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
OIG-10-120  

>Management of DHS' Data Center Consolidation Initiative Needs Improvement  		2010
OIG-11-11 Major Management Challenges Facing the Department of Homeland Security 2011
OIG-11-09 Independent Auditors' Report on DHS' FY 2010 Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting 2011
OIG-11-15 Review of the Quality of Data Submitted by Department of Homeland Security Recipients of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Funds ( 2011
OIG-11-41  

>DHS Contracts Awarded Through Other Than Full and Open Competition During Fiscal Year 2010 		2011
OIG-11-45  

>Management Letter for the FY 2010 DHS Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting Audit 		2011
OIG-11-51  

>Management Directorate's Management Letter for FY 2010 DHS Consolidated Financial Statements AuditManagement Directorate's Management Letter for FY 2010 DHS Consolidated Financial Statements Audit 		2011
OIG-11-66  

>National Flood Insurance Program's Management Letter for FY 2010 DHS Consolidated Financial Statements Audit 		2011
OIG-11-67  

>The DHS Privacy Office Implementation of the Freedom of Information Act 		2011
OIG-11-71  

>DHS Oversight of Component Acquisition Programs 		2011
OIG-11-72  

>Special Report: Summary of Significant Investigations October 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010 		2011
OIG-11-87  

>Management Oversight and Additional Automated Capabilities Needed to Improve Intelligence Information Sharing (Redacted) 		2011
OIG-11-89  

>Planning, Management, and Systems Issues Hinder DHS' Efforts To Protect Cyberspace and the Nation's Cyber Infrastructure (Redacted) 		2011
OIG-11-91  

>Update on DHS’ Procurement and Program Management Operations 		2011
OIG-11-101  

>Use of DHS Purchase Cards 		2011
OIG-11-103  

>Information Technology Management Letter for the FY 2010 DHS Financial Statement Audit (Redacted) 		2011
OIG-11-113  

>Evaluation of DHS’ Information Security Program for Fiscal Year 2011 		2011
OIG-11-116  

>DHS Continues to Face Challenges in the Implementation of Its OneNet Project 		2011
OIG-12-02 (U) Additional Department Oversight Can Improve DHS' Intelligence Systems Security Program 2012
OIG-12-08 Major Management Challenges Facing the Department of Homeland Security 2012
OIG-12-07 Independent Auditors’ Report on DHS’ FY 2011 Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting 2012
OIG-12-23  

>Fire Station Construction Grants Funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 		2012
OIG-12-37  

>DHS Contracts Awarded Through Other Than Full and Open Competition During Fiscal Year 2011 		2012
OIG-12-42  

>Management Letter for the FY 2011 DHS Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting Audit 		2012
OIG-12-81  

>Information Technology Management Letter for FY 2011 Department of Homeland Security Financial Statement Audit 		2012
OIG-12-82  

>DHS Information Technology Management Has Improved, But Challenges Remain 		2012
OIG-12-88  

>DHS Needs To Address Portable Device Security Risks  		2012
OIG-12-91  

>FEMA’s Efforts To Recoup Improper Payments in Accordance with the Disaster Assistance Recoupment Fairness Act of 2011 (2) 		2012
OIG-12-108  

>Special Report: Summary of Significant Investigations January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011 		2012
OIG-12-112  

>DHS Can Strengthen Its International Cybersecurity Programs (Redacted) 		2012
OIG-12-116  

>The State of Arkansas’ Management of State Homeland Security Program Grants Awarded, During Fiscal Years 2008 Through 2010 		2012
OIG-12-133  

>Department of Homeland Security Compliance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation Revisions on Proper Use and Management of Cost-Reimbursement Contracts 		2012
OIG-13-03 On September 29, 2009, FEMA awarded a Transit Security Grant of $48,286,592 (number 2009-RA-RI-0105) to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port). The purpose of the grant is to fund exterior and interior mitigation measures to strengthen the PATH rail tunnels connecting cities in northern New Jersey to Manhattan. Reimbursement for eligible project costs is based on the grant agreement; Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State,Local and Indian Tribal Governments, Revised; and FEMA guidance. As of March 31, 2012, the Port had claimed project costs totaling $42,020,112. The costs covered the period from September 1, 2009, through March 31, 2012.

>Costs Claimed by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Under Transit Security Grant No. 2009-RA-R1-0105 		2013
OIG-13-04 We conducted an independent evaluation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) information security program and practices to comply with the requirements of the Federal Information Security Management Act. In evaluating DHS’ progress in implementing its agency-wide information security program, we specifically assessed the Department’s plans of action and milestones, security authorization processes, and continuous monitoring programs. We performed fieldwork at both the program and component levels.

>Evaluation of DHS’ Information Security Program for Fiscal Year 2012 		2013
OIG-13-06 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) includes an amalgamation of organizations that work together to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and other threats. Such collaboration requires that components establish effective communication among external and internal partners during operations. DHS established an internal goal of developing interoperable radio communications and identified common channels, and its components invested about $430 million in equipment, infrastructure, and maintenance to meet communication requirements. We performed this audit to determine whether DHS’ oversight ensured achievement of Department-wide interoperable radio communications.

>DHS’ Oversight of Interoperable Communications 		2013
OIG-13-20 The attached report presents the results of the u.s. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) financial statements audit for fiscal year (FY) 2012 and the results of an examination of internal control over financial reporting of those financial statements. These are mandatory audits required by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended by the Department of Homeland Security Financial Accountability Act of 2004. This report is incorporated in the Department's FY 2012 Annual Financial Report. We contracted with the independent public accounting firm KPMG LLP (KPMG) to perform the integrated audit.

>Independent Auditors' Report on DHS' FY 2012 Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting 		2013
OIG-13-09 The attached report presents our fiscal year 2012 assessment of the major management challenges facing the Department. As required by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-531), we update our assessment of management challenges annually. As stipulated, the report summarizes what the Inspector General considers to be the most serious management and performance challenges facing the agency and briefly assesses the agency’s progress in addressing those challenges.

>Major Management Challenges Facing the Department of Homeland Security (Revised) 		2013
OIG-13-21 Since our fiscal year 2011 evaluation, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has improved its oversight of Department-wide systems and established programs to monitor ongoing security practices. I&A has developed and implemented a training program to educate DHS’ growing number of personnel assigned security duties on intelligence systems. In addition, progress has been made in collaboration with other DHS components in centralizing the planning and prioritization of security weakness remediation, streamlining system configuration management, and maintaining a current systems inventory. However, we identified deficiencies at the United States Coast Guard (USCG) in system authorizations and specialized training and incident response, contingency planning, and security capital planning at the United States Secret Service (USSS).

>(U) Further Development and Reinforcement of Department Policies Can Strengthen DHS' Intelligence Systems Security Program 		2013
OIG-13-36 The Department obligated about $389 million for noncompetitive contracts during fiscal year 2012. Our review of 40 contract files with a reported value of more than $174 million showed that, compared with previous reviews of noncompetitive contracts awarded during fiscal years 2008 through 2011, the Department continued to improve its management oversight of acquisition personnel’s compliance with policies and procedures. However, these personnel did not always document their consideration of vendors’ past performance when researching background on eligible contractors. As a result, the Department cannot be assured that acquisition personnel always awarded government contracts to eligible and qualified vendors as required.

>DHS Contracts Awarded Through Other Than Full and Open Competition During Fiscal Year 2012 		2013
OIG-13-38 We have audited the balance sheet of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) as of September 30, 2012 and the related statements of net cost, changes in net position and custodial activity, and combined statement of budgetary resources for the year then ended (referred to herein as the “fiscal year (FY) 2012 financial statements”). The objective of our audit was to express an opinion on the fair presentation of these financial statements.

>Management Letter for the FY 2012 DHS Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting Audit 		2013
OIG-13-49 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had minimal involvement in the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force Operation Fast and Furious. Our review of DHS involvement in the operation determined that senior DHS officials in Washington, DC had no awareness of the methodology used by the task force to investigate Operation Fast and Furious until media reports were published in March 2011.

>DHS Involvement in OCDETF Operation Fast and Furious (Revised) 		2013
OIG-13-58 We have audited the balance sheet of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) as of September 30, 2012 and the related statements of net cost, changes in net position and custodial activity, and combined statement of budgetary resources for the year then ended (referred to herein as the “fiscal year (FY) 2012 financial statements”). The objective of our audit was to express an opinion on the fair presentation of these financial statements. We were also engaged to examine the Department’s internal control over financial reporting of the FY 2012 financial statements, based on the criteria established in Office of Management and Budget, Circular No. A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control, Appendix A.

>Information Technology Management Letter for the FY 2012 Department of Homeland Security Financial Statement Audit 		2013
OIG-13-68 We have audited the balance sheet of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) as of September 30, 2012 and the related statements of net cost, changes in net position and custodial activity, and combined statement of budgetary resources for the year then ended (referred to herein as the fiscal year (FY) 2012 financial statements”). The objective of our audit was to express an opinion on the fair presentation of these financial statements. We were also engaged to examine the Department’s internal control over financial reporting of the FY 2012 financial statements, based on the criteria established in Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Circular No. A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control, Appendix A.

>Management Directorate’s Management Letter for FY 2012 DHS Consolidated Financial Statements Audit 		2013
OIG-13-96 According to the Department, it participated in 1,094 conferences in fiscal year 2012, with expenditures totaling approximately $21.6 million. We conducted this audit in response to a mandate from the House Appropriations Committee, which directed the Office of Inspector General to report, no later than 30 days after the date of enactment of the DHS Fiscal Year 2013 Appropriations Bill, whether DHS has effective procedures in place to ensure compliance with all applicable Federal laws and regulations on conferences. The Fiscal Year 2013 Appropriations Bill was enacted on March 26, 2013.

>DHS' Policies and Procedures Over Conferences 		2013
OIG-13-98 The Homeland Security Information Network is a secure, unclassified Internet portal that enables information sharing and collaboration across the homeland security enterprise. In 2006 and 2008, we reported on challenges that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) faced to define the system’s role, meet user requirements, provide user support, and increase system use. We conducted a followup audit of this system to determine the progress made and the system’s effectiveness in supporting information sharing among select stakeholders.

>Homeland Security Information Network Improvements and Challenges 		2013
OIG-13-104 Our evaluation focused on how these components had implemented computer security technical, management, and operational controls at the airport and nearby locations. We performed onsite inspections of the areas where these assets were located, interviewed departmental staff, and conducted technical tests of internal controls. We also reviewed applicable policies, procedures, and other relevant documentation. The information technology security controls implemented at these sites have deficiencies that, if exploited, could result in the loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the components’ respective information technology systems. For example, a technical control includes regularly scanning servers for vulnerabilities. However, not all departmental servers were being scanned for vulnerabilities.

>Technical Security Evaluation of DHS Activities at Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport 		2013
OIG-13-105 In April 2012, in response to its growing caseload and limited resources, the Watchlisting Cell proposed to decentralize its watchlist nomination process by providing watchlist analyst training and certification to analysts in DHS operational components, and then delegating to the certified watchlist analysts the authority to submit terrorist nominations. We reviewed the Watchlisting Cell to determine whether (1) it is timely, effective, and efficient in submitting DHS nominations; (2) the information provided to external partners is complete, accurate, and timely; (3) establishing the Watchlisting Cell has had an effect on the DHS component nomination process; and (4) the Watchlisting Cell has developed and communicated effective policies and procedures for coordinating nomination submissions within DHS. We also reviewed whether the Watchlisting Cell has developed an effective process for providing nominator certification training, quality assurance, and the oversight necessary for decentralization, and whether it has developed an effective methodology for planning and coordinating its resources.

>DHS’ Watchlisting Cell’s Efforts To Coordinate Departmental Nominations (Redacted) 		2013
OIG-13-106 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) creates, receives, handles, and stores classified information as part of its homeland security, emergency response, and continuity missions. As creators and users of classified information, DHS is responsible for both implementing national policies and establishing epartmental policies, to ensure that such information is adequately safeguarded when necessary and appropriately shared whenever possible. With proper classification of intelligence products, DHS can share more information with State, local, and tribal entities, as well as the private sector. The Reducing Over-Classification Act of October 2010 (Public Law 111-258) requires the DHS Secretary to develop a strategy to prevent the over-classification and promote the sharing of homeland security and other information. This is the first of two reviews we are mandated to conduct under this act.

>Reducing Over-classification of DHS’ National Security Information 		2013
OIG-13-108 We evaluated the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) enterprise-wide security program for Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information intelligence systems. Pursuant to the Federal Information Security Management Act, we reviewed the Department’s security program including its policies, procedures, and system security controls for enterprise-wide intelligence systems. In doing so, we assessed the Department’s continuous monitoring, configuration management, identity and access management, incident response and reporting, risk management, security training, plans of actions and milestones, contingency planning, and security capital planning. As of May 2012, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) authorizing official assumed oversight for USCG's shore-side intelligence systems from Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A). USCG is migrating its Coast Guard Intelligence Support System to a multi-authorizing official structure including DHS, USCG, and Defense Intelligence Agency.

>Review of DHS' Information Security Program for Intelligence Systems for Fiscal Year 2013 		2013
OIG-13-110 We conducted an audit of the efforts undertaken by the Department’s Office of the Chief Information Officer to implement and maintain continuity of operations and disaster recovery and contingency planning capabilities. The objective of our audit was to determine the progress that the Office of the Chief Information Officer has made in carrying out its continuity planning roles and developing contingency planning strategies for routine backup of critical data, programs, documentation, and personnel for recovery after an interruption.

>DHS Needs To Strengthen Information Technology Continuity and Contingency Planning Capabilities (Redacted) 		2013

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

Return to top of page