Special Report on the "Department of Energy's Efforts to Meet Accountability and Performance Reporting Objectives of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act"
The purpose of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) was to jumpstart the U.S. economy, create or save millions of jobs, spur technological advances in health and science, and invest in the Nation's energy future. The Department of Energy will receive an unprecedented $38 billion in Recovery Act funding to support a variety of science, energy, and environmental initiatives. The Recovery Act requires transparency and accountability over these funds. To this end, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued guidance requiring the Department to compile and report a wide variety of funding, accounting, and performance information. The Department plans to leverage existing information systems to develop accounting and performance information that will be used by program managers and ultimately reported to Recovery.gov, the government-wide source of Recovery Act information, and to OMB. The Department's iManage iPortal, a system that aggregates information from a number of corporate systems, will serve as the main reporting gateway for accounting information. In addition, the Department plans to implement a methodology or system that will permit it to monitor information reported directly to OMB by prime funding recipients. Furthermore, performance measures or metrics that outline expected outcomes are being developed, with results ultimately to be reported in a recently developed Department-wide system. Because of the significance of funds provided and their importance to strengthening the Nation's economy, we initiated this review to determine whether the Department had taken the steps necessary to ensure that Recovery Act funds can be appropriately tracked and are transparent to the public, and whether the benefits of the expenditures can be properly measured and reported clearly, accurately, and in a timely manner. Although not yet fully mature, we found that the Department's efforts to develop, refine, and apply the control structure needed to ensure accurate, timely, and reliable reporting to be both proactive and positive. We did, however, identify certain issues relating to Recovery Act performance management, accounting and reporting accuracy, and timeliness that should be addressed and resolved. In particular, at the time of our review: (1) Program officials had not yet determined whether existing information systems will be able to process anticipated transaction increases associated with the Recovery Act; (2) System modifications made to the Department's performance management system to accommodate Recovery Act performance measures had not yet been fully tested and verified; (3) The ability of prime and sub-recipients to properly segregate and report both accounting and performance information had not been determined; (4) There was a lack of coordination between Headquarters organizations related to aspects of Recovery Act reporting. For example, we observed that the Offices of Fossil Energy and Program, Analysis and Evaluation were both involved in developing job creation estimates that could yield significantly different results; and, (5) A significant portion (91 of 142, or 64 percent) of the performance measures developed for the Recovery Act activities were not quantifiable. In some instances, Project Operating Plans had not been finalized and we were not able to verify that all needed performance measures had been developed. Furthermore, the Department had not developed specific metrics to measure federal and contractor jobs creation and retention, an essential Recovery Act objective. The Department had devoted a great deal of time and resources to identifying and mitigating Recovery Act-related risks. For example, the Department developed a risk assessment tool that is intended to assist programs in identifying risks that can prevent its Recovery Act projects from meeting their intended goals. We also found that program staff and management officials at multiple levels were actively engaged in designing Recovery Act-related control and accountability programs. These efforts ranged from updating existing information systems to developing matrices designed to ensure that all required reporting and performance elements were addressed. Each of these activities required substantial effort and was accomplished within a relatively short period. Further, we noted that the Office of the Chief Financial Officer had been instrumental in helping impacted program elements identify issues that could adversely affect the Department's ability to execute its accounting, reporting, and performance monitoring responsibilities. While much has been done, additional work is necessary if the Department is to successfully manage Recovery Act-related risks. For example, as previously noted, OMB has issued guidance establishing Recovery Act monitoring and reporting requirements.
- Research Organization:
- DOEIG (USDOE Office of the Inspector General (IG) (United States))
- Sponsoring Organization:
- USDOE
- OSTI ID:
- 964280
- Report Number(s):
- OAS-RA-09-04; TRN: US200920%%270
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Special Report on Review of "The Department of Energy's Quality Assurance Process for Prime Recipients' Reporting for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act"
Audit Report on "The Department of Energy's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act -- Florida State Energy Program"