IG Report: FISCU Supervisory Policies Lack Consistency

State and federal examiners say there could be confusion about the role each agency plays in the FISCU examination process.

Lobby of the NCUA.

NCUA regional offices do not have operating agreements with many state agencies that define roles for examining federally insured, state -chartered credit unions, the agency’s Inspector General said in a just-released report.

While the agreements are optional, the IG said it believes that “such high-level agreements would not only improve coordination, scheduling, and overall consistency of joint examinations, but would also reduce redundancy thus making the joint examination process more efficient.”

Of the 45 states that have such institutions, 16 had no operating agreements and 11 had unsigned agreements.

As a result, the IG’s office said, some state and federal examiners said there could be confusion about the role each agency plays in the FISCU examination process.

NCUA officials told the IG that even before the audit was conducted, they were developing a template for an updated operating agreement.

And the IG said that state examiner recommendations for follow-up action at credit unions were not consistently documented, adding that such a process is a “prudent and sound practice.”

Without such a policy, examiners may not understand the details of a supervision plan or the rationale behind it.

The IG said that NCUA officials assured them that such a process is being developed.