Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Government Website

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Safely connect using HTTPS

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock () or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Audits, Inspections, and Evaluations

Report Number Title Issue Date Fiscal Year
GC-HQ-06-35 Cannibalization of Travel Trailers by Bechtel 2006
OIG-20-24 Williams-Adley determined that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) did not ensure the Puerto Rico Central Office of Recovery, Reconstruction, and Resiliency (COR3) and the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) establish and implement policies, procedures, and practices to account for and expend Public Assistance (PA) grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  Specifically, PRASA did not follow established policies and procedures for: (1) recording the capacity size and rate of its force account equipment; and (2) ensuring each vendor had a certificate of eligibility before receiving a contract award.  We made two recommendations to improve PRASA’s management of FEMA PA funds, ensuring they are expended according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.

>Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority 		2020
OIG-20-26 Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the Puerto Rico Department of Education 2020
OIG-20-22 Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the Puerto Rico Department of Housing 2020
OIG-20-25 Williams-Adley determined that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) did not always ensure that Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTOP) established and implemented policies, procedures, and practices to account for and expend PA grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  Specifically, DTOP did not have (1) an effective grants management process; (2) sufficient internal controls in the procurement process; and (3) sufficient controls over its processes for claiming Force Account Labor costs.  This occurred because FEMA and Central Office of Recovery, Reconstruction and Resiliency (COR3) did not adequately oversee DTOP’s grant management activities.  We made three recommendations to improve COR3’s and DTOP’s management of FEMA Public Assistance funds, ensuring they are expended according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  FEMA concurred with the recommendations.

>Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the Puerto Rico Department of Transportation and Public Works 		2020
OIG-20-30 KPMG, LLP found that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) did not always ensure Virgin Islands Territorial Emergency Management Agency (VITEMA) and the Virgin Islands Department of Education (VIDE) established and implemented policies, procedures, and practices to account for and expend Public Assistance (PA) grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  For example, VIDE did not have policies and procedures to address procurement-related conflicts of interest and related disciplinary actions.  This occurred because FEMA did not adequately train VIDE personnel and did not review these policies and procedures.  We made five recommendations that, when implemented, should improve management of FEMA PA grant funds, ensuring the funds are expended according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  FEMA concurred with the recommendations. 

>Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Education 		2020
OIG-20-29 KPMG, LLC found the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) did not provide adequate guidance to the Virgin Islands Emergency Management Agency (VITEMA) and the Virgin Islands Housing Finance Agency (VIHFA) and that VITEMA and VIHFA did not adequately manage FEMA Public Assistance (PA) funds.  Also, VITEMA and VIHFA did not always ensure the accuracy of project funding information or promptly notify FEMA about significant project cost overruns.  This occurred because FEMA did not provide the necessary guidance to and oversight of VITEMA and VIHFA to properly manage PA funds.  Because of these deficiencies, PA programs are at increased risk of mismanagement and expenditure of funds for unallowable activities.  We made seven recommendations to improve VITEMA’s and VIHFA’s management of FEMA PA funds, ensuring they are expended according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  FEMA concurred with the recommendations.

>Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the U.S. Virgin Islands Housing and Finance Authority 		2020
OIG-20-39 KPMG found FEMA did not always ensure that the Virgin Islands Emergency Management Agency (VITEMA), and Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority (VIWAPA) established and implemented policies, procedures, and practices to account for and expend PA disaster grant funds in accordance with Federal regulations and FEMA guidance.  Specifically: 1) VITEMA did not have policies and procedures to ensure the timely submission of management costs for reimbursement; 2) VIWAPA did not fully ensure contract costs were reasonable and allowable; and 3) Neither VITEMA nor VIWAPA had fully implemented FEMA’s Grants Manager and Grants Portal system.  This occurred because FEMA did not consistently provide adequate oversight.  Because of these deficiencies, there is increased risk the PA program may be mismanaged and funds may be used for unallowable activities.  We made three recommendations that, when implemented, should improve FEMA’s, VITEMA’s, and VIWAPA’s management of FEMA PA funds.  FEMA concurred with all three recommendations. 

>Capacity Audit of FEMA Grant Funds Awarded to the USVI Water and Power Authority 		2020
DS-11-01 Capping Report: FY 2009 Public Assistance Grant and Subgrant Audits 2011
DD-11-17  

>Capping Report: FY 2010 FEMA Public Assistance Grant and Subgrant Audits 		2011
OIG-12-74  

>Capping Report: FY 2011 FEMA Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant and Subgrant Audits 		2012
OIG-13-90 In FY 2012, we issued 59 audit reports on grantees and subgrantees awarded FEMA PA and HMGP funds between November 2002 and December 2009 as a result of 31 presidentially declared disasters in 16 States and 1 U.S. Territory.1 The objective of those 59 audits was to determine whether the grantees and subgrantees accounted for and expended FEMA funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. Our HMGP audit objectives also included determining whether the projects met FEMA eligibility requirements and project management complied with applicable regulations and guidelines.

>Capping Report: FY 2012 FEMA Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant and Subgrant Audits 		2013
OIG-14-102-D This is the fifth annual Capping Report we have issued that summarizes the results of the PA program and HMGP grant and subgrant audits we conducted throughout the year. Each year, our audits reveal significant issues representing millions of dollars in findings and recommendations to FEMA. We focus our audits on FEMA’s PA and HMGP grant funds, which are funded from the Disaster Relief Fund. The PA program and HMGP provide a means for response, recovery, and mitigation from disasters. Through the PA program, FEMA provides grants to State, tribal, and local governments, and certain types of private nonprofit organizations so that communities can quickly respond to and recover from major disaster or emergency declarations. FEMA’s HMGP provides recovery from a declared disaster by also providing grants to State, tribal, and local overnments, and certain types of private nonprofit organizations to implement long ‐ term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster declaration.

>Capping Report: FY 2013 FEMA Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant and Subgrant Audits 		2014
OIG-14-146-D The County received a Public Assistance award of $6.2 million from the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (Georgia), a FEMA grantee, for damages resulting from tornadoes and strong winds, which occurred in April 2011. The award provided 75 percent FEMA funding for debris removal activities and emergency protective measures. The award consisted of 5 large projects and 14 small projects

>Catoosa County, Georgia, Effectively Managed FEMA Public Assistance Grant Funds Awarded for Severe Storms and Flooding in April 2011 		2014
DD-09-07  

>Central Electric Cooperative, Inc. 		2009
DD-06-05 Central Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. Stillwater, Oklahoma FEMA Disaster Number 1401-DR-OK Public Assistance Identification Number 000-U05EC-00 2005
OIG-09-11 Challenges Facing FEMA's Acquisition Workforce ( 2009
OIG-09-70  

>Challenges Facing FEMA's Disaster Contract Management 		2009
OIG-05-44 Challenges in FEMA's Flood Map Modernization Program (PDF, 63 pages - 3.33 MB) 2005
DD-11-05 Chambers County, Texas 2011
DD-06-03 Changes in State of Louisiana Compensation Policies 2006
DD-11-07  

>Chennault International Airport Authority, Lake Charles, Louisiana 		2011
DS-10-04  

>Chugach Electric Association, Inc.  		2010
DD-10-03  

>City of Albuquerque, New Mexico  		2010
DA-10-04 City of Andalusia, Alabama, FEMA Disaster No. 1208-DR-AL 2004
DD-11-13  

>City of Austin, Texas 		2011
DA-03-04 City of Barnesville, Georgia, FEMA Disaster No. 1033-DR-GA and 1209-DR-GA 2004
DA-10-03 City of Biloxi, Mississippi  2010
DD-10-09  

>City of Bucyrus, Ohio  		2010
DA-10-10  

>City of Buffalo, New York  		2010
OIG-18-49 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) estimated that the City of Cedar Falls, Iowa (City), had sustained approximately $893,000 in damage caused by severe storms and flooding from September 21 through October 3, 2016. We audited early in the grant process to identify areas in which the City may need additional technical assistance or monitoring to ensure compliance with Federal procurement requirements. Except for procurement, the City’s policies, procedures, and business practices appear to be adequate to account for and expend FEMA grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA policies. Specifically, the City’s procurement policies did not provide sufficient opportunities for disadvantaged firms to compete for contracts, or prevent awarding contracts to debarred or suspended contractors. After we discussed these issues, City officials moved quickly to modify procurement policies to comply with Federal requirements.

>City of Cedar Falls, Iowa Has Policies, Procedures, and Business Practices to Manage Its FEMA Grant 		2018
DA-24-05 City of Clarksville, Tennessee 2005
DA-16-05 City of Columbus, Mississippi FEMA Disaster No. 1360-DR-MS 2005
DA-11-13  

>City of Deerfield Beach, Florida 		2011
OIG-16-137-D At the time of our audit, FEMA estimated that the City of Eureka, Missouri (City), had sustained approximately $1.5 million in damages from flooding in December 2015. We conducted the audit early in the grant process to identify areas where the City may need additional technical assistance or monitoring to ensure compliance with Federal procurement requirements.

>City of Eureka, Missouri, Needs Additional Assistance and Monitoring to Ensure Proper Management of Its $1.5 Million FEMA Grant 		2016
OIG-14-125-D We audited Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance grant funds awarded to the City of Flagstaff, Arizona (City), Public Assistance Identification Number 005-23620-00. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City accounted for and expended FEMA grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. The Arizona Division of Emergency Management (Arizona), a FEMA grantee, warded the City $3.5 million for damages resulting from severe storms and flooding during the incident period of July 20, to August 7, 2010. The award provided 75 percent FEMA funding for one large project and four small projects. The audit covered the period of July 20, 2010, to August 8, 2013. We audited the one large project (Project 12) for a total of $3.3 million or 97 percent of the award. At the time of our audit, the City had ompleted work on the large project and submitted its final claim to Arizona. However, Arizona had not completed its review of the City’s final claim; therefore, the project remained open.

>City of Flagstaff, Arizona, Generally Accounted for and Expended FEMA Grant Funds Properly, But FEMA Should Disallow $124,443 and Deobligate $57,941 of Public Assistance Grant Funds 		2014
DA-10-19  

>City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida  		2010
W-09-03 City of Fremont, CA, Public Assistance ID No. 001-26000, FEMA Disaster No. 1203-DR-CA, 2003
DS-10-10  

>City of Glendale, California 		2010
DA-10-17  

>City of Greenvile, South Carolina  		2010
GC-AL-06-18 City of Gulf Shores, Alabama 2006
OIG-16-116-D At the time of our audit, the City of Hazelwood, Missouri (City), estimated it had sustained approximately $3.3 million in damages from flooding in December 2015. We conducted this audit early in the grant process to identify areas where the City may need additional technical assistance and monitoring to ensure compliance with Federal requirements.

>City of Hazelwood, Missouri, Needs Additional Assistance and Monitoring to Ensure Proper Management of Its Federal Grant 		2016
DA-10-12  

>City of Hialeah, Florida  		2010
DD-02-04 City of Hoisington, KS, FEMA Disaster No.1366-DR-KS, Public Assistance ID No. 009-32550-00 2004
DA-09-23  

>City of Homestead Florid 		2009
DD_07-04 City of Houston, Houston, Texas, FEMA Disaster No. 1379-DR-TX, Public Assistance ID No. 201-35000-00, Audit 2007
DD-09-06 City of Kansas City, Missouri FEMA Disaster Number DR-1403-MO, Audit 2009
DD-09-14  

>City of Kettering, Ohio 		2009
DS-09-10  

>City of Laguna Beach, California 		2009
DS-09-09 City of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power 2010

*NDAA, Pub. L. 117-263, section 5274 Response Received. View responses

Return to top of page