The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery says it has yielded more than $196.5 million in financial benefits.

The Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery says it has yielded more than $196.5 million in financial benefits. Antonio Busiello / Getty Images

End of pandemic inspector general's office could hurt ongoing efforts to enforce accountability

A former senior official for the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery said there were about 40 unfinished cases when the office’s authority lapsed, some of which were referred to other agencies and others closed.

The inspector general office with oversight over federal funds spent in response to the COVID-19 pandemic closed at the end of March after Congress failed to reauthorize it, and now its incomplete investigations are in limbo. 

Geoff Cherrington, who served as an external relations executive for the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery, said in an interview with Government Executive that there were about 40 open cases when the office sunsetted on March 27. Some of them were referred to other agencies, mostly the Justice Department, while others were closed. 

“We’re not blaming Congress for not reauthorizing us in light of downsizing and in light of reprioritizing federal dollars,” he said. “We wish we were extended, but there’s no sour grapes. We get it. Hopefully, the folks that ripped off Main Street Lending and Direct Loans will see justice.” 

DOJ did not respond to a request for comment regarding how many referred cases it’s handling. 

SIGPR was specifically responsible for oversight of the Main Street Lending Program, which provided $17.5 billion in loans to small and medium-sized businesses and nonprofits, and the Direct Loan Program, which offered $2.7 billion in loans to air carriers and national security businesses. 

According to a March fact sheet, SIGPR’s work since 2020 has yielded more than $196.5 million in financial benefits, which is more than three times the $62.3 million appropriated to the office. It also resulted in 71 federal indictments, 49 arrests, 32 guilty pleas and 18 sentencings. 

For example, SIGPR contributed to the 2022 guilty plea of a Florida man who fraudulently received approximately $2.6 million in pandemic assistance loans to purchase a house, stocks, a boat, engagement ring and ammunition. Investigators also played a role in the 20-month sentencing of an Oklahoma woman who used an MSLP loan for her business to build a home and buy a luxury SUV. 

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the head of the Inspectors General Caucus, backed two bills to reauthorize SIGPR for an additional five years — the COVID Spending Transparency Act in the 118th Congress and the Complete COVID Collections Act in the current Congress. The former did not receive any legislative action, and the latter only made it out of committee and never received a floor vote. 

“Fraudsters stole hundreds of billions from taxpayers designated for small businesses in desperate need of relief during COVID,” said Ernst, who is also the chair of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, in a statement to Government Executive. “SIGPR’s closure does not mean these con artists will get away. I am working overtime to ensure that the Department of Justice and Small Business Administration have the tools they need to hold every criminal accountable.”

Several members of Congress supported reauthorization because borrowers are required to pay back 70% of their MSLP loan in the fifth year, which coincided with SIGPR’s expiration. 

Eric D. Radwick, who was a senior special agent for SIGPR, wrote on LinkedIn after the office’s closure that, with respect to the unfinished cases, “some will fade away, their perpetrators not facing consequences, and the money never being recovered.” 

But he also wrote that SIGPR was the “perfect ending” to his federal career and praised his experienced colleagues. 

“This group of ‘old guys’ ran cases like I have never seen before. There were no egos, nobody was trying to outdo anyone else,” Radwick wrote. “We all had been there, done that, and had nothing to prove. We were working cases because we wanted to work cases.”

How are these changes affecting you? Share your experience with us:
Sean Michael Newhouse: snewhouse@govexec.com, Signal: seanthenewsboy.45

NEXT STORY: Government watchdog reports that its unimplemented recommendations could save $100 billion