A number of federal law  enforcement organizations participate in DOJ’s Assets Forfeiture Fund  (AFF), including the U.S. Field-Based Information- Sharing Entities

DOJ, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Office of  National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) operate or support, through grant  funding or personnel, five types of field-based information-sharing entities  that may collect, process, analyze, or disseminate information in support  of law enforcement and counterterrorism-related efforts, as shown in table  1. DOJ Has Steps Under Way to Reduce the Risk of Unnecessary Duplication in Its Grant Programs

In July 2012, we reported that DOJ’s more than 200 grant programs  overlapped across 10 key justice areas, and that this overlap contributed  to the risk of unnecessarily duplicative grant awards for the same or  similar purposes. Five of the  recommendations specifically relate to ways in which DOJ can improve  program efficiency and resource management, and these are that DOJ  conduct an assessment to better understand the extent to which the  department’s grant programs overlap with one another and determine  if grant programs may be consolidated;  coordinate within and among granting agencies on a consistent basis  to review potential or recent grant awards from grant programs that  DOJ identifies as overlapping, before awarding grants;  require its grant applicants to report all federal grant funding, including  all DOJ funding, that they are currently receiving or have recently  applied for in their grant applications; provide appropriate OJP, COPS Office, and OVW staff access to both  grant management systems; and ensure its comprehensive study of DOJ grant management systems  assesses the feasibility, costs, and benefits of moving to a single  grants management system, including the steps needed to harmonize  DOJ grant processes, so that any variation in how granting agencies  manage their portfolios is not an encumbrance to potential system  unification. DOJ has taken steps to partially address these recommendations. In February 2012, we reported that DOJ  had designed several controls for the BVP program to ensure grantee  compliance with program requirements, among other things, but could  take additional action to further reduce management risk. To improve  DOJ’s resource management, we recommended that DOJ deobligate  undisbursed funds from grants in the BVP program whose terms have  ended. For example, deobligating this funding could enable  the department to apply the amounts to new awards or reduce requests  for future budgets. The department concurred with this recommendation  and has since deobligated $2 million. In early April 2013, DOJ officials  stated that they expect to complete the deobligation process before the  end of April 2013. DOJ officials stated that they plan to use the  deobligated funds toward fiscal year 2014 BVP awards. DOJ and Treasury Have Not Yet Studied the Feasibility of Consolidating Asset Forfeiture Activities

In September 2012, we found that DOJ and Treasury had made limited  progress to consolidate their asset forfeiture property management  activities. Thus, we  recommended that DOJ and Treasury conduct a study to determine the  feasibility of consolidating potentially duplicative asset management  activities including, but not limited to, the use of asset-tracking systems  and the sharing of vendor and contract resources. As of March 2013, DOJ officials  reported that DOJ and Treasury representatives had met several times in  the fall of 2012 and thereafter agreed upon an approach to conduct the  study and assess potential costs. DOJ Has Not Documented the Process for Carrying Over Asset Forfeiture Funds from Year to Year

In July 2012, we reported on the growth of revenues and expenses in  DOJ’s AFF from fiscal years 2003 to 2011, and the need for transparency  in DOJ’s process for carrying over funds from one fiscal year to the  next. In contrast, at the end of fiscal year 2011, DOJ carried over  $844 million to cover expenses into fiscal year 2012. We recommended that DOJ clearly  document how it determined the amount of funds that it would need to be  carried over for the next fiscal year, a recommendation with which DOJ  concurred. DOJ officials stated that they plan to include information on  the basis for its decisions concerning the amount of funds to be carried  over in future Congressional Budget Justifications, but as of March 2013,  the decision on how to present the information was still pending. DOJ and Other Agencies Could Improve Coordination to Help Reduce Unnecessary Overlap in Field-Based Information Sharing

In April 2013, we identified overlap in some activities of five types of field- based information-sharing entities and concluded that DOJ, DHS, and  ONDCP could improve coordination among the entities to help reduce  unnecessary overlap in activities. DOJ generally concurred with both  recommendations, but asserted that it was already actively promoting  coordination and routinely seeking to identify efficiency gains.
Why GAO Did This Study

In fiscal year 2012, DOJ's $27 billion budget funded a broad array of national security, law enforcement, and criminal justice system activities. GAO has examined a number of key programs where DOJ has sole responsibility or works with other departments and recommended actions to improve program efficiency and resource management. This statement summarizes findings and recommendations from recent GAO work in the following five areas: (1) overlap and potential duplication in DOJ grant programs; (2) DOJ's management of undisbursed funds from BVP grant awards whose terms have ended; (3) potential duplication in DOJ and Treasury asset forfeiture programs; (4) DOJ's management of asset forfeiture funds; and (5) overlap among DOJ and other federally funded field-based information sharing entities. This statement is based on prior products GAO issued from February 2012 through April 2013, along with selected updates obtained from April 2012 through April 2013. For the selected updates on DOJ's progress in implementing recommendations, GAO analyzed information provided by DOJ officials on taken and planned actions.

What GAO Found

In July 2012, GAO reported that the Department of Justice's (DOJ) more than 200 grant programs overlapped across 10 key justice areas, and that this overlap contributed to the risk of unnecessarily duplicative grant awards for the same or similar purposes. GAO has recommended, among other steps, that DOJ conduct an assessment to better understand the extent of grant program overlap and determine if consolidation is possible. DOJ has begun taking related actions, but it is too early to assess their impact.
In February 2012, GAO reported that DOJ's Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) Program--a source of funding for law enforcement ballistic- and stab-resistant body armor--had not taken steps to deobligate about $27 million in unused funds from grant awards whose terms had ended. GAO recommended that DOJ deobligate these funds and, for example, apply the amounts to new awards or reduce requests for future budgets. DOJ officials have since deobligated $2 million and plan to deobligate the rest by the end of April 2013. DOJ officials plan to apply the funds toward fiscal year 2014 BVP grants.
In September 2012, GAO reported that DOJ and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) conducted potentially duplicative asset management activities related to the seizure and forfeiture of assets associated with federal crimes. For example, GAO reported that each agency maintains separate tracking systems for seized and forfeited property. GAO recommended that DOJ and Treasury conduct a study to determine the feasibility of consolidating their asset management activities. In March 2013, DOJ officials reported that DOJ and Treasury had agreed upon an approach to conduct the study and assess potential costs, but that meetings between the departments were still ongoing and the study had not been finalized.
In July 2012, GAO reported that annual revenues from DOJ's Assets Forfeiture Fund exceeded annual expenditures, allowing DOJ to carryover $844 million at the end of fiscal year 2011, in part to reserve funds for the next fiscal year. However, DOJ does not clearly document how it determines the amounts that need to be carried over. GAO recommended that DOJ more clearly document how it determines the carryover amounts. DOJ officials reported that they plan to provide this information, but as of March 2013, had not yet determined how to present the information.
In April 2013, GAO reported on overlap in activities and services across field-based entities operated or supported by DOJ, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy that may share terrorism-related information, among other things. GAO identified 91 instances of overlap in some analytical activities, such as disseminating information on similar issue areas, such as terrorism. GAO recommended, in part, that the federal agencies collaborate to hold the entities accountable for coordination and assess where practices that enhance coordination could be applied. DOJ generally agreed with the intent of the recommendations, but stated that DOJ has already taken steps to promote coordination. The steps, however, do not establish an accountability mechanism for monitoring coordination or assessing practices.

What GAO Recommends

GAO has made several recommendations to DOJ in prior reports to help improve program efficiency and resource management. DOJ generally concurred with these recommendations and is taking actions to address them.