Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Are there investigations or audits into large payments involving Kristi Noem or her administration?
Executive summary
Reporting shows a ProPublica investigation — widely republished — that a firm with ties to Kristi Noem received money connected to a $220 million DHS advertising campaign, and watchdogs and legal experts have urged probes by the DHS inspector general and congressional oversight [1] [2]. Separate earlier reporting alleges Noem accepted $80,000 tied to political spending while governor and failed to disclose it; that matter drew scrutiny but ProPublica did not assert it broke campaign-finance law [3] [4].
1. What the recent reporting found: a $220 million ad effort and a Noem-linked firm
ProPublica reported that the Department of Homeland Security ran a roughly $220 million advertising campaign for which some work flowed to the Strategy Group — a firm with personal ties to Noem’s senior aides — and that DHS used a declared “emergency” at the southern border to speed or limit normal competitive bidding for the campaign [1] [5]. The coverage says the company is run by the husband of Noem’s chief DHS spokesperson and that payments from the campaign reached entities tied to Noem allies [1] [6].
2. Who is calling for investigations — and what they recommend
Contracting experts quoted in the coverage urged formal inquiries: Scott Amey of the Project on Government Oversight called the revelations “worthy of an investigation,” and Charles Tiefer, a former federal contract law authority, said the matter should prompt probes by the DHS inspector general and the House Oversight Committee [2] [7]. Local advocates and outlets republishing ProPublica also encouraged GAO or congressional oversight to audit whether procurement rules were followed [8] [2].
3. What oversight avenues the reporting identifies
The articles note multiple institutional paths for scrutiny: internal DHS review and the DHS inspector general, congressional oversight by committees such as House Oversight or Homeland Security, and Government Accountability Office audits of federal spending and contract compliance [8] [2]. Local reporting and opinion pieces explicitly suggest asking senators and representatives to request investigations and GAO audits [8].
4. Related prior scrutiny: the $80,000 disclosure question
Earlier in 2025, ProPublica and other outlets reported that Noem reportedly received $80,000 connected to American Resolve Policy Fund activity while she was South Dakota governor and that she did not disclose those funds when joining DHS; her lawyer disputed wrongdoing and ProPublica did not allege campaign-finance violations [3] [4]. That reporting heightened scrutiny of Noem’s finances and created public pressure for clearer oversight [4].
5. How news outlets and local papers are framing the story
National outlets (ProPublica, USA Today, The New York Times republishing or summarizing elements) and many local and partisan sites have republished or analyzed the ProPublica scoop, often highlighting ties between the Strategy Group and Noem aides and stressing potential ethics questions [1] [9] [10]. Some republishers add context about Noem’s prior state contracts with the same firm and her recent internal DHS spending controls [11] [12].
6. Conflicting claims, limits of current reporting
Available sources report ties and payments and quote contracting experts calling for probes, but they do not report any completed federal criminal or administrative enforcement action as of publication; the coverage recommends investigations rather than announcing indictments or findings of legal violations [1] [2]. ProPublica explicitly did not assert that the $80,000 disclosure amounted to a campaign-finance violation [3]. Available sources do not mention any final IG or GAO reports or formal congressional subpoenas completed at the time of these articles [1] [8].
7. What readers should watch next
Follow whether the DHS inspector general opens a formal inquiry, whether House Oversight or Homeland Security committees announce investigations, and whether GAO begins an audit — these are the avenues experts in the reporting named as likely next steps [2] [8]. Also watch for DHS responses or administration disclosures about procurement procedures and any public release of contract documents showing how the emergency invocation was applied [1] [5].
Summary judgment: multiple news organizations republishing ProPublica have documented substantial payments tied to a DHS ad program and flagged personal ties between the contractor and Noem aides; contracting experts and watchdogs in the coverage have recommended inspector general, GAO, and congressional probes, but the sources do not report completed official investigations or legal findings as of these stories [1] [2] [3].