Reducing Improper Payments UI Integrity Conference April 20 th , 2010 1
Feb 10, 2016
Reducing Improper Payments
UI Integrity Conference April 20th, 2010
1
Agenda• Introduction of the Executive Order
– Components of the Executive Order – Stakeholder roles and responsibilities – Executive Order milestones
• Guidance – Guidance overview – Major questions addressed in guidance – Sections that states may be interested in
• Work Groups – Description of work groups and issue areas – Role of states and state agencies
• Next Steps • Questions and resources
2
Collaboration
• Strengthening partnerships between Federal, State, and local governments and agencies.
• Partner4Solutions.gov has been established to gather best practices to improve program integrity.
3
Improper Payments Overview
LandscapePayment errors have been steadily increasing since 2004 when Federal agencies first began measuring and reporting payment errors. The increase is the result of: • More programs measuring error • More thorough measurement
methodologies • Increases in total Federal outlays
StatisticsFY 2009 improper payments are approximately ~$100 billion • Represent ~$30 billion increase
versus FY 2008, driven primarily by more stringent measurement and increased expenditures
• Approximately 90% of the errors are in 12 of the 72 programs measured (6 agencies)
• The Medicare, Medicaid, EITC and Unemployment Insurance programs each have over $10 billion in improper payments
The President issued Executive Order #13520, Reducing Improper Payments on November 20, 2009.
4
Components of the Executive Order
Transparency
•“High-priority” programs designated (programs with largest amount of error)
•More frequent measurement and reporting
•Improper payment dashboard • High dollar errors/fraud • Assessment of
performance versus planned targets
• Publicly available •Central website for
reporting waste, fraud, and abuse
Agency Accountability
•Accountable Senate-confirmed appointees for high-priority programs • Inspector generals review: • Error payments over certain
thresh-hold amounts • Measurement plans and
reduction targets •Agency forensic auditing
pursued •Required sharing of
eligibility information among programs and agencies
•Quarterly reporting of high-dollar improper payments
• •
Incentives for Compliance
• Financial incentives for States to build better systems to identify and reduce errors • State audits to focus on
error reduction versus compliance • Contractors charged
damages for improperly invoicing the government •
5
Stakeholders
6
Executive Order Milestones
• Publish dashboard • Submit recommendations on:
– Improving measurements – Strengthening internal control measures – Improving information sharing – Enhancing contractor accountability – Shifting focus of single audits to improper
payments – Improving incentives and accountability
• Agency submits first quarterly report on high-dollar improper payments • Agency provides IG with report on error
methodology and plans for meeting targets
• Issue government-wide guidance to agencies • Establish annual or semi-annual
reduction targets
• Establish working groups
7
Guidance Overview
• OMB issued implementing guidance for Executive Order 13520 - March 22, 2010
• The guidance is: – Drafted in a “Question and Answer” format – Separated into several sections:
• General questions • Improper payments reporting • Reporting deliverables
8
Major Questions Addressed in Guidance
Although many questions are addressed in the guidance, the highlights include instructions on:
• Specifying responsibilities for agency accountable officials;
• Determining the programs subject to the EO (i.e., high-priority programs);
• Defining supplemental measures and targets for high-priority programs;
• Establishing reporting requirements under the EO; and • Establishing procedures to identify entities with
outstanding improper payments.
9
Guidance Sections of Interest to State UI Officials
• A few sections that may interest State UI community include: – Measures of access requirements; – More frequent “supplemental measures”; and – Posting additional information on the web.
10
Work GroupsWork Group (Section of E.O) Deliverables
Issue Guidance --2(a)(iii) IP Guidance in OMB A-123 App. C
Improve Measures of Access - 2(a)(iv) Dashboard for program access and measurement
Publish Dashboard on Website - 2(b) & 2(c) IP Website
Refine Measurements to Focus on High-Dollar or High-Risk Errors - 3(d)
Forensic tools to measure & detect IP
Improve Information Sharing - 3(e) Sources and ways to share payments info
Enhance Contractor Accountability - 4(a) Contractors –causes & remedies for IP
Shift Focus of Single Audits to Improper Payments - 4(b)
Modifications to SA process for effectiveness
Explore Incentives for State and Local Governments - 4(c)
Administrative actions through OMB Circulars and program guidance
11
Work Group Collaboration
• Interagency work groups: – Being lead by agency representatives; – Sharing best practices from different agencies and programs; and – Bridging “silos”
• State involvement in several work groups, including: – Measuring program access; – Improving data sharing; – Single audit requirements; and – Incentives for state and local governments
12
Next Steps
• 5/19 Work groups to issue recommendations • 5/19 Website launch • Which recommendations will be pursued? • Payment Recapture Audits
13
Questions and Resources
• Joe Pika: [email protected] or 202-395-1040 • OMB’s improper payments website with EO, guidance, and
other materials: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/financial_fia_improper/
14