DOD Comptroller and military  service financial management and comptroller officials responsible for the  department’s ADA programs have stated that because of weaknesses in  the department’s business processes and systems, knowledgeable  personnel are critical to improving the department’s funds control  processes. Efforts are under way to provide key funds control personnel classroom  and Web-based training. Finally, the DOD FMR establishes a time frame of approximately 15  months and 25 days for completing an ADA investigation. The inconsistent manner in which the military services have  complied with this requirement raises concerns as to whether DOD or the  military services have reasonable assurance that individuals assigned to  conduct ADA reviews and investigations are qualified. Based on our review of  the closed ADA case files, the rosters, and other documentation provided  by the military services, we were only able to determine that 6 of the 66  investigating officers assigned to the 54 ADA cases reviewed had received  the required training. DOD Has Taken Steps to Improve Transparency of Reporting, and the Nature of Disciplinary Actions Taken Is Consistent with the ADA and the DOD FMR

The military services provided OSD the required monthly investigation  summary information for the 54 ADA cases reviewed. Within DOD, the FMR specifies that  such administrative discipline can range in severity from no action to the  termination of the individual’s federal employment. OMB guidance notes that the report should  include  the title and Department of the Treasury (Treasury) symbol (including the  fiscal year) of the appropriation or fund account, the amount involved, and  the date on which the violation occurred; the name(s) and position(s) of the individual(s) responsible for the  violation;   all facts pertaining to the violation, including the type of violation, the  primary reason or cause, and any statement from the responsible  individual; the disciplinary action taken;   a statement confirming that all information has been submitted to the  Department of Justice if it is deemed that the violation was knowing and  willful;   a statement regarding the adequacy of the system of administrative control  prescribed by the head of the agency and approved by OMB and a  proposal for a regulation change, if the head of the agency determines a  change is needed;   statement of any additional action taken by, or at the discretion of, the    a statement concerning the steps taken to coordinate the report with the  other agency, if another agency is involved. For the 20  ADA cases in which DOD concluded that no ADA violation occurred, we  found that 13 of those cases identified corrective actions to be taken by  the DOD component. Disciplinary Actions Taken Were in Accordance with the Act and DOD Guidance

Our analysis of the 34 ADA violations reported by DOD as being closed in  fiscal years 2006 and 2007 found that disciplinary actions taken were in  accordance with the criteria set forth in the DOD FMR and were reported  to the President and the Congress, with a copy to the Comptroller General,  as required by the ADA. The ADA requires that employees who are  responsible for an ADA violation be subject to appropriate administrative  discipline. Additionally, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the  Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the  Air Force to take the following four actions: (1) implement and document  processes, procedures, and controls to identify and help ensure that key  funds control personnel, including funds certifying officials, are properly  trained so that they can fulfill their responsibilities to prevent, identify,  and report potential ADA violations; (2) implement and document  processes, procedures, and controls to oversee and monitor compliance  with DOD FMR provisions requiring the maintenance and use of a roster  for selecting qualified ADA investigating officers; (3) develop, implement,  and document policies and procedures to help ensure compliance with the  DOD FMR requirements for investigating officer training; and (4) develop,  implement, and document policies and procedures to help ensure  compliance with the DOD FMR requirements for investigating officer  independence. To assess investigating officers’ qualifications,  we focused our review on whether the investigating officers had received  training and if there was an internal control in place to ensure that the  investigating officers did not have any personal, external, or organizational  independence impairments to their ability to conduct an investigation. We did not assess the appropriateness of the conclusions  reached by DOD for the 54 closed ADA cases or the disciplinary actions  taken in the 34 cases for which DOD concluded that an ADA violation had  occurred. For the remaining 20 ADA cases, DOD concluded that no  ADA violation had occurred, and therefore these cases were not reported  externally.
Why GAO Did This Study

Senate Report No. 110-77 directed GAO to review the Department of Defense's (DOD) procedures for Antideficiency Act (ADA) violations. GAO focused on whether (1) existing DOD funds control systems, processes, and internal controls provide reasonable assurance that ADA violations will be prevented or detected and whether key funds control personnel are trained; (2) investigations of ADA violations are processed in accordance with applicable DOD regulations; and (3) DOD tracks and reports metrics pertaining to its ADA investigations and what disciplinary actions are taken when ADA violations have occurred. GAO's review included all 54 ADA military service case files closed in fiscal years 2006 and 2007. GAO did not assess the appropriateness of the conclusions reached or of the disciplinary actions taken for the ADA cases.

What GAO Found

DOD's complex and inefficient payment processes, nonintegrated business systems, and weak internal controls impair its ability to maintain proper funds control, leaving the department at risk of overobligating or overspending its appropriations in violation of the ADA. DOD Comptroller and military service financial management and comptroller officials responsible for the department's ADA programs have stated that because of weaknesses in DOD's business operations, knowledgeable personnel are critical to improving the department's funds control, and these officials have or are developing training courses. However, only the Army has attempted to identify and determine whether key funds control personnel have received appropriate training to provide them with the knowledge and skills to fulfill their responsibilities, including the ADA, required by DOD regulations. GAO's analysis of the 54 ADA cases and other documentation provided by the military services disclosed that the military services did not fully comply with DOD regulations intended to ensure that ADA reviews and investigations were conducted by qualified and independent personnel and were completed in a timely manner. More specifically, GAO found the following: (1) Only 6 of the 66 investigating officers assigned to the 54 ADA cases reviewed had received all of the required training. (2) Nineteen of the 54 ADA cases lacked documentation needed to determine whether the investigating officer was organizationally independent. Further, because the military services focused on organizational independence, they could not be assured that investigating officers were free of personal or external impairments to independence. ? ADA investigations were generally not completed within the 15 months and 25 days set forth by DOD. Of the 54 ADA cases reviewed, 22 cases took over 30 months to complete and only 16 were completed on time. GAO also noted that DOD, as required, reported the 34 cases in which it had concluded that an ADA violation had occurred to the President and the Congress, with a copy to GAO. For the remaining 20 cases, DOD concluded that an ADA violation had not occurred and therefore external reporting was not required. Further, DOD has taken steps to improve transparency over the ADA investigation process by requiring DOD components to report status information when an ADA investigation is initiated. Additionally, for the 34 ADA cases in which DOD concluded that an ADA violation had occurred, the nature of the disciplinary actions taken and reported to the President and the Congress was consistent with the criteria set forth in the DOD regulations. The ADA requires that employees who are responsible for ADA violations be subject to appropriate administrative discipline. The DOD regulations specify that administrative discipline can range from no action to the termination of the individual's employment.