Report Type
Report Category
Submitting Agency
State/Local Agency
State (State and Local Reports)
Fraud Type
Agency Reviewed
- (-) Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System & CFPB (1)
- (-) Farm Credit Administration (1)
- (-) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1)
- (-) National Science Foundation (11)
- Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (1)
- Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (1)
- Department of Agriculture (7)
- Department of Defense (18)
- Department of Education (15)
- Department of Health & Human Services (28)
- Department of Homeland Security (28)
- Department of Housing and Urban Development (1)
- Department of Justice (6)
- Department of Labor (36)
- Department of the Interior (8)
- Department of the Treasury (37)
- Department of Transportation (4)
- Department of Veterans Affairs (27)
- Election Assistance Commission (13)
- Environmental Protection Agency (4)
- General Services Administration (4)
- Internal Revenue Service (27)
- Multiple Agencies (1)
- National Security Agency (1)
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (1)
- Railroad Retirement Board (5)
- Securities and Exchange Commission (1)
- Small Business Administration (28)
- Social Security Administration (3)
- Tennessee Valley Authority (3)
- U.S. Agency for International Development (1)
- U.S. Postal Service (11)
Related Organizations
Management Challenges
Any Recommendations
Any Open Recommendations
Reports
The Board and FRB Boston Generally Followed Their Process for Purchasing MSLP Loan Participations but Can Formally Document Some Key Processes
We recommend that the Board’s Legal Division and FRB Boston’s Legal Department document a framework outlining the general process for identifying, determining, and pursuing action on ineligible loans as well as the key roles and responsibilities for addressing potentially ineligible MSLP loans.
FDIC Examinations of Government-Guaranteed Loans
Develop and implement guidance to examination staff on the credit, operational (including fraud), liquidity, and compliance risks related to Government-guaranteed loans to ensure staff adequately plans and conducts examinations to identify and address emerging risks.
Develop and implement a training plan to ensure examination staff are trained on the requirements and risks of Government-guaranteed loan programs.
Update, develop, and distribute to FDIC examination personnel a list of FDIC examiners who have significant experience examining banks that specialize in Government-guaranteed loan programs to regional offices.
Develop and implement a process to obtain improved data regarding Government-guaranteed lending activities of FDIC-supervised financial
institutions.
Update the [redacted] MOU to include the sharing of loan portfolio information such as historical loan performance, status of guaranty, and loan-level risk characteristics.
Establish arrangements with other Federal agencies that administer Government-guaranteed loan programs to facilitate information sharing and
proactive identification of risk.
Develop and implement processes and procedures for the routine sharing, receipt, and storage of confidential information with Federal agencies that administer Government-guaranteed loan programs.
Develop and implement guidance to provide instruction to FDIC bank examination staff requiring communication and information sharing with Federal agencies that administer Government-guaranteed loan programs to ensure FDIC staff and the Federal agencies are aware of any emerging risks.
Determine whether other Federal agencies that administer Government-guaranteed loan programs have a list of FDIC-supervised banks with high risk factors associated with such programs and develop protocols to share information with relevant FDIC personnel, including examiners.
Develop and implement guidance to ensure relevant risk information exchanged with Federal Government agencies that administer Government-guaranteed loan programs is shared internally within the FDIC on an ongoing basis with the appropriate FDIC employees.
Develop and implement updated FDIC examination guidance to establish an appropriate timeframe for uploading complete supervisory business records to RADD.
Develop and implement guidance to examination staff to ensure the staff consistently evaluate Government-guaranteed loans in their review of loan classification, assessment of off-balance sheet risk, concentration risk, and ongoing monitoring.
Update and implement the Examination Profile Script to include additional questions on financial institution participation in Government-guaranteed loan programs in order to identify and address emerging risk.
Develop and implement additional items to the Safety and Soundness Request List to identify Government-guaranteed loans, the performance of those loans, and status of the guaranty.
Issue and implement guidance to require that examination staff conduct a fraud risk assessment on future Government-guaranteed loan programs involving FDIC-insured and FDIC-supervised financial institutions to inform policy decisions.
Ensure guidance on future Government-guaranteed loan programs includes all risks associated with such programs and has instructions to allow for consistency in supervisory activities.
Issue and implement guidance for examiners clarifying the FDIC supervisory expectations for reviewing bank PPP activities, including the level of PPP loan volume triggering a heightened review, how examiners should assess the PPP activities of banks that have existing BSA/AML weaknesses, and protocols for examination staff to communicate observed weaknesses.
Revise and implement FDIC guidance and practices for assessing concentrations and loan classification to ensure uniform application with the other Federal bank regulators of supervisory approaches to banks
Coordinate with the other Federal bank regulators to ensure uniform application of supervisory approaches to banks regarding concentrations and loan classification.
Remote Versus In-Person Merit Review Panels
Develop a methodology to track the cost of convening merit review panels to evaluate proposals for NSF funding.
Identify and implement solutions to improve merit review panelist demographic data.
Study multiple factors, including cost of merit review panelists’ travel and compensation, to inform a decision on how to conduct future merit review panels to evaluate proposals and modify guidance accordingly.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities – University of Michigan
Direct UM to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $11,499 of questioned participant support costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct UM to establish clear guidance regarding the rebudgeting of participant support cost funding. This guidance should address when and how to request approval to rebudget participant support cost funding, as well as how to document the approval.
Direct UM to update its current award set-up practices to require that, when setting up accounts established for NSF awards and/or funding supplements, personnel ensure that the accounts apply indirect costs using the rate(s) that were established in the Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement in effect as of the date of the NSF award, rather than using the rate(s) included in the original Notice of Award.
Survey of Farm Credit Administration Employees on COVID-19
The Office of Inspector General recommends the Office of the Chief Operating Officer distribute further communications to employees to explain:
• when it is necessary to be physically present during telework operating statuses;
• how mask-wearing and other required workplace safety measures differ in Farm Credit Administration space and non-Farm Credit Administration space;
• trends used in considering the Agency’s operating status;
• future remote work arrangements and expectations;
• specific procedures for when and whom to contact regarding a suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnoses that affects the workplace;
• specific procedures for official travel decisions and following Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines after personal travel;
• symptom monitoring procedures; and
• specific procedures for quarantine and self-isolation after a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis or close contact.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities – University of Central Florida
Direct UCF to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $134 in questioned fringe benefit costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct UCF to notify its Federal sponsors that its personnel have not yet certified their effort for the Fall 2019, Spring 2020, Summer 2020, and Fall 2020 semesters.
Direct UCF to require its employees to certify their effort for the Fall 2019, Spring 2020, Summer 2020, and Fall 2020 semesters and then process any cost transfers needed to ensure that UCF charged NSF for salary costs that were consistent with the effort certified.
Direct UCF to review all salary earned during June 2020 to verify that its accounting system appropriately applied fringe benefits at the correct rate and, if the accounting system did not apply fringe benefits at the correct rate, process any adjustments necessary.
Direct UCF to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $160 of questioned participant support costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct UCF to establish policies and procedures to ensure that it obtains and documents proper approval for insurance costs before charging the costs to NSF awards.
Direct UCF to establish policies and procedures to ensure that it does not apply fringe benefit rates to participant support costs that it processes through its payroll subledger.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities – California Institute of Technology
Resolve the $16,351 in questioned salary expenses for which Caltech has not agreed to reimburse NSF and direct Caltech to repay or otherwise remove the sustained questioned costs from its NSF awards.
Direct Caltech to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $418 of questioned salary expenses for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct Caltech to strengthen its policies and procedures by retroactively establishing expiration dates on its use of the Other Paid Leave Pool on Federal awards and ensuring that these expiration dates align with the expiration dates and criteria specific to Flexibility 6 of Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-20-17.
Resolve the $31,856 in questioned subaward expenses for which Caltech has not agreed to reimburse NSF and direct Caltech to repay or otherwise remove the sustained questioned costs from its NSF awards.
Direct Caltech to strengthen its internal control processes and procedures surrounding the transfer of significant portions of NSF-funded research to other organizations. Updated processes could include: a. Establishing procedures to verify whether the scope of work for a proposed subcontract on an NSF award is programmatic in nature before issuing the subcontract. If the scope of work is programmatic in nature, Caltech should obtain the NSF Grants Officer’s approval before issuing the subcontract. Caltech could obtain this approval either as part of the initial NSF grant proposal/budget or through a formal request to transfer the research or effort, submitted through NSF’s FastLane system. b. Requiring periodic training for Caltech personnel that are permitted to subaward, issue, or subcontract out research under NSF awards, to ensure that they request the appropriate approvals. c. Establishing procedures to confirm that Caltech personnel perform pass-through entity risk assessments to identify the appropriate monitoring procedures when Caltech awards NSF research to a pass-through entity. d. Establishing periodic monitoring procedures to ensure that Caltech appropriately assesses indirect costs on the first $25,000 invoiced by each subawardee.
Direct Caltech to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $1,515 of questioned indirect costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct Caltech to strengthen its monitoring procedures and internal control processes for applying indirect costs to Federal awards. Updated procedures could include: a. Requiring that personnel review rental expenses charged to NSF awards to assess whether the expenses included indirect costs. Specifically, Caltech should ensure the general ledger account codes it establishes to account for equipment rental charges do not apply indirect costs. b. Requiring that personnel review capitalized expenses charged to an NSF award to ensure that the capitalized amount includes all applicable costs.
Direct Caltech to quantify the total indirect costs inappropriately applied to NSF awards as a result of its rental equipment account inappropriately applying indirect costs and to reimburse NSF for the appropriate amount.
Direct Caltech to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $581 of questioned salary and fringe costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct Caltech to strengthen its administrative and management controls and processes surrounding the charging of salary to Intergovernmental Personnel Act awards. Updated processes could include requiring departmental payroll personnel to perform additional procedures to ensure that Caltech appropriately established initial salary payments, including verifying that all payments are within the Intergovernmental Personnel Act assignment dates.
Direct Caltech to update its current award set-up practices to require that, when setting up accounts established for NSF awards, personnel ensure that the accounts apply indirect costs using either the rates that were established in the Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement in effect as of the date of the NSF grant award or the rates identified in the NSF award letters, as appropriate.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities - University of Wisconsin - Madison
Resolve the $26,974 in questioned Award Cash Management $ervice drawdowns for which UW-Madison has not agreed to reimburse NSF and direct UW-Madison to repay or otherwise remove the sustained questioned drawdowns from its NSF awards.
Direct UW-Madison to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $20,431 of questioned Award Cash Management $ervice drawdowns for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct UW-Madison to update its administrative and management processes and internal control procedures surrounding the Award Cash Management $ervice procedures for awards with expiring appropriations. Updated processes could include validating that UW-Madison adequately documents that any Award Cash Management $ervice draws in excess of its actual expenses support immediate cash needs.
Direct UW-Madison to strengthen its award set-up processes and procedures to ensure it cannot charge costs to an active award if the Federal appropriations for the award have expired.
Direct UW-Madison to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $1,593 in questioned costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct UW-Madison to update its administrative and management processes and internal control procedures surrounding the Award Cash Management $ervice system to ensure that UW-Madison appropriately incorporates credits when calculating the total amount to draw down from, or return to, NSF.
Direct UW-Madison to update its current award set-up practices to require that, when setting up accounts established for NSF awards, personnel ensure that the accounts apply indirect costs using the rates that were established in the Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement in effect as of the date of the NSF grant award, rather than using the rates included within the original grant proposal.
Direct UW-Madison to strengthen its Research Experience for Undergraduate award setup procedures to ensure that personnel select the appropriate indirect cost base.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities - Florida State University
Direct FSU to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $4,808 of questioned Award Cash Management $ervice drawdowns for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct FSU to update its administrative and management processes and internal control procedures for awards with expiring appropriations. Updated processes could include: a. Validating that FSU adequately documents that any Award Cash Management $ervice draws in excess of its actual expenses support immediate cash needs. b. Ensuring that FSU’s system prohibits personnel from posting costs to an award after the award’s appropriation expires.
Direct FSU to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $3,648 in questioned publication and other direct costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct FSU to establish clear guidance regarding the allowability of publication expenses, including the need to acknowledge NSF funding sources.
Direct FSU to strengthen its grant closeout procedures to ensure that it reimburses NSF for any expenses that it determines did not benefit the NSF award(s) charged. Additional procedures should ensure that FSU refunds the NSF award(s) for any materials and supplies that it was unable to use before the award’s period of performance expired.
Direct FSU to implement additional controls to prevent personnel from directly charging NSF awards for costs charged to accounts established to accumulate expenses that are not typically allowed on Federal awards, such as credit/debit fees, unless the personnel obtain specific prior approval.
Direct FSU to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $567 of questioned indirect costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct FSU to strengthen its administrative and management processes and internal controls for applying indirect costs to Federal awards. Updated procedures could include implementing an annual review of other direct costs charged to sponsored awards that include funding for participant support costs to ensure that FSU is appropriately segregating other direct costs incurred on behalf of participants in accounts to which it does not apply indirect costs.
Performance Audit of the Implementation of OMB COVID-19 Flexibilities – Florida International University
Resolve the $1,252 in questioned Award Cash Management $ervice drawdowns for which FIU has not agreed to reimburse NSF and direct FIU to repay or otherwise remove the sustained questioned costs from its NSF awards.
Direct FIU to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $14,167 of questioned costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct FIU to update its administrative and management processes and internal control procedures surrounding the Award Cash Management $ervice for awards with expiring appropriations. Updated processes should ensure FIU appropriately documents how it calculates the final draw amounts for awards with expiring appropriations, to ensure it only uses the draws to cover costs incurred before the appropriation expired.
Direct FIU to strengthen its award set-up processes and procedures to ensure it cannot charge costs to an active award if the Federal appropriations for the award have expired.
Resolve the $791 in questioned fringe benefit costs for which FIU has not agreed to reimburse NSF and direct FIU to repay or otherwise remove the sustained questioned costs from its NSF awards.
Direct FIU to provide documentation supporting that it has repaid or otherwise credited the $5,934 of questioned promotional and salary costs for which it has agreed to reimburse NSF.
Direct FIU to establish clear guidance regarding the <span class="tx-tooltip" tabindex="0">
allowable uses
<span class="tx-tooltip-text">
<span class="cf0">An allowable use is any expenditure on which an entity can spend funding.</span>
</span>
</span>
of participant support cost funding. This guidance should address: a. Allowable uses of participant support cost funding. b. How to verify personnel did not apply fringe benefit rates to participant stipends or other non-salary expenses.
Direct FIU to strengthen its monitoring procedures surrounding costs charged to its NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates programs. Updated procedures should ensure FIU charges costs associated with promotional and/or other unallowable items to nonFederal funding sources.
Direct FIU to update its current practices to ensure it only applies fringe benefits using fringe benefit rates that have been approved by its cognizant audit agency.