Fresh Produce Discussion Blog

Created by The Packer's National Editor Tom Karst

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Government charge cards

Anyone in possession of a charge card is dangerous, and especially so if the charge card is not their own. Saw a report on the local TV news about the U.S. Government Accountability Office shining a light on government credit card misuse. Alas, someone from agriculture was responsible for high six figure abuse... From the GAO report:

Over the past several years, GAO has issued numerous reports and testimonies on internal control breakdowns in certain individual agencies' purchase card programs. In light of these findings, GAO was asked to analyze purchase card transactions governmentwide to (1) determine whether internal control weaknesses existed in the government purchase card program and (2) if so, identify examples of fraudulent, improper, and abusive activity. GAO used statistical sampling to systematically test internal controls and data mining procedures to identify fraudulent, improper, and abusive activity. GAO's work was not designed to determine the overall extent of fraudulent, improper, or abusive transactions.
Internal control weaknesses in agency purchase card programs exposed the federal government to fraud, waste, abuse, and loss of assets. When testing internal controls, GAO asked agencies to provide documentation on selected transactions to prove that the purchase of goods or services had been properly authorized and that when the good or service was delivered, an individual other than the cardholder received and signed for it. Using a statistical sample of purchase card transactions from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006, GAO estimated that nearly 41 percent of the transactions failed to meet either of these basic internal control standards. Using a second sample of transactions over $2,500, GAO found a similar failure rate--agencies could not demonstrate that 48 percent of these large purchases met the standard of proper authorization, independent receipt and acceptance, or both. Breakdowns in internal controls, including authorization and independent receipt and acceptance, resulted in numerous examples of fraudulent, improper, and abusive purchase card use. These examples included instances where cardholders used purchase cards to subscribe to Internet dating services, buy video iPods for personal use, and pay for lavish dinners that included top-shelf liquor. GAO identified some of the case studies, including one case where a cardholder used the purchase card program to embezzle over $642,000 over a period of 6 years from the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service firefighting fund. This cardholder was sentenced to 21 months in prison and ordered to pay full restitution. In addition, agencies were unable to locate 458 items of 1,058 total accountable and pilferable items totaling over $2.7 million that GAO selected for testing. These missing items, which GAO considered to be lost or stolen, totaled over $1.8 million and included computer servers, laptop computers, iPods, and digital cameras. For example, the Department of the Army could not adequately account for 256 items making up 16 server configurations, each of which cost nearly $100,000.


TK: It's discouraging that better management systems are not in place system wide to cut back on this type of abuse.

Labels: ,

1 Comments:

At April 10, 2008 at 10:47:00 PM CDT , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow...the USDA Forest Service thief even has the USDA AMS Fresh Products Branch thief, Tom Gambill, beat. Gambill only stole about 165K worth of goods with his card over a 2-year period, re-selling them on eBay as he went, before his subordinates found out and turned him in. Gambill was eventually sent packing to the pokie for a year and a half. (In fact, he was just released in mid-February).

So, it sort of looks like Forest Service management was as asleep at the wheel as FPB's.

In either case, it sure doesn't say much for management oversight or responsibility over at USDA.

It would appear that the appropriate question should be: Are these "managers" over at USDA EVER held accountable for their lack of supervision? (You would think that is one of the things they are paid those six figure salaries for).

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home