Federal Reports

The OIG inspection team assessed whether the Superintendent of Documents (SuDoc) is meeting the intent of 44 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1909 to “make firsthand investigation of conditions for which need is indicated” with the Public Access Assessments (PAA) of the Federal Depository Libraries (FDL).

Our Objective(s)
To evaluate single audit reports uploaded to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse between April 1, 2025 and June 30, 2025, and identify findings that affect directly awarded Department of Transportation (DOT) programs.
Why This AuditOIG performs oversight of independent, non-Federal auditors' single audit reports. Over the past 3 fiscal years, on average over 250 single audit reports were issued that included findings related to programs directly funded by DOT. We issue memoranda that summarize the single audit reports' significant findings and recommendations that require priority action by DOT. When warranted, we also recommend that DOT recover funds that were inappropriately expended by non-Federal entities.

What We Found
Auditors reported 20 findings related to 11 grantees that included significant noncompliance with Federal guidelines that require prompt actions from DOT's Operating Administrations.
Of the 20 findings, 8 were repeat findings related to 4 grantees.
Auditors identified questioned costs totaling $27,114 for 1 of the 11 grantees.
We identified nonmonetary repeat findings that caused a disclaimer of opinion for one entity and a qualified opinion for another.

Recommendations
We made 2 recommendations to OST to resolve and close the findings and recover questioned costs, if applicable.

VA medical facilities use automated dispensing cabinets to help manage medication inventory and allow clinical staff to dispense medications to patients near the point of care. The OIG conducted this national review to evaluate whether controls at VHA medical facilities ensure accountability over high-risk medications when clinical staff remove them from these cabinets using generic information, such as codes or nonpatient information.

The OIG estimated that in fiscal year 2024, VA medical facilities could not fully account for 46 percent of medications removed with generic information from cabinet A (one of two types of cabinets reviewed, called A and B in the report). Facilities had the most issues tracing propofol to specific patients. Cabinet B transactions could not be projected due to data limitations, but these transactions may also be at risk of not being traceable to a patient. These issues occurred because medical facilities’ standard operating procedures and local policies did not address monitoring of medication removals from cabinets using generic information. Some staff reported using generic information out of convenience or to be more efficient.

The OIG reviewed 40 transactions in which staff removed controlled substances using generic information and found one instance in which a facility could not trace a controlled substance to a specific patient. VHA policy does not prohibit using cabinets to store controlled substances, but it does require facilities to maintain full accountability over them through an electronic record that tracks the medication’s removal from a cabinet to its final dispensation. Removing medications without using a patient’s name increases the risk of drug diversion, so this practice should be closely monitored.

VHA concurred with the OIG’s three recommendations to enhance local guidance on, compliance with, and monitoring of these transactions.
 

This report provides the results of Objective 1, in which we determined whether the State of Michigan used FNS SNAP administrative funds to provide benefits to participants.