To accumulate comparative  information on budget and staffing resources, we obtained the total  budgetary resources and staffing levels for the USDA OIG and for all  other OIGs in the cabinet-level departments from the Office of  Management and Budget (OMB) for the same 3-year period from fiscal  year 2009 through 2011. We then compared the accomplishments,  including the number of audits, reported by the USDA OIG in semiannual  reports over the 3-year period to USDA’s mission areas, high-risk areas,  and management challenges to provide perspective on the extent and  nature of the OIG’s oversight coverage. To provide information on the reported quality of the OIG’s oversight, we  obtained the results of the most recent external peer reviews of audit and  investigative quality, and the results of the internal quality assessment  reviews performed by the USDA OIG of its own operations for audits,  investigations, and administrative activities for fiscal years 2009 through  2011. We also obtained information on the results of the OIG’s audit of USDA’s  compliance with reporting requirements under The Improper Payments  Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 (IPERA 2010), including  requirements for reporting on the causes of the agency’s improper  payments. The other cabinet-level OIGs  combined had an increase of about 6 percent in total budgetary resources  during the same period. The USDA OIG had budget authority for 608 full-time equivalent staff  (FTE) during fiscal year 2011. The USDA OIG had an  11 percent increase in the number of FTEs from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal  year 2011, compared to an overall increase of 14 percent for all other  cabinet-level OIGs during the same 3-year period. USDA OIG’s Reported Monetary Accomplishments Compared to Other Cabinet-Level OIGs

The USDA OIG reported total monetary accomplishments from audits and  investigations of approximately $4.9 billion over fiscal years 2009 through  2011. As a ratio of the OIG’s total budgetary resources over  the same 3-year period, the USDA OIG’s estimated average return-on- investment for each budget dollar is about $13.96. By comparison, the estimated 3-year average return-on-investment for all  other cabinet-level OIGs combined was $12.63. The USDA OIG’s audit reports show that coverage was provided of high- risk areas identified by GAO, and management challenges identified by  the OIG for the 3-year period. USDA OIG Audit and Investigative Quality as Reported by External Peer Reviews and Quality Assurance Reviews

The USDA OIG received peer reviews of its audit and investigative quality  during the 3-year period. The OIG’s 2012 audit report on USDA’s fiscal year 2011 compliance with  improper payment reporting requirements concluded, among other things,  that USDA’s component agencies did not consistently assign the  appropriate error category when reporting the causes of improper  payments and that as a result, USDA’s reported amount of improper  payments caused by documentation errors was not accurate. They also concurred with the OIG’s report  recommendations to (1) implement a second-party quality review process  to ensure that improper payment information reported in the PAR is  properly supported, (2) implement controls to ensure that the USDA  agencies consistently and accurately categorize improper payment errors,  and (3) update USDA guidance for determining the cause of an error to  include specific examples related to USDA programs. Agency Comments

In written comments on a draft of this report, which are reprinted in  appendix II, the USDA Inspector General stated that the report provides  an objective and comprehensive view of the office’s oversight of USDA’s  programs. We are sending copies of this report to the U.S. Department of  Agriculture’s Inspector General and interested congressional committees.
Why GAO Did This Study

The USDA OIG plays a critical role in addressing issues of economy, efficiency, and potential fraud involving scarce taxpayer dollars allocated to USDA.
GAO was asked to review a number of issues related to the OIG's operations in comparison to other cabinet-level OIGs. The objectives of this report were to provide information on the USDA OIG's (1) budget and staffing levels, (2) reported accomplishments, (3) reported oversight coverage, (4) reported quality of work, and (5) oversight of USDA's reported causes of estimated improper payments. To address these objectives, GAO obtained information over the 3-year period covering fiscal years 2009 through 2011 on the OIG's budget and staff levels and the reported monetary and nonmonetary accomplishments from this work. GAO obtained similar information reported by the OIGs in all cabinet-level departments. In addition, GAO summarized information on the USDA OIG's oversight coverage reported by audits and investigations, and the quality of the OIG's work as reported by peer reviews performed by other OIGs. Also, GAO obtained information on the OIG's audit of USDA's reporting on improper payments.

What GAO Found

During the 3-year period from fiscal year 2009 through 2011, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of Inspector General's (OIG) total budgetary resources decreased by about 8 percent. In contrast, the total budgetary resources for all other cabinet-level OIGs increased by approximately 6 percent over the 3-year period. The USDA OIG's authorized full-time equivalent staff (FTE) increased by 11 percent, from 550 to 608, while all other cabinet-level OIGs had a combined increase in authorized FTEs of about 14 percent during the same 3-year period.
The USDA OIG had an estimated average return on investment for each budgetary resource dollar received of $13.96 during the 3-year period compared to the other cabinet-level OIGs' average return of $12.63, based on the potential savings from monetary accomplishments reported by audits and investigations. Most of the USDA OIG's return was the result of approximately $4 billion in potential savings resulting from a fiscal year 2011 audit of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for USDA programs.
During the 3-year period the USDA OIG issued 212 audit reports and completed 878 investigations that provided oversight coverage for each of USDA's seven mission areas, high-risk areas identified by GAO, and the management challenges identified by the OIG.
With respect to quality, the OIG received peer reviews of its audit and investigative quality from external OIGs, which concluded that the OIG had controls in place to ensure that its audits were performed in accordance with professional auditing standards, and that the OIG's investigations followed applicable professional standards.
The OIG's audit of USDA's compliance with reporting requirements for improper payments included a review of the reported root causes. The audit concluded that because of the lack of clear instructions, USDA's component agencies did not consistently categorize the root causes of improper payments. As a result, the OIG concluded that USDA's reporting of the causes of the improper payments was not accurate. The OIG made recommendations, and USDA agreed to implement a second-party review process to help ensure accuracy, implement controls to ensure consistent categorizing of causes, and update guidance for determining the causes.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making specific recommendations in this report. The USDA Inspector General commented that the draft of this report provided an objective and comprehensive review of the OIG.