The OIG is assessing the Department’s tribal law enforcement activities and responsibilities pursuant to the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010. The review will focus on the Department’s legal assistance, investigative training, and other technical assistance used to enhance law enforcement efforts in Indian Country.
The OIG initiated an audit with the preliminary objective of reviewing the Civil Division’s administration of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, which was opened by James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010. Title II of the Act reactivated the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, provided an additional $2.775 billion to compensate claimants, and added new categories of beneficiaries for the fund, including individuals with conditions that may have been caused over longer periods of time.
The OIG is conducting an audit of the National Security Division’s Administration and Enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The preliminary objectives of the audit are to determine: (1) the trends in the numbers and types of registrations; (2) the timeliness and sufficiency of the information provided by registrants; (3) the monitoring and enforcement actions taken by the Department to ensure appropriate registration; and (4) areas for administrative or legislative improvements.
The OIG initiated an audit of the Office of Justice Programs’ Crime Victims Fund (CVF), which was established by the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 to provide assistance and grants for victim services throughout the nation. Funding for the CVF is generated from criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalties, and special assessments collected from offenders convicted of federal crimes. The OIG will conduct a risk assessment of OJP’s management of the CVF with a preliminary objective to assess the risk associated with managing funding increases.
The OIG initiated a review of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Title II Formula Grants Program, which provides funding directly to states, territories, and the District of Columbia to help implement comprehensive state juvenile justice plans based on needs studies for delinquency prevention and intervention efforts, as well as juvenile justice system improvements. The objectives include assessing compliance with Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act protections and requirements.
The OIG is examining the Department’s oversight of asset seizure activities, with a focus on assessing the scope of federal seizure operations and the success rate of those actions, as well as the nature and extent of Department-organized or funded asset seizure training initiatives. The OIG’s review will cover the policies, practices, documentation, and outcomes of these activities and training programs for FY 2007 through FY 2014.
The Tribal Justice Infrastructure Program (TJIP), formerly the Correctional Systems and Correctional Alternatives on Tribal Lands Program, funds the planning and construction of new, or renovation of existing, tribal justice facilities. It also funds community-based alternatives to help prevent and control jail overcrowding due to alcohol and other substance abuse-related crime. OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) administers the TJIP in coordination with the Department of the Interior’s BIA, which with tribal grantees, is responsible for supporting, operating, and maintaining the correctional facilities. The OIG’s audit will assess OJP’s management and oversight of the funding provided under the TJIP, including the contracting activities of grantees, and determine the extent of OJP’s cooperation and coordination with the BIA to ensure efficient and effective correctional services in Indian Country.
Pre-trial diversion and drug court programs are alternatives to incarceration that enable prosecutors, judges, and correctional officials to divert certain offenders from traditional criminal justice proceedings into programs designed to address the underlying cause for criminal behavior. This OIG audit will evaluate the design and implementation of the programs, variances in the usage of the programs among the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, and costs savings associated with successful program participants.