Report to the Secretary ...on OIG in the CRAT Report

March 17, 1997
REPORT FOR THE SECRETARY ON REFERENCES TO THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION TEAM (CRAT) REPORT

FROM: Roger C. Viadero,
Inspector General

SUBJECT: Response to Allegations Raised in the CRAT Report

On February 28, 1997, the Department released its Civil Rights ActionTeam (CRAT) Report. The report was based on a CRAT review of civil rightsissues facing USDA, as well as the results of 12 listening sessions tailoredto address civil rights concerns of customers and USDA employees. CRATmade 92 recommendations to address institutional and underlying problemsand ways to implement actions to ensure accountability and follow-throughat USDA. Recommendation 13 included a statement that the Department ofJustice (DOJ) should investigate alleged abuses of authority by the Officeof Inspector General (OIG).
Because of my concern regarding any allegation that calls into question the integrity of OIG, I requested all documentation from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Administration, and CRAT leader, concerning the allegations. CRAT conducted a search of CRAT transcript disks, along with other correspondence received by the Department, for references to OIG. The list which was provided to me was comprised of allegations made against OIG by six individuals. I appointed a Task Force to undertake a thorough examination of each of the allegations and relevant OIG files. The review was conducted to determine the propriety of OIG's actions regarding the manner in which complaints were handled pursuant to policies and procedures. The purpose of this report is to set forth the findings of the Task Force.

SUMMARY:

The allegations appear to result from general dissatisfaction with theultimate outcome of complaints made to OIG, and audits and investigationsconducted by OIG. One allegation pertained to an OIG audit, two of the allegations concerned a general complaint about OIG investigations, and three of the allegations concerned the handling of complaints made to the OIG Hotline.

Although the Task Force found that the allegations of wrongdoing by OIG were unsubstantiated, there appear to be serious misconceptions regarding the Inspector General's authority, role, and function within the Department. These misconceptions apparently led to false expectations or misunderstandings on the part of the complainants, and therefore, not surprisingly, dissatisfaction with the end result.

I. BACKGROUND

The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C.A. app. 3 (Inspector General Act), sets forth the Inspector General's authority. Departmental Regulation (DR) 1700-2, OIG Organization and Procedures, describes OIG authority, responsibility, policies and procedures within USDA. It also establishes corresponding responsibilities of Department officials and employees. Both are summarized below.

A. Office of Inspector General

Under the Inspector General Act, the Inspector General has the following statutory responsibilities with respect to USDA programs and operations: (1) Conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations; (2) review and make recommendations regarding legislation and regulations; (3) coordinate relationships between USDA and other governmental and nongovernmental entities in order to promote economy and efficiency, prevent fraud and abuse, and identify persons involved in fraud and abuse; (4) keep the Secretary, the Congress, and USDA management informed on significant deficiencies; (5) report Federal criminal violations to the Attorney General; (6) submit a Semiannual Report to Congress and to the Secretary; and (7) receive complaints from USDA employees.

B. USDA Officials and Employees

Pursuant to Departmental regulations, USDA officials and employees must: (1) maintain established lines of managerial authority; (2) provide supervision and inspections consistent with assigned responsibilities; (3) establish, execute, and assure compliance with USDA policies, plans, and procedures; (4) implement internal control systems as required by the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982; (5) prepare financial statements in accordance with Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990; (6) report suspected violations of law and serious employee misconduct to OIG; and (7) take appropriate action on conditions needing improvements, including those reported by OIG.

II. TASK FORCE METHODOLOGY

The Task Force conducted a detailed review and analysis of the allegations by reviewing pertinent OIG files. In reviewing the files, members of the Task Force carefully examined whether OIG's actions were appropriate. Since the Task Force members included representatives from OIG's Audit, Investigation, Policy Development and Resources Management, and Legal staffs, the case files were examined from various perspectives, for compliance with legal mandates and OIG procedures and policies. The six allegations reviewed by the Task Force are summarized below.

Allegation Relating to Audit

Complainant A alleged that he had been singled out for review because he was a minority farmer while white farmers with similar operations were not reviewed and had their operations approved.

Allegations Relating to Investigations
Complainant B alleged that OIG is used by Departmental agencies as a tool to conduct meritless investigations in order to deny program participants assistance that they would otherwise be entitled to.
Complainant C's allegation related to a request from a Departmental agency that OIG investigate alleged violations of law by Complainant C and his family. Complainant C alleged that although the investigation disclosed no evidence to support the original alleged violations, OIG decided to continue to investigate the family and to turn the investigation into a criminal investigation against Complainant C's family, which ultimately led to a conviction.

Allegations Relating to OIG Hotline Complaints

Complainant D alleged that he complained to the Hotline about criminal violations relating to his family's land, but that OIG improperly refused to investigate the matter.

Complainant E asserted that OIG did not take action concerning a threat made against one USDA employee by another USDA employee.
Complainant F alleged that OIG and Forest Service law enforcement personnel cooperate with managers to deter involvement in the EEO process and for administrative vendettas against employees involved in EEO and whistleblower processes. Complainant F's involvement with OIG mainly concerned a matter referred by Complainant F to the OIG Hotline, which was investigated by OIG, but was not prosecuted.

	March 17, 1997
	REPORT FOR THE SECRETARY ON REFERENCES TO THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION TEAM (CRAT) REPORT
	FROM: Roger C. Viadero, Inspector General
	SUBJECT: Response to Allegations Raised in the CRAT Report
	On February 28, 1997, the Department released its Civil Rights ActionTeam (CRAT) Report. The report was based on a CRAT review of civil rightsissues facing USDA, as well as the results of 12 listening sessions tailoredto address civil rights concerns of customers and USDA employees. CRATmade 92 recommendations to address institutional and underlying problemsand ways to implement actions to ensure accountability and follow-throughat USDA. Recommendation 13 included a statement that the Department ofJustice (DOJ) should investigate alleged abuses of authority by the Officeof Inspector General (OIG).
	Because of my concern regarding any allegation that calls into question the integrity of OIG, I requested all documentation from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Administration, and CRAT leader, concerning the allegations. CRAT conducted a search of CRAT transcript disks, along with other correspondence received by the Department, for references to OIG. The list which was provided to me was comprised of allegations made against OIG by six individuals. I appointed a Task Force to undertake a thorough examination of each of the allegations and relevant OIG files. The review was conducted to determine the propriety of OIG's actions regarding the manner in which complaints were handled pursuant to policies and procedures. The purpose of this report is to set forth the findings of the Task Force.
	SUMMARY:
	The allegations appear to result from general dissatisfaction with theultimate outcome of complaints made to OIG, and audits and investigationsconducted by OIG. One allegation pertained to an OIG audit, two of the allegations concerned a general complaint about OIG investigations, and three of the allegations concerned the handling of complaints made to the OIG Hotline.
	Although the Task Force found that the allegations of wrongdoing by OIG were unsubstantiated, there appear to be serious misconceptions regarding the Inspector General's authority, role, and function within the Department. These misconceptions apparently led to false expectations or misunderstandings on the part of the complainants, and therefore, not surprisingly, dissatisfaction with the end result.
	I. BACKGROUND
	The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C.A. app. 3 (Inspector General Act), sets forth the Inspector General's authority. Departmental Regulation (DR) 1700-2, OIG Organization and Procedures, describes OIG authority, responsibility, policies and procedures within USDA. It also establishes corresponding responsibilities of Department officials and employees. Both are summarized below.
	A. Office of Inspector General
	Under the Inspector General Act, the Inspector General has the following statutory responsibilities with respect to USDA programs and operations: (1) Conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations; (2) review and make recommendations regarding legislation and regulations; (3) coordinate relationships between USDA and other governmental and nongovernmental entities in order to promote economy and efficiency, prevent fraud and abuse, and identify persons involved in fraud and abuse; (4) keep the Secretary, the Congress, and USDA management informed on significant deficiencies; (5) report Federal criminal violations to the Attorney General; (6) submit a Semiannual Report to Congress and to the Secretary; and (7) receive complaints from USDA employees.
	B. USDA Officials and Employees
	Pursuant to Departmental regulations, USDA officials and employees must: (1) maintain established lines of managerial authority; (2) provide supervision and inspections consistent with assigned responsibilities; (3) establish, execute, and assure compliance with USDA policies, plans, and procedures; (4) implement internal control systems as required by the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982; (5) prepare financial statements in accordance with Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990; (6) report suspected violations of law and serious employee misconduct to OIG; and (7) take appropriate action on conditions needing improvements, including those reported by OIG.
	II. TASK FORCE METHODOLOGY
	The Task Force conducted a detailed review and analysis of the allegations by reviewing pertinent OIG files. In reviewing the files, members of the Task Force carefully examined whether OIG's actions were appropriate. Since the Task Force members included representatives from OIG's Audit, Investigation, Policy Development and Resources Management, and Legal staffs, the case files were examined from various perspectives, for compliance with legal mandates and OIG procedures and policies. The six allegations reviewed by the Task Force are summarized below.
	Allegation Relating to Audit
	Complainant A alleged that he had been singled out for review because he was a minority farmer while white farmers with similar operations were not reviewed and had their operations approved.
	Allegations Relating to Investigations
	Complainant B alleged that OIG is used by Departmental agencies as a tool to conduct meritless investigations in order to deny program participants assistance that they would otherwise be entitled to.
	Complainant C's allegation related to a request from a Departmental agency that OIG investigate alleged violations of law by Complainant C and his family. Complainant C alleged that although the investigation disclosed no evidence to support the original alleged violations, OIG decided to continue to investigate the family and to turn the investigation into a criminal investigation against Complainant C's family, which ultimately led to a conviction.
	Allegations Relating to OIG Hotline Complaints
	Complainant D alleged that he complained to the Hotline about criminal violations relating to his family's land, but that OIG improperly refused to investigate the matter.
	Complainant E asserted that OIG did not take action concerning a threat made against one USDA employee by another USDA employee.
	Complainant F alleged that OIG and Forest Service law enforcement personnel cooperate with managers to deter involvement in the EEO process and for administrative vendettas against employees involved in EEO and whistleblower processes. Complainant F's involvement with OIG mainly concerned a matter referred by Complainant F to the OIG Hotline, which was investigated by OIG, but was not prosecuted.