	Background

The Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) was the largest construction project on  the Capitol Grounds in over 140 years. AOC Jurisdictions, Offices, and Major Contracts Subject to OIG Oversight

AOC is responsible for the maintenance, renovation, and construction of  the Capitol Hill buildings and grounds covering 17.4 million square feet of  facilities and more than 587 acres, and the AOC OIG is responsible for  the audit and investigative oversight of AOC. In interviews with the IG, he  explained that instead of formal plans with an assessment of risk and an  assignment of priorities, the OIG relied on a process of “continuous  review” defined by the IG as an effort to alert AOC and the Congress to  cost overruns, delays, and other contract management issues as they  occurred. OIG Provided No Audit Reports of AOC’s Mega Projects and Most Jurisdictions and Offices during Fiscal Years 2012 through 2015

In large part because of the OIG’s insufficient audit planning, the OIG  provided no audit reports of AOC’s mega projects with an estimated  combined cost of over $1.1 billion, and the OIG provided limited audit  oversight of AOC’s jurisdictions and offices during the 4-year period we  reviewed. (See table  2.) Investigative Changes Contributed to a Decline of Reports and Accomplishments

Although the OIG continues to perform investigations, the IG’s changes in  investigative operations have contributed in part to a significant decline in  the number of investigative reports and monetary accomplishments  reported by the OIG. During the same 4-year period, the OIG provided only one audit  report that addressed a single program among all the programs provided  by AOC’s 10 jurisdictions, and reported a declining number of other audit  reports accompanied by a corresponding decline in the reported amount  of monetary accomplishments. The OIG’s efforts during the 4-year period, including  its continuous review of mega projects, did not have audit plans that were  based on an assessment of risk or assignment of priorities. In addition, the current IG rescinded the OIG’s law enforcement authority  and removed its investigators’ responsibility to complete investigations of  potential criminal allegations, resulting in these allegations being referred  to USCP for investigation. USCP and AOC  program offices are not subject to CIGIE’s Quality Standards for  Investigations. To provide increased oversight of AOC and to keep the Architect and  the Congress fully and currently informed, we recommend that the  AOC OIG revise and implement policies and procedures to provide  audit reports that are based on planning that includes an assessment  of risk and the assignment of priorities, consistent with requirements  in CIGIE’s Quality Standards for Federal Offices of Inspector General. To reduce the risk that fraud, waste, and abuse and criminal activities  are not detected or fully addressed, we recommend that (1) the AOC  OIG work with CIGIE to obtain a peer review from another federal OIG  of the AOC OIG’s overall investigative operations, including  consideration of the OIG’s reliance on investigations performed by  other entities, and (2) make any needed changes in its operating  procedures based on the results of the review to help ensure that  investigations of AOC are conducted in accordance with CIGIE  standards for investigations and AOC IG Act requirements. The OIG agreed with our recommendation to work with  CIGIE to obtain a peer review of the AOC OIG’s investigative operations,  including consideration of the OIG’s reliance on investigations performed  by other entities. We did not assess this determination. AOC OIG has  responsibility for ensuring that its investigations comply with applicable  standards. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our audit objectives were to (1) identify the Architect of the Capitol’s  (AOC) jurisdictions, offices, and major contracts subject to AOC Office of  Inspector General (OIG) oversight during fiscal years 2012 through 2015;  (2) determine the statutory requirements, policies, and budgetary and  staffing resources of the AOC OIG during fiscal years 2012 through 2015;  and (3) examine the extent to which the AOC OIG developed plans and  policies for oversight of AOC’s jurisdictions, offices, and major contracts  during fiscal years 2012 through fiscal year 2015, and the extent to which  oversight was provided. We also obtained the OIG policies  and procedures specific to OIG planning and compared these  requirements with the OIG’s plans.
Why GAO Did This Study

The AOC OIG was established by statute in 2007, in part because of congressional concerns about time delays and cost overruns during construction of the Capitol Visitor Center. GAO was asked to assess the AOC OIG's oversight of AOC. This report describes AOC areas subject to OIG oversight and examines the extent to which the OIG developed plans and policies for AOC oversight for fiscal years 2012 through 2015 and the extent to which oversight was provided. GAO reviewed AOC's annual performance and accountability reports, the OIG's statutory requirements, the OIG's policies and procedures, and applicable CIGIE standards. GAO also interviewed AOC OIG officials, analyzed the OIG's plans and reports for the 4-year period, and compared these efforts with the AOC areas subject to oversight.

What GAO Found

During fiscal years 2012 through 2015—the 4-year period GAO reviewed—the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) Office of Inspector General (OIG) had responsibilities for independent audits and investigations of AOC's
10 jurisdictions with specific program responsibilities for the maintenance, operations, and preservation of the buildings and grounds across Capitol Hill;
Capitol Construction and Operations with central support offices; and
construction and restoration projects, including its four largest ongoing “mega projects,” with an estimated combined cost of over $1 billion.
The AOC OIG's audit planning during this period did not include either risk assessments or assigned priorities for conducting audits consistent with standards of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE). In addition, the OIG did not adopt these CIGIE standards in its policies and procedures. Instead, the current IG emphasized “continuous review” of mega projects, which he defined as an effort to alert AOC and the Congress of contract management issues as they occurred. This approach and the prior IG's efforts did not result in any audit reports of AOC's mega projects during fiscal years 2012 through 2015. The OIG also reported a decline in total audit reports and monetary accomplishments of potential dollar savings during fiscal years 2014 and 2015 (see table). Further, the OIG provided only one audit report of an AOC jurisdiction program during the 4-year period. Because of incomplete plans, a limited number of audit reports, and the lack of audit reports of AOC's mega projects, AOC and the Congress did not have the full benefit of OIG findings and recommendations and were not kept fully and currently informed of possible AOC problems and deficiencies during the 4-year period.
In fiscal year 2014, the IG rescinded the OIG's law enforcement authority and removed the OIG investigators' responsibility to complete criminal investigations. Instead, the OIG's investigators have responsibility for administrative investigations and rely primarily on the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) to perform criminal investigations, and on occasion other AOC program offices perform their own investigations. USCP and AOC program offices are not subject to CIGIE standards. The OIG is required to follow CIGIE standards for investigations. These OIG changes contributed in part to a decline in investigative reports and monetary accomplishments. The OIG has volunteered to receive a peer review of its investigations that could be expanded to include consideration of investigations by these other entities.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making two recommendations to the AOC OIG to (1) revise and implement policies and procedures to provide audit reports based on planning that includes risk assessment and assignment of priorities consistent with CIGIE standards and (2) obtain a peer review from another federal OIG of overall investigative operations, including consideration of the OIG's reliance on investigations performed by other entities, and to make any needed changes based on the results of such review. In comments on a draft of this report, the AOC OIG agreed with the two recommendations but raised concerns with some of GAO's findings. GAO continues to believe that its findings are valid, as discussed in the report.