BIOETHICS

The Bioethics Imperative XX

Structure of the NSF Office of the Inspector General: An Interview with James Kroll

“Mokita”: The truth we all know and agree not to talk about. Papua New Guinea.

Sitting in the second building of the National Science Foundation, Stafford II, on November 22, 2004, I asked James Kroll, head of Administrative Investigations at NSF’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG), to describe the structure of the OIG. He kindly sketched for me the figure below. I was surprised to learn that the IG and all the staff are considered a part of the executive rather than the judicial branch of government.

“The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the duties, responsibilities, and authorities of a federal Inspector General (IG). The original act created IGs primarily at cabinet-level government agencies (such as the Department of Commerce). Over the years, the Act has been amended to increase the number of agencies with IGs to include smaller, independent agencies. Currently, 57 IGs provide oversight to 59 federal agencies.”¹ Jim told me that the IG Act was expanded in 1989 because this manner of governmental oversight was working well. “Each year billions of dollars are returned to the federal government or better spent based on IG recommendations.”

NSF is somewhat unique in that the NSF IG reports to the National Science Board rather than directly to the director of NSF (Figure 1). In contrast to the NSF, the IG of Commerce reports directly to the Secretary of Commerce (not shown) and the IG of Energy reports directly to the Secretary of Energy. Variation in structure between the NSF and other agencies is “statutory guidance,” that is, the specific structures for these agencies were spelled out in the IG Act. In addition, each IG provides a semi-annual report directly to Congress regarding investigative and audit activities (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Existing agencies include those listed, as well as others included in the “etc.” at the right-hand side of the figure. A full list of agencies that have an IG can be found at http://www.ignet.gov/igs/homepage1.html.

Why is it necessary to have an IG at each agency? “IGs contribute to the effective work of government agencies by looking independently at problems and recommend[ing] possible solutions; issuing fact-filled reports based on professional audit, investigative, and inspection standards; performing independent investigation of allegations; providing technical and/or consultative advice as new plans are developed; and maintaining hotlines for employees and others to report confidential information regarding allegations of fraud and abuse.” In addition, Jim explained that the workload and specific concerns of each OIG demand a dedicated staff for each agency that depends on federal funds.

Management and coordination are paramount to smooth functioning in any institution or community, and in this respect the OIG is no exception. “Although each IG is responsible to their own agency, the IG community does work together on common issues. The President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) and the Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency (ECIE) were established by Executive Order 12805, May 11, 1992, to

• address integrity, economy, and effectiveness issues that transcend individual Government agencies, and
• increase the professionalism and effectiveness of IG personnel throughout the Government.

To accomplish their mission, the PCIE and ECIE members conduct interagency and inter-entity audit, inspection, and investigation projects to promote economy and efficiency in Federal programs and operations and address more effectively government-wide issues of fraud, waste, and abuse. The Council members also develop policies, standards, and approaches to aid in the establishment of a well-trained and highly skilled IG workforce.” Note that the PCIE and the ECIE are excluded from the formal reporting scheme; however, annually they provide a summary report to Congress highlighting IG-wide efforts and accomplishments.

In general, candidate “IGs are [identified] on the basis of their personal integrity and expertise in accounting, auditing, financial analysis, law, management analysis, public administration, or investigations.” The president nominates IG candidates for cabinet-level departments and major agencies. These 29 IGs head agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, NASA, and the Department of Agriculture (http://www.ignet.gov/igs/pas1.html). Senate confirmation is required for these IGs. In contrast, IGs at so-called designated federal entities are appointed by the heads of those entities. These 28 IGs include the NSF, Smithsonian, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the U.S. Postal Service (http://www.ignet.gov/igs/dfe1.html).

“Presidentially appointed IGs serve at the pleasure of the president and can be removed only for cause. Agency-appointed IGs serve at the pleasure of either the agency head or the board depending on the agency” (James Kroll, e-mail to Dina Mandoli, December 13, 2004). There are no term limits for IGs. Chronicles of IG appointments can be perused at http://www.ignet.gov/igs1.html.

Next time: The path that allegations of wrongdoing take through the OIG.

Dina Mandoli
mandoli@u.washington.edu

¹Unless otherwise attributed, quotations in this article were taken or paraphrased from “An Introduction to the Inspector General Community” at http://www.ignet.gov/igs/igbrochure.pdf.