American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Advancing Government Accountability Baltimore, Maryland January 21, 2010 H. Glen Walker Executive Director,

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Advancing Government Accountability

Baltimore , MarylandJanuary 21, 2010

H. Glen WalkerExecutive Director,

Recovery Accountability & Transparency Board

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

$787 Billion availableSave and create 3 to 4 million jobsLay the foundation for a robust and

sustainable 21st century economyCreate an oversight body to ensure

transparency and accountability of the funds

2

Breakout of $787 Billion Funding (Source – OMB)

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

3

Agency Commitments vs. Spending*Contract, Grants, Loans, and Entitlements

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

4*Updated through January 5, 2010

$ in Billions

Provide public with unprecedented transparency of Recovery spending and job creation (Recovery.gov)

Provide oversight of Recovery spending to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse

Mission of the Board

5

Recovery.gov- TIGTA – Russell George (Committee Chair)- HHS IG – Daniel Levinson- Commerce IG – Todd Zinser- Defense IG – Gordon Heddell

Accountability- Homeland IG – Richard Skinner (Committee Chair & Board Vice-Chair)- Justice IG – Glenn Fine- Energy IG – Greg Friedman- Education IG – Mary Mitchelson (acting)

Recovery Funds Working Group- Transportation IG – Calvin Scovel (Committee Chair)- Agriculture IG – Phyllis Fong- Interior IG – Mary Kendall (acting)- Treasury IG – Eric Thorson

Board Members & Committees

6

Recovery.gov Committee

7

Smartronix (KMPG, Synteractive, TMP

Government), GSA (Savvis), DHSEPA

(CGI Federal)

• Web Portal• Data Storage• Reports on the use of funds• Data visualization• Content management• Pre-compiled reports• Raw report data• Advanced geospatial capabilities

Out-Bound ReportingRecipientIn-Bound Reporting

• Recipient Registration • Recipient Reporting • Agency Validation

Recovery.govFederalReporting.gov

GSA Database

(Sybase)

Database

Data Replicated Between Hosting Centers

Our strategy employs a hybrid approach, leveraging expertise and services from both government and industry.

Recovery.gov Version 2.0 Architecture

8

9

Issues Recovery Act Implementation Guidance

Provides Host System for FederalReporting.gov Repository for Data Collection

Provides Recovery.gov Version 2.0 Collocation, Database, and Internet Connectivity

Provides Information Security Monitoring (Einstein) GSA– DHS

Infrastructure of RECOVERY.GOV VERSION 2.0

Recovery.gov Version 2.0 Organizational Relationships

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was selected to lead the development of the recipient reporting architecture (FederalReporting.gov)

FederalReporting.gov is powered by EPA’s mature CDX (Exchange Network) technology

EPA’s secure CDX is currently used by all 50 States for Reporting/Data Exchange

FederalReporting.govOverview

10

FederalReporting.gov is designed to satisfy Section 1512, “Reports on Use of Funds” as specified by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

FederalReporting.govOverview (continued)

11

Prime Recipient Level (State)

Lowest Data Collection Level-----------------------------------------------------------

Sub Recipient Level 2 (Contractor)

Sub Recipient Level 1 (City)

Federal Agency

Sub Recipient Level 3 (Paving Company)

Sub Recipient Level 1 data is reported by the prime or sub recipient

Only the identity of Sub Recipient Level 2is reported

Data on 3rd or lower level recipients is not reported

Recipient Reporting Requirements

12

Late Reports – 16,997

Recipients Who Failed to Report – 4,359

Job Reporting

Data Input Issues Funding and Awarding Agency Codes and Names Treasury Account Symbol Code (TAS) Congressional District Recipient and Place of

Performance Federal Award Number or ID

Initial Recipient Reporting* Prominent Issues

13*October 2009 Reporting Period

New Data Anomaly Reports to assist with Data Quality Reviews

Quality Edit Checks & Alert Messages

Improved Data Definitions (OMB/RATB)

Simplified Job Reporting Requirements (OMB/GAO)

Extended Stakeholder Review Period

Prime Recipient Reports2nd Quarter Enhancements

14

Total Number of Reports – 134,194

Reports by Type of Award Contracts – 18,205 Grants – 115,333 Loans – 656

Help Desk Statistics Total Number of Contacts – 19,194 Average Response Time – 01:06 minutes Satisfaction Rating – 4.5 out of 5

Recipient Reporting Preliminary January 2010*

15*As of January 15, 2010

Accountability Committee

16

Referral Starting PointGenerated from

all types of external

complaints and/or proactive

RATB risk assessment, review and

analysis Triage and Analysis Continued analysis on intake and internally generated

issues

Assignment(Referred to

OIGs)

Reporting back to RATB

Required in monthly

reporting on all Recovery related matters , and key to our predictive

analysis

Accountability ModuleInformation Flow

17

Reviews contracts and grants for completeness

Reviews whether competition requirements for contracts and grants have been satisfied

Reviews for wasteful spending, poor contract/grant management, and other abuses

Refers matters it considers appropriate for investigation to the OIG for the applicable agency

Accountability Committee Contract & Grant Activities

18

Accountability Committee Recovery Operations Center

19

Initial Risk Assessment – Recipient screening Target Analysis – In-depth fraud analysis to

identify non-obvious relationshipsFocusing Limited Resources – Enhancing the

IG’s organic investigative capabilities

Primary Function

Accountability CommitteeKey Oversight Statistics

Recovery Board and All Inspectors GeneralData Through November 30, 2009

20

Complaints 1,006 Received Via the ROC = 442Investigations 29 Closed Without Action Hotline - 225

25 Accepted for Prosecution FAX - 34 Prosecution Denied Website - 2082 Referred for Alternative Resolution US Mail - 4

Audits, Inspections, Evaluations and Reviews 250 Completed Other - 2Whistleblower Reprisal Allegations 5 Received Referred for Action - 41

21

Accountability CommitteeGenerating Leads

Accountability CommitteeComplaints By Geographical Area

22

Heat Map technology

affords a visual image of

geographical hot spots.

Recovery Funds Working Group

Committee

23

Recovery Funds Working Group Committee

24

Board Committee

Recovery OIG Working Group

Lead Recovery OIG

Regular

Update

sDecision Making

Process

Initiatives To Date: OIG Recovery Act Plan – provides overview of planned

work

OIG Monthly Report – provides overview of completed work

Survey of Federal Acquisition and Grant Personnel – data will be used to make government-wide recommendations regarding Recovery Act oversight

Funding – made recommendations to OMB to address funding State and Local Recovery Act oversight activities

Recovery Funds Working Group Committee

25

Initiatives To Date (continued): Single Audits – made recommendations to OMB to address

Single Audit process issues as they relate to the Recovery Act

Oversight Coordination – coordinating across OIGs, GAO, and Federal Agencies and between Federal, State, and local governments

Reporting – issue quarterly and annual reports on Recovery Act funds and other issues as appropriate

Data Quality Reviews - HHS OIG, on behalf of the Recovery Board, issued a report entitled Summary of Inspectors General Reports on Federal Agencies’ Data-Quality Review Processes

Recovery Funds Working Group Committee

26

Two Fold Mission – Accountability & Transparency– Recovery.gov– Prevent fraud, waste, and abuse

Led by Three Board Committees– Recovery.gov– Accountability– Recovery Funds Working Group

Coordinated throughout Federal, State, and Local Oversight Communities

Closing

27

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Advancing Government Accountability

Baltimore , MarylandJanuary 21, 2010

H. Glen WalkerExecutive Director,

Recovery Accountability & Transparency Board