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-14-136-D Our audit objective was to determine whether the City's policies, procedures, and business practices are adequate to account for and expend Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. We conducted this audit early in the Public Assistance process to identify areas where the City may need additional technical assistance or monitoring to ensure compliance. In addition, by undergoing an audit early in the grant cycle, grant recipients have the opportunity to correct non-compliance with Federal regulations before they spend the majority of their funding.

>The City of Albuquerque, New Mexico, Needs Assistance to Ensure Compliance with FEMA Public Assistance Grant Requirements 		2014
OIG-15-101-D FEMA awarded the Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Indian Reservation in Montana (Tribe) a $31.6 million grant for damages from a June-July 2010 flood disaster. The Tribe mismanaged this grant, which resulted in a domino effect of negative consequences. First, the Tribe awarded a $3.7 million sole-source contract to a Tribal-owned corporation, the Chippewa Cree Construction Corporation (Corporation). The lack of full and open competition set the stage for fraud, waste, and abuse. Then, the Tribe neglected to identify the material deficiencies in the Corporation’s fiscal controls and accounting procedures. The Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer took advantage of these weaknesses; and a Federal court has since convicted him of Federal corruption charges for embezzling the Tribe’s insurance proceeds and FEMA grant funds, and sentenced him to prison in August 2014. Finally, the Tribe could not provide documentation sufficient to support the $3.9 million it claimed for Project 117.

>The Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy's Indian Reservation in Montana Mismanaged $3.9 Million in FEMA Disaster Grant Funds 		2015
DS-13-01 Our audit objective was to determine whether the Department accounted for and expended Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. The Department received a PA award of $670,251 from the California Emergency Management Agency Cal EMA), a FEMA grantee, for damages resulting from severe storms, flooding, mudslides, and landslides, which occurred from March 29 to April 16, 2006. The award provided 75 percent FEMA funding for four large and eight small 2 projects.The audit covered the period from March 29, 2006, to October 12, 2012. We audited two large projects that incurred charges totaling $280, 112. We also performed a limited review of three small projects and two large projects to identify unused funds that should be put to better use (see Exhibit, Schedule of Audited Projects). As of the date of this report, Cal EMA had completed its review and FEMA was reviewing the Department's final claim.

>The California Department of Parks and Recreation Sacramento, California, Successfully Managed FEMA's Public Assistance Grant Funds 		2013
DS-13-05 The California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA), a FEMA grantee, awarded the Department $8,002,596 for costs resulting from severe storms, flooding, mudslides, and landslides during the period from December 17, 2005, through January 3, 2006.' The award provided 75 percent FEMA funding for 38 large projects and 17 small projects. Our audit covered the period of December 17, 2005, to October 4, 2012. We audited 10 large projects and 2 small projects, with total awarded costs of $2,684,804.

>The California Department of Parks and Recreation Did Not Account for or Expend $1.8 Million in FEMA Grant Funds According to Federal Regulations and FEMA Guidelines ( 		2013
OIG-16-107-D At the time of our audit, FEMA had granted the Commission a $7.4 million grant for damages from severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds, and flooding that occurred in April and May 2014. We conducted this audit early in the grant process to identify areas where the Commission may need additional technical assistance or monitoring to ensure compliance with Federal requirements. What We

>The Baldwin County Commission Effectively Managed FEMA Grant Funds Awarded for Damages from Spring 2014 Storms 		2016
DS-13-09 Our audit objective was to determine whether the Central Region accounted for and expended FEMA PA grant funds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines. The Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (ADHSEM), a FEMA grantee, awarded the Central Region $1,979,312 for costs resulting from damages from severe storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides during the period from August 15 through 25, 2006. The award provided 75 percent FEMA funding for six large projects and two small project5, Our audit covered the period from August 15, 2006, to January 23, 2013. We audited all six large projects, with a total awarded cost of $1,927,140.

>The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Central Region, Did Not Properly Account for and Expend $1.5 Million in FEMA Public Assistance Grant Funds 		2013
OIG-17-62-D We determined that the District’s accounting policies, procedures, and business practices are adequate to account for FEMA grant funds and insurance proceeds according to Federal regulations and FEMA guidelines.  However, the District’s procurement policies, procedures, and business practices were not adequate to meet minimum Federal standards and address key procurement elements such as to ensure no award is made to any party debarred or suspended from Federal assistance programs.  The District took immediate corrective actions and amended its procurement procedures to be compliant with Federal procurement standards.  Non-compliance occurred because District officials were not fully aware of the required procurement standards for Federal grants.  We recommended that FEMA direct Texas to continue providing technical assistance and closely monitor the District to ensure it complies with Federal procurement standards for awarding and administering disaster-related contracts to prevent improper spending of the estimated $12,854,705 ($9,641,029 Federal share) in contract costs for remaining permanent work.  FEMA agreed with the findings and recommendation in the report.

>Texas Should Continue to Provide Deweyville Independent School District Assistance in Managing FEMA Grant Funds 		2017
OIG-17-15 We determined that in most instances, Texas distributed and spent the awards in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; however, the State lacked adequate controls over more than $1 million in grant funds we reviewed.  This occurred because the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the State did not ensure adequate management and oversight of Homeland Security Grant Program funds.  We made three recommendations, which when implemented, should enhance Texas’ effectiveness in the overall use of the grant funds to improve preparedness and response capabilities.  Better management and oversight should also reduce the risk associated with the State’s management of grant funds.  FEMA concurred with all three recommendations.

>Texas Management of Homeland Security Grant Program Awards for Fiscal Years 2012-14 		2017
DA-02-04 Tennessee Board of Regents, FEMA Disaster No. 1262-DR-TN 2004
OIG-08-59 Technical Security Evaluation of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Activities at the Chet Holifield Federal Building (Redacted) 2008
OIG-08-37 Technical Security Evaluation of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Activities at the Chet Holifield Federal Building (Redacted) 2008
OIG-08-02 Technical Security Evaluation of U.S. Citizenship Activities at the Chet Holifield Federal Building 2008
OIG-07-44 Technical Security Evaluation of DHS Activities at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Unclassified Summary, 2007
OIG-09-01 Technical Security Evaluation of DHS Activities at Los Angeles International Airport 2009
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-07-25 Technical Security Evaluation of DHS Activities at Dulles International Airport, Unclassified Summary, 2007
OIG-12-45  

>Technical Security Evaluation of DHS Activities at Chicago O'Hare International Airport (Redacted) 		2012
OIG-08-65 Targeting of Cargo Carriers FY 2008: Review of CBP Cargo Enforcement Reporting and Tracking System 2008
OIG-07-72 Targeting Oceangoing Cargo Containers 2007 (Unclassified Summary) 2007
DD-11-09  

>Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana 		2011
OIG-04-24 Survey of the Science and Technology Directorate, March 2004 2004
OIG-10-21 Survey of the Number, Qualifications, and Training of DHS Personnel Responsible for Administering Recovery Act Contracts and Grants ( 2010
OIG-04-13 Survey of the Information Analysis And Infrastructure Protection Directorate, February 2004 2004
OIG-12-109  

>Survey of Hazard Mitigation Planning 		2012
OIG-07-49 Survey of DHS Intelligence Collection and Dissemination (Unclassified Summary) 2007
OIG-06-56 Survey of DHS Data Mining Activities 2006
OIG-17-14 We determined that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) resolved most of our recommendations from previous airport reports.  However, there are several open security control recommendations related to TSA’s Security Technology Integrated Program and one open and unresolved recommendation concerning closed-circuit TVs at John F. Kennedy International Airport.  We recommended that TSA prepare business impact analyses that comply with best practices and also establish a plan to conduct recurring reviews of the operational, technical, and management controls for securing TSA information technology systems at U.S. airports nationwide. TSA concurred with both recommendations.

>Summary Report on Audits of Security Controls for TSA Information Technology Systems at Airports (Redacted) 		2017
OIG-24-11 Summary of Selected DHS Components that Did Not Consistently Restrict Access to Systems and Information 2024
OIG-24-10 Summary of Previously Issued Recommendations and Other Insights to Improve Operational Conditions at the Southwest Border 2024
OIG-05-04 Summary of Evaluation of DHS' Security Program for Its Intelligence Systems 2005
OIG-04-34 Summary of Evaluation of DHS' Security Program for Its Intelligence Systems 2005
OIG-04-28 Summary of A Review of the Use of Alternative Screening Procedures at an Unnamed Airport, April 28, 2004 2004
OIG-18-75 Collectively, our FY 2017 work shows that FEMA continues to face systemic problems and operational challenges, as the variety of findings summarized in this report illustrates In FY 2017, FEMA did not manage disaster relief grants and funds adequately and did not hold grant recipients accountable for properly managing disaster relief funds. We continue to identify problems such as improper contract costs, and ineligible and unsupported expenditures.

In FY 2017, we identified $2.08 billion in questioned costs, which represents 96 percent of the $2.16 billion audited.2 We issued 37 reports concerning FEMA grants, programs, and operations funded by the DRF. Specifically, we conducted 16 grant audits, 13 proactive audits, and 8 program audits. In the last 9 fiscal years, we audited grant funds totaling $13.75 billion and reported potential monetary benefits of $6.55 billion.

>Summary and Key Findings of Fiscal Year 2017 FEMA Disaster Grant and Program Audits 		2018
OIG-18-06 FEMA did not manage disaster relief grants and funds adequately and did not hold grant recipients accountable for properly managing disaster relief funds. We continue to identify persistent problems such as improper contract costs, and ineligible and unsupported expenditures as examples of this continued failure. Over the 7-year period, FYs 2009 to 2015, we found $1.64 billion, or 15 percent, in questioned costs out of the $10.9 billion that we audited, which we recommended FEMA disallow as ineligible and unsupported costs. In FY 2016, we found $155.6 million2, or 23 percent, in questioned costs out of the $686 million that we audited, confirming that FEMA is not making progress managing disaster relief funds adequately. We continue to identify persistent problems throughout FEMA’s grant process, we are concerned that billions of tax payer dollars remain at risk.

 

>Summary and Key Findings of Fiscal Year 2016 FEMA Disaster Grant and Program Audits 		2018
OIG-17-13-D We determined that of the 55 grant audit reports we issued in fiscal year 2015, 43 reports contained 154 recommendations resulting in potential monetary benefits of $1.734 billion. This amount included $457.46 million in questioned costs that we recommended FEMA disallow as ineligible or unsupported and $1.28 billion in cost avoidance, unused obligated funding, and unused funds at risk that we recommended FEMA put to better use. The eight program audits did not relate to specific grants. In three program audits, we deployed staff to major disasters to assess FEMA’s initial response to disasters. Another program audit related to technical assistance we provided during a disaster deployment. The remaining four program audits covered other FEMA programs or operations, contained six recommendations for improving FEMA programs or operations, and identified $1.6 million in potential monetary benefits.

>Summary and Key Findings of Fiscal Year 2015 FEMA Disaster Grant and Program Audits 		2017
OIG-15-146-D This is our sixth annual “capping” report summarizing our disaster-related audits. Our first five annual reports focused solely on our Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation grant audits. This year, we added the results of our non-grant audits to reflect all of our work related to Disaster Relief Fund activities. In fiscal year (FY) 2014, we issued reports on 61 audits of FEMA grants, programs, and operations funded from the Disaster Relief Fund: 49 grant audits and 12 program audits. The 61 reports contained 159 recommendations, with potential monetary benefits of $1 billion, which included $971.7 million reported for grant audits and $29.3 million reported for program audits. The $971.7 million represents 28 percent of the $3.44 billion in grant funds we audited in FY 2014. One Hazard Mitigation Grant Program audit resulted in $812 million of the $971.7 million of potential monetary benefits. We continue to find problems with grant management, ineligible and unsupported costs, and noncompliance with Federal contracting requirements. The 12 program audits included 3 audits of FEMA’s initial response to disasters, 4 audits related to issues we identified during our audits of FEMA’s disaster responses, and 5 other audits of FEMA programs or operations. The 12 program audit reports recommended improvements to FEMA programs or operations and the recoupment of a $29.3 million debt that a state owed to FEMA. FEMA has been proactive in responding to our FY 2014 recommendations.

>Summary and Key Findings of Fiscal Year 2014 FEMA Disaster Grant and Program Audits 		2015
OIG-21-25 This report provides a summary of our previous findings and recommendations, which may inform future disaster response efforts.  Based on our prior work, we identified a pattern of internal control vulnerabilities that negatively affect both disaster survivors and disaster program effectiveness that may hinder future response efforts, including shortcomings in acquisition and contracting controls, interagency coordination challenges, and insufficient privacy safeguards that affect disaster survivors.  Additionally, FEMA did not adequately oversee disaster grant recipients and subrecipients, manage disaster assistance funds, or oversee its information technology environment.  This report discusses these vulnerabilities and the correlating recommendations we previously made that, if implemented, would better prepare FEMA to respond to future disasters.  We made no new recommendations. 

>Success of Future Disaster Response and Recovery Efforts Depends on FEMA Addressing Current Vulnerabilities 		2021
OIG-10-86  

>Stronger Security Controls Needed on Active Directory Systems 		2010
GC-HQ-06-10 Strengthening Registration Intake Controls 2006
OIG-15-95 Streamline is an initiative to criminally prosecute individuals who illegally enter the United States through defined geographic regions along the Southwest border. Although U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Border Patrol measures Streamline’s effect on re-entry of illegal aliens, its metrics do not reflect an alien’s crossing history, re-entry, or re-apprehension over multiple years. As a result, Border Patrol is not fully and accurately measuring Streamline’s effect on deterring aliens from entering and re­entering the country illegally. Additionally, because Border Patrol does not distinguish Streamline costs from the costs of its other border enforcement consequences, Border Patrol is not able to differentiate Streamline-associated costs. Finally, according to ICE ERO, Streamline has increased the workload at some of its Southwest border field offices. However, ERO cannot be certain which aliens it removes as a result of Streamline and which removals result from other enforcement actions.

>Streamline: Measuring Its Effect on Illegal Border Crossing 		2015
OIG-08-27 Status Report on Open Recommendations to DHS Components 2008
OIG-09-87  

>Status of Disaster Recovery Planning for Informatiojn Systems at the Nebraska Avenue Complex (Unclassified Summary) 		2009
DS-08-09 State of Washington's Administration of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program for the Middle Fork Fire 2008
DA-20-04 State of South Carolina, Emergency Management Division 2004
DS-08-05 State of Oregon's Administration of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program for the Bland Mountain #2 Fire 2008
DS-08-10 State of New Mexico's Administration of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program for the Atrisco Fire 2008
DS-08-12 State of Montana's Administration of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program for the Missoula/Mineral Fire Zone 2008
DS-08-07 State of Montana's Administration of the Fire Management Assistance Grant Program for the Hobble Fire 2008
DD-13-15 On August 29, 2005, the President declared Hurricane Katrina a major disaster for the State of Louisiana. At the time, Hurricane Katrina was the costliest and one of the deadliest hurricanes in U.S. history. Hurricane Katrina’s high winds, flooding, and massive storm surge breached the New Orleans levee system leaving 80 percent of the city flooded. Three weeks later, Hurricane Rita, a major hurricane in its own right, struck southwestern Louisiana heightening the recovery challenges that disaster survivors, GOHSEP, and FEMA faced.

>State of Louisiana Needs a Strategy To Manage Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Public Assistance Grants More Effectively 		2013
OIG-12-122  

>State of Kansas’ Management of State Homeland Security Program Grants Awarded During Fiscal Years 2008 Through 2010 		2012

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

Return to top of page