 
  
Updated January 12, 2023
An Introduction to Oversight of Offices of Inspector General
Who watches the watchers? is a frequently posed question 
The Integrity Committee is a body within CIGIE created 
when people consider the role of oversight bodies, 
under Section 11(d) of the IG Act and tasked with receiving 
including offices of inspector general (OIGs). However, the 
and reviewing allegations of wrongdoing against IGs and 
organization of OIGs may pose unique challenges that 
OIG staff. Investigative reports of the Integrity Committee 
make it more difficult to conduct oversight of their 
are provided to both the appropriate congressional 
activities. In particular, the level of independence from 
committees and the President (or agency head if that 
agency leaders that allows inspectors general (IGs) to 
official appoints the agency’s IG). Congress has maintained 
conduct their audits and investigations with less risk of 
a regular interest in this work and included provisions in the 
actual or perceived interference also makes it more difficult 
FY2023 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 117-
to identify and remedy issues that arise within an OIG by 
263) that expand the information on investigations that the 
limiting their supervision by senior agency officials. 
Integrity Committee must report to Congress, including on 
investigations concluded without findings of wrongdoing. 
While oversight of OIGs may create specific challenges for 
Congress and other stakeholders, the efficient and effective 
The IG community also conducts regular peer reviews in 
operation of OIGs, like the agencies and officials they 
which OIGs evaluate each other’s procedures and recent 
oversee, is important to the successful operation of the 
work to determine compliance with government audit, 
government. 
investigation, and inspection standards. These reviews 
provide regular opportunities for OIGs to receive expert 
Congress has established mechanisms for oversight of 
evaluations of their activities.  
inspectors general through the Inspector General Act of 
1978 (IG Act; 5 U.S.C. App.). While Section 3(a) of the act 
Other Oversight Offices 
states that each IG “shall report to and be under the general 
In addition to reviews within the IG community, other 
supervision of the establishment” in which they serve, it 
federal entities may also oversee OIGs in some 
also states that agency leadership may not “prevent or 
circumstances. The Government Accountability Office 
prohibit the Inspector General from initiating, carrying out, 
(GAO), in particular, has the authority to investigate the 
or completing any audit or investigation.” In practice, these 
operations of OIGs and to improve their effectiveness and 
provisions mean that OIGs typically operate with less 
compliance with laws, regulations, and best practices for 
supervision from agency leaders than other officials do. 
audits and investigations. For instance, in April 2021, GAO 
published a preliminary report on its review of the 
While the overall focus of the IG Act is oriented toward 
Department of Homeland Security OIG at the request of the 
independence for IGs, particularly from those officials 
House Committee on Homeland Security and appeared at a 
whom they oversee, it does contain several discrete 
hearing on the subject before the committee (GAO-21-
provisions that facilitate or require specific forms of 
452T). 
oversight of OIGs. 
Under Section 4(b) of the IG Act, OIGs are also required to 
This In Focus details how the IG Act addresses oversight of 
comply with GAO auditing standards. GAO may conduct 
OIGs and provides information on government 
compliance reviews to ensure that each OIG is adhering to 
organizations that have formal and informal oversight roles 
those standards and make recommendations related to the 
with regard to the IG community, including the IG 
operations of OIGs. 
community itself, other oversight offices, the President, 
agency leaders, and Congress. 
In addition, officials within OIGs may be subject to the 
jurisdiction of the Office of Government Ethics and the 
The Inspector General Community 
Office of Special Counsel in some circumstances. Potential 
A consistent form of oversight of OIGs comes from the 
violations of federal criminal law may be reviewed by the 
inspector general community itself. The Council of 
Department of Justice. 
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is 
composed of inspectors general and certain other oversight 
The President 
officials who are tasked with, among other things, 
One of Congress’s principal design decisions in the creation 
increasing the “professionalism and effectiveness” of OIGs. 
of OIGs has been to provide a relatively high degree of 
CIGIE conducts oversight of particular OIGs through two 
independence from the President and agency leaders. When 
principle mechanisms: its Integrity Committee and OIG 
Presidents have been perceived to act against that 
peer reviews. 
expectation of independence, even when they are acting in a 
manner allowed under the IG Act, they have typically been 
met with bipartisan criticism in Congress. For more 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
An Introduction to Oversight of Offices of Inspector General 
information, see CRS In Focus IF11546, 
Removal of 
Congress 
Inspectors General: Rules, Practice, and Considerations 
While each of the entities discussed above plays a role in 
for Congress, by Ben Wilhelm. 
the oversight of OIGs, the primary responsibility for 
overseeing OIGs and ensuring that they are accountable 
Nonetheless, regardless of past practice and stakeholder 
may ultimately fall upon Congress.  
expectations, the President does have authority to remove 
presidentially appointed IGs so long as he or she provides 
Congress’s direct role in the selection or removal of IGs is 
written notice, including a substantive rationale, to 
through the exercise of the Senate’s Advice and Consent 
Congress 30 days before the removal of the IG (IG Act 
authority for presidentially appointed IGs and the 
§3(b)). 
establishment of general qualification criteria for IG 
nominees through the legislative process.  
While a President can remove an IG that he or she believes 
is not performing to the standards of the IG community or 
More significantly, Congress impacts OIGs through the 
the IG Act, these actions have tended to focus attention on 
appropriations process and its authority to amend statutes to 
IG independence rather than the specific reason the IG was 
alter the organization and authority of OIGs. Congress 
removed. Nonetheless, there may be circumstances in 
regularly considers legislative proposals related to IG 
which the presidential removal of an IG would be 
authority, reporting, and independence and has approved 
considered justified by other IG community stakeholders.  
three major packages of IG Act amendments since 2008. 
One recent example of such a situation is illustrated by an 
Further, Congress’s ability to conduct hearings, request 
April 14, 2021, letter from the CIGIE Integrity Committee 
investigations, and publicly comment on the activities of 
to President Joe Biden recommending that he consider 
OIGs can be another important tool for ensuring that OIGs 
“substantial disciplinary action up to and including 
operate in an effective manner that is consistent with the 
removal” for Federal Housing Finance Authority IG Laura 
expectations of policymakers.  
Wertheimer. This recommendation was based on 
allegations of official misconduct reported to and 
In addition, Congress is a principal stakeholder for the IG 
investigated by the Integrity Committee. While IG 
community and regularly relies upon OIGs to identify 
Wertheimer chose to resign from her position in July 2021, 
compliance issues in agencies; conduct independent, expert 
there were calls for President Biden to remove her, which 
reviews of complex or controversial topics; and issue 
he did not do in the months before her resignation. 
recommendations that can help Congress and agencies 
resolve identified problems.  
Agency Leadership 
While OIGs are under the “general supervision” of their 
Congress, therefore, occupies an unusual position as both a 
agency leadership, agency officials are not supposed to play 
regular user of OIG work products and a body that can 
a role in OIG decisions about investigations and audits in 
oversee OIG performance. This combination may mean that 
most circumstances, except that they are to be kept 
Congress brings its own perspective on the effectiveness of 
informed of the findings and recommendations arising from 
OIGs that not only includes compliance with legal and 
the work of their agency’s OIG (IG Act §4(a)(5)). As a 
professional standards but also extends to broader questions 
practical matter, the relationship between agency and OIG 
about OIG priorities and the value of their work. Of course, 
leaders might be complex, but OIGs typically operate 
agencies and Presidents might also have their own views on 
without direct interference. This arrangement is supported 
the performance of OIGs, but they have fewer tools at their 
by the ability of an OIG to report to Congress on any 
disposal than Congress does to make changes to the 
agency leadership attempt to interfere with its work. 
operations and authority of OIGs. 
Despite this general limit on agency capacity to oversee 
Finally, Congress may also be the stakeholder best 
OIGs, there are two notable exceptions. 
positioned to take a long-term, institutional view of the IG 
community, because a robust and effective IG community 
First, IGs who serve in a Designated Federal Entity (DFE) 
can enhance the effectiveness of Congress as it performs 
as defined in Section 8G of the IG Act are appointed by and 
both its legislative and oversight functions. 
can be removed by the leadership of the agency they 
oversee rather than by the President. Removal of an IG by 
Further Reading 
the head of a DFE is subject to the same notice requirement 
Charles A. Johnson and Kathryn E. Newcomer, 
U.S. 
as removal by the President, and a removal action might 
Inspectors General: Truth Tellers in Turbulent Times 
lead to the same concerns as removal by the President.  
(Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2020), 
pp. 121-162. 
Second, while the issue of IG jurisdiction is distinct from 
oversight of OIGs, it should be noted that some agency 
CRS Report R45450, 
Statutory Inspectors General in the 
heads (including, for example, the Secretary of Defense and 
Federal Government: A Primer, by Ben Wilhelm.  
the director of the Central Intelligence Agency) have the 
authority, with notification to Congress, to prevent OIGs 
Ben Wilhelm, Analyst in Government Organization and 
from reviewing specific matters under some circumstances. 
Management   
IF11869
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
An Introduction to Oversight of Offices of Inspector General 
 
 
Disclaimer This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11869 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED