x-^tD Sf/ljv
* *. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	20-P-0200
§ mmj \ Office of Inspector General	June 22,2020
UsSi
At a Glance
Why We Did This Project
A November 2018 U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency Office of Inspector
General scientific integrity
survey yielded hotline
complaints on potential internal
control issues with the EPA's
Quality System. We conducted
this audit to determine whether
the Office of Mission Support
has controls in place to carry
out its responsibility in
developing and coordinating
the mandatory agencywide
Quality System.
The Quality System provides
requirements for conducting
quality management activities
for all environmental data
collection performed by or for
the Agency. Its primary goal is
to ensure that environmental
data are of sufficient quantity
and quality to support intended
uses. Each EPA office
implements a quality system,
and Quality System staff is
responsible for its oversight,
policies, procedures, training,
and tracking.
This report addresses the
following:
•	Operating efficiently and
effectively.
This project addresses a key
EPA management challenge:
•	Improving data quality and
filling identified data gaps.
Address inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG WEBCOMMENTS@epa.gov.
List of OIG reports.
EPA Needs to Address Internal Control
Deficiencies in the Agencywide Quality System
After five years and
$1.3 million towards
the development of
an agencywide
tracking system, the
OMS does not know
the status of the
agencywide Quality
System.
What We Found
The OMS has not fully implemented internal controls for
the mandatory agencywide Quality System. We found
that the OMS has not reviewed policies, procedures,
and guidance within required time frames. For example,
reviews of two quality policies were 15 years overdue.
We also found that the OMS has not conducted required
annual reviews for five years. The OMS has also not
conducted regular assessments of program and regional
quality systems as more than half of the systems had
not had a review in the past six years. Also, the OMS has not assessed staff and
resource needs since 2008, and the OMS has not performed a programmatic risk
assessment. Additionally, the OMS has not developed a strategic plan,
implemented a tracking system, or provided agencywide training.
OMS leaders and staff identified four factors that led to control deficiencies:
(1)	Quality System leaders overtime have had varying priorities;
(2)	Quality System staff had a backlog of work; (3) Quality System leaders
determined that variations in the length, details, and format of annual reviews
made them difficult to analyze and compare; and (4) the Quality System lacked
resources for its work.
The EPA and the public rely upon the quality of the Agency's data, which helps
the Agency make reliable, cost-effective, and defensible decisions. Additionally,
the EPA uses its Quality System to manage the quality of its environmental data
generation, collection, and use. The Quality System covers activities such as
determining hazardous or toxic wastes in the environment and establishing
health risk levels, supporting enforcement monitoring efforts, and mapping
human health risk data. Poor data quality negatively impacts the EPA's
effectiveness in monitoring programs that directly impact public health and could
also subject the EPA to significant financial and legal risks.
OMS leaders agree that the Quality System needs improvement and are taking
steps to strengthen its internal control system. However, until the OMS fully
implements internal controls, it cannot know the status or health of the
agencywide Quality System.
Recommendations and Planned Agency Corrective Actions
We made 15 recommendations to the assistant administrator for Mission Support
to improve internal controls for the agencywide Quality System. The OMS agreed
with 13 recommendations, which are either completed or resolved with corrective
actions pending. The OMS disagreed with two recommendations which are
unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.

-------