News
At what point does the task of scrubbing programs for improper payments become more cumbersome and expensive than the benefit gained from getting rid of these wasteful mistakes? Ask two government experts and you’ll get two different answers.
Clay Johnson, the administration’s deputy director for management, stands by the Office of Management and Budget’s guidance that agencies review only programs that have improper payments totaling $10 million and exceeding 2.5 percent of their budgets.
“Our focus is to use our resources to look where the return for the taxpayer is the greatest. Let’s focus on the high-risk priorities first,” Johnson told the Senate subcommittee on federal financial management, government information and international security today. “We know where 73 percent of the improper payments are now. Let’s get rid of those.”
But Comptroller General David Walker urges OMB to broaden its scope.
“We need to put everything on the radar screen. . . . Once it gets on the radar screen, then you can decide what to do about it,” he told the subcommittee. “I agree that you have to set priorities and consider the cost versus the benefit, but I respectfully suggest that $10 million may be too low and 2.5 percent is too high.”
Walker, who heads the Government Accountability Office, suggested that a 0.5 percent improper payment rate would be a better threshold to set for reviewing programs.
He said the effort is about more than just recovering the money.
“It’s about what can we do to prevent this to begin with,” he said.
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., the subcommittee chairman, agreed.
“I believe if we never look, we’ll never know. We need to look at everything,” he said.
Coburn said OMB, in issuing guidance to agencies four years ago on how to tackle the problem of improper payments, was “aiming at the low-hanging fruit rather than a comprehensive solution.”
The 2002 Improper Payments Information Act requires agencies annually to review all programs and activities that could be susceptible to faulty payments.
Johnson said the 2.5 percent, $10 million threshold came after carefully considering risk.
“If you want everything measured, that should be the law, but that’s not a risk assessment,” he said.
Johnson stressed that agencies are making progress in eliminating improper payments.
“There’s been a lot of talk today about what’s being reported and what’s not being reported, but our goal is to eliminate [improper payments], and that’s doable in 10 years,” he said.
Johnson called on Congress to approve legislation that will help agencies better recover improper payments by giving them greater access to each other’s databases.
Walker called on Congress to clarify what programs and activities should be reviewed.
“I don’t believe [OMB] abused their discretion,” he said. “I’m just saying it might not be what Congress intended.”
Coburn concurred.
“I believe everyone must report improper payments. It shouldn’t be OMB’s job. It should be the agencies’,” he said. “If [program managers] know they’re going to have to measure it, they will make some judgments, some management decisions, on how to minimize it.”
Clay Johnson, the administration’s deputy director for management, stands by the Office of Management and Budget’s guidance that agencies review only programs that have improper payments totaling $10 million and exceeding 2.5 percent of their budgets.
“Our focus is to use our resources to look where the return for the taxpayer is the greatest. Let’s focus on the high-risk priorities first,” Johnson told the Senate subcommittee on federal financial management, government information and international security today. “We know where 73 percent of the improper payments are now. Let’s get rid of those.”
But Comptroller General David Walker urges OMB to broaden its scope.
“We need to put everything on the radar screen. . . . Once it gets on the radar screen, then you can decide what to do about it,” he told the subcommittee. “I agree that you have to set priorities and consider the cost versus the benefit, but I respectfully suggest that $10 million may be too low and 2.5 percent is too high.”
Walker, who heads the Government Accountability Office, suggested that a 0.5 percent improper payment rate would be a better threshold to set for reviewing programs.
He said the effort is about more than just recovering the money.
“It’s about what can we do to prevent this to begin with,” he said.
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., the subcommittee chairman, agreed.
“I believe if we never look, we’ll never know. We need to look at everything,” he said.
Coburn said OMB, in issuing guidance to agencies four years ago on how to tackle the problem of improper payments, was “aiming at the low-hanging fruit rather than a comprehensive solution.”
The 2002 Improper Payments Information Act requires agencies annually to review all programs and activities that could be susceptible to faulty payments.
Johnson said the 2.5 percent, $10 million threshold came after carefully considering risk.
“If you want everything measured, that should be the law, but that’s not a risk assessment,” he said.
Johnson stressed that agencies are making progress in eliminating improper payments.
“There’s been a lot of talk today about what’s being reported and what’s not being reported, but our goal is to eliminate [improper payments], and that’s doable in 10 years,” he said.
Johnson called on Congress to approve legislation that will help agencies better recover improper payments by giving them greater access to each other’s databases.
Walker called on Congress to clarify what programs and activities should be reviewed.
“I don’t believe [OMB] abused their discretion,” he said. “I’m just saying it might not be what Congress intended.”
Coburn concurred.
“I believe everyone must report improper payments. It shouldn’t be OMB’s job. It should be the agencies’,” he said. “If [program managers] know they’re going to have to measure it, they will make some judgments, some management decisions, on how to minimize it.”
