	Introduction

Congress created federal inspectors general (IGs) to combat waste, fraud, and abuse within designated federal departments and agencies. Congress may have an interest in ensuring that federal OIGs have the appropriate authorities and access they need to perform their investigations, audits, and evaluations. Concurrently, Congress has a responsibility to protect from improper release some records and information, such as information related to national security or to ongoing criminal investigations. This report provides background on the statutory creation of federal OIGs and provides historical context for contemporary debates about the strengths and limitations of the offices. As a result, statutory IGs are not identical. A few IGs, however, have express authority to audit and investigate more than one agency, organization, program, or activity. 110-323 ); Government Printing Office ( P.L. 100-504 ); Library of Congress ( P.L. Purposes

Pursuant to Section 2 of the IG Act, the three principal purposes of inspectors general who are governed by the IG Act are
conducting and supervising audits and investigations related to agency programs and operations; providing leadership and coordination as well as recommending policies for activities designed to promote the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of the affiliated agencies' programs and operations; providing for the prevention and detection of fraud and abuse in such programs and operations; and keeping the agency head and Congress "fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to" such programs and the necessity for and "progress of corrective action." Congress, however, has mandated in legislation that OIGs conduct certain reviews. In recent Congresses, these legislative and oversight authorities have been used in a variety of ways, including through introduction or passage of bills, through formal letters to and from overseers, and through oversight hearings. Selected Legislation in Recent Congresses

Congress has perennially attempted to address IG oversight through legislation in a number of ways, including expanding an existing IG's oversight to additional federal entities; creating a new IG for an agency that appears to be without such an oversight mechanism; amending the appointment structure of an existing IG; requiring additional reporting measures by one or several IGs; and various other administrative initiatives like ensuring competitive pay rates for IGs. 314 in the 113 th Congress and H.R. For example, H.R. For example, in December 2015, Congress created a new agency-head-appointed IG to oversee the operations of the Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind and Severely Disabled, also known as the AbilityOne Program. H.R. On September 9, 2015, H.R. 3770 , 113 th Congress). Oversight of IG Recommendations

A December 10, 2015, hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs examined IGs' required processes for audit and follow-up on their audit recommendations. On June 29, 2016, Senator Heidi Heitkamp introduced the Inspector General Recommendation Transparency Act ( S. 3109 ), which, among other requirements, would require federal IGs to post online a list of the recommendations that the IG has made to the agency "that [have] not been adopted or implemented" by the agency affiliated with the IG. The list of open recommendations would be required to be updated at least every six months. Appendix.
Federal inspectors general (IGs) are authorized to combat waste, fraud, and abuse within their affiliated federal entities. To execute their missions, offices of inspector general (OIGs) conduct and publish audits and investigations—among other duties. Two major enactments—the Inspector General Act of 1978 and its amendments of 1988 (codified at 5 U.S.C. Appendix)—established federal IGs as permanent, nonpartisan, and independent offices in more than 70 federal agencies.
OIGs serve to assist Congress in overseeing executive branch—and a few legislative branch—agencies. They provide recommendations and findings to their affiliated agency head and to Congress that may save the government millions of dollars per year. As a result, Congress may have an interest in ensuring that federal OIGs have the appropriate authorities and access to information they need to perform their investigations, audits, and evaluations. Concurrently, Congress has a responsibility to protect some records and information, such as national security information or information about an ongoing criminal investigation, from improper release. This report provides background on the statutory creation of federal OIGs and provides historical context for contemporary debates about the strengths and limitations of the offices.
Congress has a number of tools at its disposal to enhance OIG oversight, including through the introduction or passage of legislation, through formal letters to and from overseers, and through oversight hearings. Recent legislative initiatives have sought to enhance OIG oversight by creating new IGs (P.L. 114-113, 114th Congress; H.R. 302 and H.R. 3770, 113th Congress), expanding the authority of existing ones (P.L. 113-6, H.R. 314, 113th Congress), amending IGs' appointment structures (P.L. 113-126 §§401, 413), or increasing IGs' reporting requirements to Congress (H.R. 1211, 113th Congress; H.R. 658, 112th Congress).
In December 2015, Congress established a new agency-head-appointed IG to assist oversight of the Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, an organization also referred to as AbilityOne.
Some Members of Congress have recently focused on how IGs might leverage technology to assist congressional staff in their oversight of Congress. In December 2015, for example, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs examined IGs' required processes for audit and follow-up on their audit recommendations to their affiliated agencies. Some committee members suggested that the IG community establish a single, centralized database in which all open IG recommendations are collected. Officials from the IG community welcomed the idea, but expressed concerns about the costs and administration of such a database. On June 30, 2016, Senator Heidi Heitkamp introduced legislation that she said "would fill a gap ... I saw in federal management" as a result of the hearing. The bill, S. 3109, would require federal IGs to publish online all recommendations that remain open after one year. The online list would be required to be updated at least every six months.
Strengthening government oversight through IGs and ensuring proper access to agency records, among other issues, will likely continue to be of interest to Congress in the future.