• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • News
  • Topics
    • Common Sense
    • Congress
    • Debt
    • Government waste
    • Millenials
    • QuizCap
    • Taxes
  • Tools
    • Agencies
    • Memes That Matter
    • Research Library
    • Scavenger Hunt
  • Shop
  • What We’re About
  • Multimedia
  • What We’re About
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter signup
  • Give to the Cause

EPA Spent 8 Years and $1.4 million on a Tool that is Duplicative and Barely Used

By Adam Kazda | September 12, 2017

Recently, the EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report based on a complaint alleging an EPA tool that launched last year was duplicative and wasted taxpayer dollars.

Popular Posts
  1. Social Security: Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences
  2. What Sam Adams Can Teach Us About the Corporate Tax Revamp
  3. The Pentagon Cooks the Books Kevin Malone Style

The report found that, C-FERST (Community-Focused Exposure and Risk Screening Tool), took 8 years and over $1.4 million to develop, and:

  1. Is different than its intended purpose,

    × Follow us on Facebook and never miss a story.
  2. Did not have a project proposal or request for its development,

  3. Was outside the agency’s information technology requirements,

    learn about our mission Artboard 1
  4. Overlaps with other EPA tools, and

    The Weekly Chaser

    Get the latest content, first.

  5. Was not widely used in the approximately 9 months after it was publicly released.”

EPA GIF According to EPA OIG, “C-FERST is an online information and mapping tool, that communities and the public can use to learn more about their environmental issues and exposures.” Development of the tool began in 2008 and launched last September. Now, costs for maintenance, updates, outreach, and case studies, are projected to reach $1.2 million for fiscal years 2017-2019.

While C-FERST has a lofty goal of providing environmental information to communities, OIG found that it largely overlaps other mapping tools, specifically EJSCREEN, in which users could not differentiate between the two. In addition to the tool being similar to other mapping tools, peer reviewers found C-FERST was not “intuitive,” thus requiring training to be used effectively, and found problems with its “usability, functionality, and navigability.”

Finally, EPA OIG suggests that “without proper accountability controls, ORD (Office of Research and Development) creates a risk that the estimated $400,000 it plans to spend annually for maintenance, operation and enhancements of C-FERST is wasteful government spending.”

Another Swamp Story, another example of waste and duplication in the federal government. The EPA should seriously evaluate if the American taxpayer needs to spend $400,000 each year over the next three years to maintain a duplicative mapping tool.

× Follow us on Twitter.

Read the full report from the EPA OIG here.

sidebar

sidebar-alt

If you liked this, you’ll love these

Fast Facts from the High Risk Report

Read all about it Artboard 1

Ivy League Flunks Transparency Test

Read all about it Artboard 1

There are 45 Federal Programs to Help Servicemembers Find Employment, But Which Ones are Working?

Read all about it Artboard 1

Support Our Work

Federal agencies go largely unchecked, spending at will making use of inflated budgets. While some do very important work, we need to hold them accountable. You can do this by donating, emailing your legislator, or signing our petitions.

Donate Now

Sign Up for Pursuit Updates

Privacy Policy

Powered by the Foundation to Restore Accountability

Search
UNCOVER SOME GOVERNMENT WASTE?
share your opinion

Can you believe the US Government spends more money on it’s cable bill than on disaster relief?

NO! I’M FURIOUS! Eh, sounds right