\n INL Bureau of International Narcotics and Law\n Enforcement Affairs\n INV Office of Investigations\n LE Locally employed\n\n\nOffice of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008 101\n\x0c MERO Middle East Regional Office\n NEC New embassy compound\n OBO Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations\n OIG Office of Inspector General\n OMB Office of Management and Budget\n OPM Office of Personnel Management\n PEPFAR President\xe2\x80\x99s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief\n PIERS Passport Information Electronic Records System\n PM/DDTC Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Directorate of\n Defense Trade Controls\n RM Bureau of Resource Management\n S/CT Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism\n SAR Semiannual Report to the Congress\n SIV Special immigrant visa\n USAID U.S. Agency for International Development\n USIBWC International Boundary and Water Commission,\n United States and Mexico, U.S. Section\n USICAO U.S. Mission to the International Civil Aviation\n Organization\n USUN Rome United Nations Agencies in Rome\n\n\n\n\n102 Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to the Congress, April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008\n\x0c Index of RepoRtIng RequIRements\n InspectoR geneRal act of 1978, as amended\n\n\n\n\nRequiRement Subject Page numbeRS\n\nSection 4(a)(2) Review of legislation and regulations 14-15\nSection 5(a)(1) Significant problems, abuses, and deficiencies 2\n\nSection 5(a)(2) Significant recommendations for corrective action 21-56, 93\n\nSection 5(a)(3) Prior significant recommendations unimplemented 75-83\n\nSection 5(a)(4) Matters referred to prosecutive authorities 61-66\n\nSection 5(a)(5) Information or assistance refused none\n\nSection 5(a)(6) List of reports issued 69-71, 97\n\nSection 5(a)(7) Summaries of significant reports 21-56, 93\n\nSection 5(a)(8) Audit reports\xe2\x80\x93questioned costs 73, 77, 95, 99\n\nSection 5(a)(9) Audit reports\xe2\x80\x93funds to be put to better use 74, 100\n\nSection 5(a)(10) Prior audit reports unresolved 84-89\n\nSection 5(a)(11) Significant revised management decisions 83\n\nSection 5(a)(12) Significant management decisions with which\n OIG disagreed none\n\x0c\x0cFRAUD, WASTE, ABUSE, OR MISMANAGEMENT\n\n of Federal programs and resources\n\t\n hurts everyone.\n\t\n\n Call the Office of Inspector General\n\t\n HOTLINE\n\n 202-647-3320\n\n or 1-800-409-9926\n\n or e-mail oighotline@state.gov\n\n to report illegal or wasteful activities.\n\t\n\n You may also write to\n\t\n Office of Inspector General\n\t\n U.S. Department of State\n\t\n Post Office Box 9778\n\t\n Arlington, VA 22219\n\t\n\n Please visit our website at oig.state.gov\n\n\n Cables to the Inspector General\n should be slugged \xe2\x80\x9cOIG Channel\xe2\x80\x9d\n to ensure confidentiality.\n ble of contents\n\x0c\x0c'