B-306475, Help America Vote Act of 2002: Audits and Recovery of Funds, January 30, 2006

B-306475 Jan 30, 2006 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Help America Vote Act of 2002 provides that if the Comptroller General determines as a result of an audit that a fund recipient is not compliant with program requirements, or that an excess payment has been made, the recipient must return a certain portion of the payment. However, the Comptroller General need not make such a determination before a paying agency may audit and take corrective action on questioned costs. This provision of the Act does not supersede the independent statutory authority of agencies to audit and take corrective action on the use of federal funds. If the Comptroller General were to make a determination under the Act as a result of any audit he conducts, he will make an appropriate recommendation for the agency to determine liability and to take corrective action. View Decision B–306475, Help America Vote Act of 2002: Audits and Recovery of Funds, January 30, 2006 B–306475 January 30, 2006 Mr. Roger La Rouche Acting Inspector General Election Assistance Commission Subject: Help America Vote Act of 2002: Audits and Recovery of Funds Dear Mr. La Rouche: You requested information on how the Government Accountability Office (GAO) will implement section 902(c) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Pub. L. No. 107-252, sect. 902(c), 116 Stat. 1666, 1728 (Oct. 29, 2002) (codified at 42 U.S.C. sect. 5542(c)). Section 902(c) provides that recipients of funds provided pursuant to HAVA shall repay certain amounts if the Comptroller General makes a determination as a result of certain audits that the recipient did not comply with program requirements or received an excess payment. In an audit of California's use of HAVA funds, conducted on behalf of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (the Commission) by the Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General (DOI–OIG), auditors questioned some of California's costs because they were either unallowable or unsupported. You would like to know if the Comptroller General must make a determination under section 902(c) for an agency to recover funds, and if so, what procedure he will apply in doing so. For the reasons set forth below, the Comptroller General need not make a determination under section 902(c) before an agency making payments may take corrective action on questioned costs. HAVA authorizes various federal agencies to make grants or provide payments of federal funds to the states and various other entities for purposes related to election reform. See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 107-252, sect. 101, 116 Stat. 1666, 1668-69 (Oct. 29, 2002) (codified at 42 U.S.C. sect. 15301). The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) disbursed $27,340,830 of HAVA funds[1] in fiscal year 2003 to California to improve the administration of elections. In an audit of California's use of these funds conducted by the DOI-OIG on behalf of the Commission, auditors took exception to some costs and found others to be unsupported. As found in the DOI-OIG audit report, the auditors questioned these costs because California did not comply with applicable regulations and requirements.[2] Section 902 of HAVA has a number of subsections relevant to this discussion. Subsection 902(b)(1) authorizes each agency making a grant or payment to audit any recipient of the funds. Pub. L. No. 107-252, sect. 902(b)(1), 116 Stat. 1666, 1727 (Oct. 29, 2002) (codified at 42 U.S.C. sect. 15542). Subsection 902(b)(3) provides that –all funds provided under this Act shall be subject to mandatory audit by the Comptroller General once during the lifetime of the program involved.— Id. at sect. 902(b)(3). Finally, subsection 902(b)(6) authorizes the Commission to conduct –a special audit or special examination— of a recipient upon a vote of the Commission. Id. at sect. 902(b)(6). In addition to the provisions of section 902(b) for federal audits of HAVA funds discussed above, section 902(c) provides: –If the Comptroller General determines as a result of an audit conducted under section 902(b) that— –(1) a recipient of funds under this Act is not in compliance with each of the requirements of the program under which the funds are provided; or –(2) an excess payment has been made to the recipient under the program, –the recipient shall pay to the office which made the grant or payment involved a portion of the funds provided which reflects the proportion of the requirements with which the recipient is not in compliance, or the extent to which the payment is in excess, under the program involved.— Pub. L. No. 107-252, sect. 902(c), 116 Stat. 1666, 1728 (codified at 42 U.S.C. sect. 15542(c)). Because this provision refers to audits specified in section 902(b), you have inferred that the authority of agencies making HAVA payments to take corrective action is limited by section 902(c) to when the Comptroller General makes determinations.