I pretty sure the reality is not quite consistent with the inference you (or the author of the piece) would like to draw. In the world of OIGs, including the USAIDOIG, there is an 'inspection and evaluations' group and an 'investigations' group. This particular project was handled by the former, not the latter. That matters because the former tends to look at the agency itself and how it manages projects, whereas the latter tends to look at external entities through a compliance and enforcement lens. Usually, what is produced is something akin to a "management report" that will comment on things like processes, controls, and the like.
And indeed here, the aims of this particular project were "to determine how (1) the Government of Ukraine used the USAID-provided Starlink terminals, and (2) USAID monitored the Government of Ukraine’s use of USAID-provided Starlink terminals." Now as to that particular description, while to be clear I don't have any inside baseball knowledge as to terms of use or financing, it sounds to me that what they may have been looking at is whether UKR may have actually misused the systems (e.g., say for offense v defense) and whether USAID had systems and processes to detect and monitor that.