WASHINGTON — The first week of September brought a heavy docket of new public records: inspector general reviews questioning millions in federal contract payments, a batch of Government Accountability Office audits touching everything from Secret Service protection policies to the government’s own savings claims, and movement on one of the most closely watched declassification files in the country as the 25th anniversary of September 11 approaches. Below, The Investigative Journal rounds up the most consequential records released during the week of September 1, 2026, with direct links to every source document. As always, we let the records speak for themselves — and we flag where they raise questions worth pursuing further.
Inspector General Findings
VA OIG questions $11.2 million paid for Veterans Crisis Line backup services that records indicate were not provided
The most striking single finding of the week comes from the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General. In a review issued September 1 (Report No. 23-03464-146), the watchdog found that VA paid about $11.2 million for Veterans Crisis Line call responder backup services that were not provided. The Veterans Crisis Line offers 24/7 confidential suicide prevention support to veterans regardless of enrollment status, and the $32.5 million contract at issue required the contractor to route calls, answer at least 10 percent of crisis line calls, and answer all calls in an emergency.
According to the report, when the original subcontractor — responsible for roughly $20.5 million, or 63 percent, of the total contract value — stopped providing backup services, the contractor hired a replacement that could not begin work because it had not met federal security requirements and lacked sufficient staff. The OIG found that VA officials knew about these issues within months of the new subcontract starting but continued to approve payments for nearly a year. Because services were not delivered, the OIG questioned the full $11.2 million.
The OIG made two recommendations, including that VA’s Office of General Counsel determine whether the department should assert a claim to recover the $11.2 million. VA concurred with that recommendation and concurred in principle with a second on verifying information security requirements before contract award — a response worth noting, since the recovery determination will itself generate records TIJ intends to follow. The full report is available as a PDF from the VA OIG.
Supply chain lapses at VA Augusta
In a separate hotline-driven review published September 2, the VA OIG examined supply chain management at the VA Augusta Health Care System in Georgia. The review found that inventory inaccuracies, weak monitoring, and lapses in physical security increased the risks of equipment loss and of items being out of stock, over-ordered, or expired — conditions the OIG said affected clinical operations. The findings echo supply chain weaknesses the watchdog has documented at other facilities, suggesting a systemic dimension worth tracking across future facility reviews.
DOJ OIG flags FBI policy inconsistency, posts misconduct findings
The Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General, under recently sworn-in Inspector General Don R. Berthiaume, issued a Notification of Concerns on September 1 identifying inconsistencies between the FBI’s non-retaliation policy and its retaliation offense code. Whistleblower advocates have long argued that internal policy misalignments can chill reporting; the OIG’s management advisory memorandum puts the issue on the record and obliges the Bureau to respond. The accompanying OIG news release provides context.
A day later, the office posted an investigative summary on September 2 documenting findings of misconduct by a then-assistant United States attorney for solicitation of a prostitute. The individual is not named in the public summary, consistent with OIG practice; the summary reflects administrative findings rather than criminal charges, and readers should not infer any beyond what the document states.
Federal Audits: GAO
GAO: DHS’s reported $10.5 billion in contract-termination savings “will not fully materialize”
In the week’s most fiscally significant audit, GAO-26-109096, published September 3, GAO examined the Department of Homeland Security’s contract terminations carried out in consultation with the Department of Government Efficiency. GAO’s analysis shows DHS completely or partially terminated 438 contracts for convenience between January 20 and September 30, 2025, deobligating a net total of over $92 million — real money returned to the government’s ledger.
But DHS publicly reported the terminations could allow it to avoid over $10.5 billion in current and future costs, and GAO found that figure overstates the savings for two reasons: it reflects the maximum that could have been obligated rather than what would have been, and DHS still needs many of the goods and services involved. Notably, 95 percent of the reported potential cost avoidance traced to 30 terminated IT contracts with 10-year periods of performance — and DHS obligated over $1.7 billion in fiscal 2025 through existing government-wide contracts to meet those same requirements. In GAO’s words, those costs “were not avoided but were incurred through other contracts.”
The report is the first in a series requested by Congress on DHS termination, grant, and workforce actions, which means more records are coming. The distinction GAO draws — between projected cost avoidance and realized savings — is one taxpayers should keep in mind whenever any administration, of either party, publicizes headline savings figures. The full 13-page report is available from GAO.
Secret Service protection policies not consistently updated
In GAO-26-108455, also released September 3, GAO reviewed how the Secret Service updates the protection policies that govern the safety of protectees. According to the report, Secret Service personnel are not required to document their rationale when they determine that incidents did not warrant a policy change, and the agency’s protection policies are not regularly reviewed. Given the documented protection failures of recent years, a records regime in which policy-change decisions leave no paper trail is precisely the kind of gap accountability reporting exists to surface.
DOD has reviewed only 4 of 27 defense agencies since 2018, GAO finds
GAO-26-107781, published September 3, reports that the Department of Defense has reviewed only 4 of its 27 defense agencies and field activities since 2018 and did not report the results to Congress, despite a legal requirement to periodically review these organizations for efficiency and effectiveness and report on them. The so-called “fourth estate” of defense agencies collectively commands substantial budgets outside the military services, and the records here indicate Congress has been operating without the visibility the statute was designed to provide.
Rulemaking without public comment: GAO tallies use of the “good cause” exception
Publicly released September 4, GAO-26-108208 examines how agencies use the Administrative Procedure Act’s “good cause” exception and other mechanisms to forgo public comment before issuing rules. The data show expedited rulemaking spiked during the COVID-19 pandemic — agencies expedited 55 rules in 2020–2021, citing good cause for 41 — while in non-pandemic years agencies issued between two and 10 major rules without advance notice-and-comment. Notably, agencies requested after-the-fact public comments on 99 percent of the interim final rules GAO reviewed and received comments on 94 percent. For readers who track regulatory transparency, this report is a baseline document.
Also from GAO this week
Three additional releases merit a look: GAO-26-109393 (September 2) on sustaining the VA’s accelerated electronic health record deployments; GAO-26-108426 (September 3), finding FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers have opportunities to improve the use of local vendors in disaster contracting; and GAO-26-107725 (August 31), on better targeting federal broadband dollars to underserved areas. GAO’s full release stream is at its Reports & Testimonies page.
Declassified and Archival Records
9/11 records move toward declassification review ahead of 25th anniversary
On September 1, the Public Interest Declassification Board published an update on high-priority 9/11 records via its National Archives-hosted blog. The Board reports that two sets of records compiled by the 9/11 Commission — a summary of President’s Daily Briefings and Memorandums for the Record of interviews with senior Clinton and Bush administration officials, including Condoleezza Rice, Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke, Michael Scheuer, and George Tenet — are now under review by the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel (ISCAP).
The Board’s June 30, 2026 letter to President Trump urged declassification and release, citing the President’s record of ordering the release of significant historical collections. With the 25th anniversary of the attacks days away, the ISCAP docket on these records is one of the most consequential declassification files in government — and TIJ will be watching for the release decision.
Declassified records on the Soviet military’s late-Cold War shift
On August 31, the National Security Archive at George Washington University — a private FOIA-driven repository, not a government agency — posted a briefing book of declassified documents on the Soviet military’s reorientation to a defensive posture in Europe in the late 1980s. For researchers of deterrence and arms control, the compilation adds primary-source texture to a period with renewed relevance.
State Records
At the state level, the New York State Comptroller’s newest audit releases include two issued August 27 that remained the office’s most recent as of this writing: a follow-up on artificial intelligence governance at New York City’s Office of Technology and Innovation, and an audit of oversight of student suspensions in New York City Public Schools. The AI governance follow-up is an early example of a genre that will become routine: auditors checking whether governments actually implemented the AI safeguards they announced. Meanwhile, the California State Auditor has reports scheduled for release September 10 and September 21 — we will cover notable findings in future roundups.
What Warrants a Deeper Look
Several of this week’s records point toward follow-on reporting. First, the DHS termination audit is explicitly the first in a GAO series, and the underlying procurement data — which contracts were terminated, and which government-wide vehicles absorbed the same requirements at what cost — is FOIA-able; TIJ has opened a file. Second, the VA crisis line review leaves the central accountability question open: whether VA will assert a claim to recover the $11.2 million, a determination now resting with VA’s Office of General Counsel. Third, GAO’s finding that 23 of 27 defense agencies have gone unreviewed since 2018 invites a simple records request: which four were reviewed, and what did DOD find? Finally, the ISCAP review of the 9/11 Commission’s high-priority records could produce one of the year’s most significant declassifications — or another delay worth documenting.
Method note: Every claim in this roundup is drawn from the linked public records as published by the issuing offices; agency responses are noted where the records include them (VA concurred or concurred in principle with the OIG recommendations cited above). Agencies or individuals referenced who wish to respond may contact the editors at tij.news. Records suggest, filings indicate — and where they don’t, we haven’t written it.