2001 - Audit Report

U.S. Department of Labor
Office of Inspector General
Office of Audit

ALLEGATION AT THE GREATER OMAHA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Information obtained from the Internet may not be in the same format as a hard copy obtained from the Office. Depending on the requester, the quantity of information provided may also vary. In order to appeal any deleted information received via the Internet, you must make a formal written request for the same material. Further, some of the audit reports issued prior to FY 1998 may no longer be available. They may have been destroyed in accordance with our records retnetion schedule. However, any request for audit reports or other audit materials should be sent to the OIG, Disclosure Officer, Room S1303, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D. C. 20210.

Unless otherwise stated, the audit reports provided on this web page reflect the findings of the OIG at the time that the audit report was issued. The auditee may have more current information available as a result of audit resolution activities.

The OIG is using Adobe Acrobat 4.0 to prepare its audit reports for the internet. If you experience problems accessing the PDF files, you may want to download the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader by clicking on the link provided.

[ Link to Acrobat 4.0 Reader ]

At the request of ETA, the OIG investigated several allegations made regarding the expenditure of Welfare-to-Work grant funds by at the Greater Omaha Workforce Development (GOWD). The most serious allegation concerned mismanagement and favoritism in awarding contracts to conduct program activities. .

We found that contracts for teaching certain courses were not competitively bid. GOWD and City of Omaha officials believed that competitive bidding was not required for these contracts because they were professional services contracts which are exempt from competition per the Home Rule Charter of the City of Omaha. The OIG concluded the definition of "professional services" contained in the Omaha Municipal Code did not support this position, and the contracts in question were subject to competitive bidding. The OIG did not find merit in the other allegations. GOWD concurred with our recommendation that, in the future, it follow its local procurement requirements which require full and open competition.

(OA Report No. 05-01-001-03-386, issued March 7, 2001)

[ Get Complete Report PDF ]

REPORTS BY FISCAL YEAR

[ 2001 Reports ]

[ 2000 Reports ]

[ 1999 Reports ]

[ 1998 Reports ]

[ Prior to 1998 ]

GO TO --

[ Audit Reports ]

[ FOIA ]

[ Semiannual Reports ]