This was the case with the “managing detention conditions” challenge, he said. Specifically, Crumpacker said various examples in the draft report share the findings from the IG’s reviews but don’t include DHS officials’ perspective or note when they disagreed with findings. The letter continued: “That is because of inaccurate, contextually incomplete and confusing statements in the draft report resulting in misinformation, which calls into question the quality control processes OIG has in place to ensure its reporting can be relied upon by others.” The entire response is six pages long. “Leadership, however, is concerned that OIG’s could be misleading to some readers about departmental efforts to carry out its mission.”
“DHS leadership, program officials and subject matter experts throughout the department will give appropriate consideration to the OIG perspective offered in this report,” wrote Jim Crumpacker, director of DHS’s departmental Government Accountability Office-OIG liaison office, to DHS IG Joesph Cuffari in a letter dated October 17, which was included in the report. As is customary for watchdog reports, the IG gave the department a chance to respond to a draft version of the report and the comments are included at the end of the final report. The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general released on October 27 its annual report on management and performance challenges facing the department, which broadly involved immigration, cybersecurity, homeland security, financial management, disaster assistance, and acquisition and procurement. The Homeland Security watchdog listed what it says are the most pressing challenges the department faces, but the department itself says the list includes “inaccurate, contextually incomplete and confusing statements.” 1 to correct NAPA's Terry Gerton's comment.
0 kommentar(er)
