From: NASA Office of Inspector General
Posted: Sunday, January 10, 2010
(Report No. IG-10-005; Assignment No. A-09-009-04) Full report
January 5, 2010
TO: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Senior Accountable Official Recovery Act Implementation Executive
FROM: Acting Assistant Inspector General for Auditing
SUBJECT: Final Memorandum on Analysis of NASA’s Final Program-Specific Recovery Act Plans (Report No. IG-10-005; Assignment No. A-09-009-04)
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) requires Federal Offices of Inspector General (OIGs) to assess their agency’s compliance with Recovery Act mandates and with the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) April 3, 2009, “Updated Implementing Guidance for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009” (OMB Guidance).
The NASA OIG conducted a review of NASA’s program-specific plans for the Agency’s Recovery Act-related projects and activities. Program-specific Recovery Act plans are intended to provide detailed summaries of projects and programs funded under the Recovery Act. Program plans are required to specify the objectives of the projects as well as the benefits of these projects to the public. NASA submitted five program plans to OMB for review on May 15, 2009, and OMB accepted the program plans as submitted. On the basis of Recovery Act requirements for agency reporting and OIG oversight, we analyzed the five program plans to assess compliance with OMB’s Guidance.
During our initial review of the five program plans, we found that each had a number of minor compliance issues when compared to the OMB Guidance. Specifically, none of the five program plans included a description of periodic reviews of planned Recovery Act-related activities in the Monitoring and Evaluation section. In addition, one program plan did not identify projects and activities funded under the Recovery Act and did not address the section on Federal Infrastructure Investments.
We discussed the issues with NASA’s Recovery Act Implementation Executive, who provided reasonable explanations for these issues. The discrepancies we noted between the OMB Guidance and the NASA Program Plans were either the result of alternate formatting of information mutually agreed upon by NASA and OMB or of NASA not providing all required information while awaiting Congressional concurrence with the Agency’s fiscal year (FY) 2009 Operating Plan. Based on the information provided, we concluded that each of the plans adequately addressed the requirements of the OMB Guidance.
We issued the draft memorandum on December 17, 2009. In NASA’s response, received January 5, 2010, the Recovery Act Implementation Executive stated the Agency concurred with the observations noted in this memorandum.
// end //