NASA Inspector General Robert "Moose" Cobb was one of the worst-performing inspectors general among federal agencies reviewed, in terms of cutting waste and saving funds, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found.

Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee, and Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), chairman of its investigations and oversight subcommittee, called again for Cobb to resign, after earlier reports of misdeeds by Cobb.

The GAO measured the budget of each inspector general, versus the amount of waste uncovered and savings realized by each IG, and found that Cobb’s operation ranked 27th in recommended savings out of 30 IG offices evaluated. Cobb uncovered just 36 cents of waste and savings for every dollar in his budget.

Gordon and Miller requested the GAO study and report, along with Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.

An investigation by a committee of other inspectors general had determined that Cobb verbally abused his employees and lacked the appearance of independence from his agency.

Allegations against Cobb were probed earlier in a joint Senate-House hearing.

"This inspector general was not qualified when he took the job," Gordon said. "The GAO’s report only confirms my view that Mr. Cobb has failed as an inspector general."

A hearing by the House panel "demonstrated his inability to run the inspector general’s office effectively," Gordon asserted. "We now can see from the GAO’s report that Mr. Cobb has failed to execute one of an IG’s prime responsibilities — reviewing the accountability and efficiency of NASA operations."

Rather than investigating actively and unearthing wrongdoing, Cobb merely reacted when reports of wrongdoing surfaced, Gordon continued.

"NASA spends billions of dollars with private contractors, and how much money Cobb left on the table due to his failures to manage his office is hard to imagine," Gordon said. "The country can’t afford Mr. Cobb."

The GAO determined that the Cobb failed to "address the economy and efficiency of NASA’s programs and operations with measurable monetary accomplishments" in its audit reports.

Its low ranking could be partially attributed "to strategic and annual audit plans that lack goals and objectives to provide assurance that the economy and efficiency of NASA’s programs will be addressed," according to the GAO. Instead of aggressive audit planning, Cobb’s management is "reactive", often acting simply as a "clearinghouse for allegations received by the OIG and provid[ing] auditors with assignments to address limited scope procurement issues and areas that involve violations of NASA regulations," GAO said.

"I am hopeful that one of the first actions at NASA taken by the Obama administration is to remove Mr. Cobb," Miller said. "The NASA IG’s office has been in shambles since he arrived, and it needs to be rebuilt."

GAO determined that the staff attrition rate at the NASA OIG had increased from 12.4 percent in 2003 to 19.9 percent in 2007, including the loss of 42 of 78 auditors and 9 of 10 management auditors.

"Many of them left not only because of Mr. Cobb’s management style, but because the inspector general didn’t seem to understand the role of an auditor," Miller said. "Waste, fraud and abuse can have a field day when an agency has a weak IG," Miller warned. "NASA and the Federal government can do better than this."