The federal government's 57 inspectors general took center stage Tuesday at a House oversight hearing held to assess the effectiveness of IG operations.
During the 20 years since the Inspector General Act became law, IGs collectively have uncovered a significant amount of fraud and abuse in government programs, noted Stephen Horn, R-Cal., chairman of the Government Reform and Oversight Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
For example, during fiscal 1996, IGs successfully prosecuted more than 12,500 criminal cases and recovered about $1 billion due the federal government, according to the General Accounting Office.
But some IGs either are not reporting all detected problems to Congress or are "burying their recommendations deep within their annual and semi-annual reports," Horn said. "We must ensure that the congressional-presidential watchdogs do not become agency lapdogs."
The hearing was the first in a series expected to be held this year on IG-related issues. Though no major overhauls of the widely supported IG law are likely, the hearings could lead to minor legislative refinements or to a greater congressional oversight role, a committee source said.
Among the issues discussed at length yesterday was how best to measure IG performance.
Historically, IGs have been measured on process achievements, such as the number of fraud and abuse investigations conducted and fines collected. Such "body count" measurements miss the mark in today's era of outcome-oriented performance, Paul Light, director of the public policy program at the Pew Charitable Trusts in Philadelphia, told the subcommittee.
Light argued that IG efforts to prevent fraud and abuse from occurring in the first place also should be measured. The several IGs who testified at the hearing agreed, but noted the difficulty in measuring preventive impact. The problem, said John Layton, former IG at the Department of Energy, is that it's difficult to know whether IG recommendations or agency policy decisions deserve the credit for preventive results.
Susan Gaffney, inspector general at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, urged the subcommittee to help foster better relations between IG offices and agency management. Agency political appointees often don't understand that IGs must operate independently, she said, adding that Congress or the President should educate these appointed officials before they take their jobs.
"Being an IG is not easy," Gaffney said. "It's a lonely job, and we need some help."
NEXT STORY: White House cautious on IRS reform