We  limited our review of the NASA OIG’s accomplishments to the results of  audits and investigations reported to the Congress for this period and did  not audit or otherwise verify the dollar amounts of the monetary  accomplishments or potential savings to the government reported by the  NASA OIG. We calculated a  ratio for each OIG’s budget information as a percentage of its respective  agency’s budget for comparative purposes. During the 5-year period of fiscal years 2003 through 2007, 99 percent of  NASA OIG’s dollar accomplishments came from investigations with 88  percent coming from two joint investigations with other OIGs. 1.) As shown in table 4, almost all of the NASA OIG’s monetary  accomplishments have come from investigations during fiscal years 2003  through 2007. In contrast, over the same 5- year period the OIG’s potential audit savings contributed about $9 million  or about 1 percent of the OIG’s total reported 5-year monetary  accomplishments, with one audit in fiscal year 2007 responsible for $7  million of this amount and another audit in fiscal year 2004 responsible for  about $1.5 million. When this same  calculation is made based on the monetary accomplishments reported by  all 30 OIGs with IGs appointed by the President and confirmed by the  Senate, the overall average return on their total budgetary resources in  fiscal year 2007 was $9.49 for every dollar spent by the government for  their offices, or almost 26 times that of the NASA OIG for fiscal year 2007. OIG Planning Lacks Economy and Efficiency Objectives

Of the 71 reports completed by the NASA OIG’s Office of Audits over fiscal  years 2006 and 2007, 70 did not include recommendations that address the  economy and efficiency of NASA’s programs and operations with potential  cost savings. 2.) These  losses affect the ability of the OIG to maintain experienced audit  personnel. We did not review the reasons for the OIG’s  employee turnover but believe that the OIG would benefit from a review  by an objective third-party expert to address the reasons for the relatively  high attrition rate as compared to the overall rate for NASA. External Reviews of NASA OIG and the Integrity Committee’s Investigation

Over the 5-year period of fiscal years 2003 through 2007, NASA OIG had  three routine external peer reviews—two reviews of its auditing practice  and one review of its investigative practice. Conclusions

The fundamental mission of the NASA OIG includes providing  independent and objective oversight of NASA to identify areas for  improved economy, efficiency, and effectiveness, and to detect and  prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. The OIG’s budgets and staffing levels have not been adversely affected  when compared to both the NASA budgets and staffing and to the budgets  of other OIGs. Recommendations for Executive Action

In order to strengthen audit oversight and management of the NASA OIG,  we recommend that the NASA IG  include in strategic and annual planning, performance audits that  address NASA’s economy and efficiency with potential monetary  savings and that the OIG work closely with an objective outside party  to obtain external review and consultation in the strategic and annual  planning processes, and  identify the causes of high employee turnover with the assistance of an  objective expert, and determine actions needed as appropriate. The IG  Act requires that IGs address issues of economy and efficiency and  provide independent audits and investigations. The NASA IG points out that in our comparison of  monetary accomplishments and the return on investment by 30 IG offices  where the IGs are appointed by the President and confirmed by the  Senate, our presentation of monetary accomplishments for the  Department of Agriculture OIG and the Department of Homeland Security  OIG includes the accomplishments of DCAA.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO was asked to review the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) and provide information on (1) the audit and investigative coverage of NASA; (2) the NASA OIG's audit and investigative accomplishments; (3) the NASA OIG's budget and staffing levels, including staff attrition rates; and (4) the results of external reviews of the NASA OIG. GAO obtained information from NASA OIG reports, interviews, and documentation.

What GAO Found

The fundamental mission of the statutory federal IG offices, including the NASA OIG, includes identifying areas for improved economy, efficiency, and effectiveness through independent and objective oversight and preventing and detecting fraud, waste, and abuse. Of the 71 reports issued by the OIG's Office of Audits in fiscal years 2006 and 2007, only 1 report had recommendations to address the economy and efficiency of NASA's programs and operations with measurable monetary accomplishments. Over the 5-year period of fiscal years 2003 through 2007, audit reports contributed to only 1 percent of the OIG's total monetary accomplishments. The remaining 99 percent came from the OIG's investigative cases. Of about $9 million in total reported monetary accomplishments from audits over the 5-year period, almost $7 million was from one audit completed in fiscal year 2007. When the monetary accomplishments of both audits and investigations in fiscal year 2007 are combined and compared to the OIG's budget of $34 million, the return for each budget dollar is $0.36. This calculation for all 30 OIGs with IGs appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate averages $9.49, or 26 times that of the NASA OIG. The OIG's relative lack of monetary accomplishments from audits is due, at least in part, to the OIG's strategic and annual audit plans, which do not provide assurance that NASA's economy and efficiency will be addressed or that measurable monetary accomplishments will be achieved. We believe that during the planning process, the OIG should consult with an objective third party with experience in providing economy and efficiency audits with potential monetary savings. The OIG's budgets and staffing kept pace or did slightly better than all of NASA for these same resources during fiscal years 2003 through 2007. When comparing the fiscal year 2007 budgets of all 30 IGs appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate with their respective agencies' budgets, the NASA OIG ranked 11th. Nevertheless, GAO noted that the OIG's ability to retain experienced audit personnel was adversely affected by a staff attrition rate that has increased from 12 percent to almost 20 percent over fiscal years 2003 through 2007. Due to the relatively high attrition rates, GAO believes that the OIG should use the assistance of an objective expert to identify the causes of staff turnover. The NASA OIG's most recent peer reviews for both audits and investigations have resulted in unqualified opinions. A recent investigation by the Integrity Committee of the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency and the Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency reported that the NASA IG had an appearance of a lack of independence. The investigation was closed, but corrective actions did not address this finding and the Integrity Committee considers the issue unresolved. This issue has been raised by members of the Congress as a limitation in obtaining independent oversight of NASA.