Trying to find out if it is an audit

It has always bothered me when the word audit is used to describe a process that is similar but not the same. At least in the public sector, audits have maintained their credibility. This is because of audit standards for evidence and objectivity.

In the news was this, "Auditor cites Afghanistan rebuilding challenges." The report states that Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction Arnie Fields presented his first report to Congress. Here is a link to testimony before the Congress announcing the appointment of the special inspector general.

I tried to investigate to see if audit standards were followed. To do so required considerable tenacity. A link provided in by the AP led me to the website of the Department of Defense. However, finding any information about the Inspector General's Office is difficult. I went to a page of "most important and most popular" websites but the Inspector General was not listed. I attempted to access the alphabetical listing for "I" with difficulty. (As I write this post, I am still stuck trying to access it.) My computer took too long to access it so I gave up. I then used a Google search of the web site to find information about this specific report without success. Finally, I Googled "inspector general" and was able to find that page. I tried to find the audit itself, to see if standards were followed, but didn't see it listed. It may be, however, that the report is not public for security reasons. I'm assuming it was an audit following standards because Inspector Generals also have similar standards. (Final note: The page finally came up and there is a link to the Inspector General. It took about 10 minutes.)

All -in - all, an unsatisfactory transparency experience.