Justice and Treasury Have Shown Limited Progress since 2003 in Consolidating Asset Forfeiture Property Management Activities

Since 2003, Justice and Treasury have taken some steps to explore  coordinating forfeiture program efforts, including sharing a website for  posting notifications, pursuing a contract for seizure efforts abroad, and  potentially sharing recycling facilities. However, the departments have  made limited progress in sharing storage facilities or contracts, and  Justice and Treasury have not fully explored the possibility of coordinating  the management of their assets that could be consolidated to achieve  efficiencies, effectiveness, and cost savings. Some Efforts Have Been Made or Are Under Way to Coordinate Forfeiture Activities but the Departments Continue to Maintain Separate Programs

In 2003, we reported that Justice’s and Treasury’s progress in improving  the management of and accountability for seized and forfeited property,  and their demonstrated commitment to communicate and coordinate  where joint efforts could help reduce costs and eliminate duplicative  activities, were sufficient to remove the high-risk designation from the  asset forfeiture programs. For example, the study recommended sharing fixed-cost  vehicle storage facilities and jointly disposing of vehicles, vessels, and  aircraft. As a result, the departments continue  to separately manage and dispose of their seized and forfeited property. According to Justice and Treasury officials, when Congress passed a law  establishing the TFF in 1992, it recognized the differences in the  programs’ missions, which warranted creating separate programs, and  this encouraged independent operational decisions that eventually  created differences between the two programs. We recognize the separate legal  authorities of the asset forfeiture funds, but those legal authorities do not  preclude coordinating more or consolidating certain asset management  activities within the programs that we have found to be duplicative over  the years across the federal government. Justice and Treasury maintain four separate IT asset tracking systems— one for Justice and three for Treasury—to support their respective asset  forfeiture program activities, and these four tracking systems have similar  functionality. Justice and Treasury have made limited progress in sharing storage  facilities or contracts and continue to separately store assets seized  under each program. In some cases, storage facilities are located in the  same geographic area. In  fiscal year 2011, the Marshals Service had multiple contracts for the  management, storage, and disposal of assets at a cost of about $19  million. While there are some variations in the types of  properties seized, both departments also seize similar assets such as  vehicles and real property. Conducting a  study that assesses the feasibility of consolidation, including the costs,  benefits, and key questions to consider when evaluating consolidation,  would better position Justice and Treasury to determine if consolidation  would result in increases in efficiency, effectiveness, or cost savings. Recommendations for Executive Action

Given that information is needed to determine the feasibility of  consolidating potentially duplicative Justice and Treasury asset forfeiture  management activities, we recommend that the Attorney General and the  Secretary of the Treasury conduct a study to determine the feasibility of  consolidating asset management activities including, but not limited to,  the use of asset tracking systems and the sharing of vendor and contract  resources.
Why GAO Did This Study

Both Justice and Treasury operate separate asset forfeiture programs that are designed to prevent and reduce crime through the seizure and forfeiture of assets that represent the proceeds of, or were used to facilitate, federal crimes. Annually, participating agencies within Justice and Treasury seize millions of dollars in assets as a result of their law enforcement activities. In fiscal year 2011, the combined value of assets in these two programs was about $9.4 billion. Beginning in 1988 and through 2003, Congress and GAO have called on Justice and Treasury to consolidate management activities between their programs. GAO was asked to assess the extent to which Justice and Treasury have assessed and acted on opportunities to coordinate or consolidate forfeiture property management activities since 2003 to reduce any duplication and achieve cost savings. GAO interviewed officials to determine actions under way or completed to consolidate their management activities. GAO also analyzed IT asset tracking systems functions and the geographic proximity of contracted facilities that store vehicles, vessels, and aircraft.

What GAO Found

Since 2003, the Departments of Justice (Justice) and the Treasury (Treasury) have taken some steps to explore coordinating forfeiture program efforts, including sharing a website for posting notifications and pursuing a contract for seizure efforts abroad. However, limited progress has been made to consolidate the management of their assets. According to department officials, when Congress established the Treasury Forfeiture Fund in 1992, it recognized the differences in the programs' missions, which warranted creating separate programs, and this encouraged independent operational decisions that eventually created differences between the programs. There are some differences between the programs, but both departments seize similar assets such as vehicles. Nevertheless, the departments have not assessed the feasibility of consolidation, including whether such efforts would be cost-effective, and continue to duplicate efforts by separately managing and disposing of their seized and forfeited property. Specifically, Justice and Treasury maintain four separate information technology (IT) asset tracking systems, which perform similar functions to support their respective asset forfeiture program activities. In addition, both departments procure separate national contracts for the management of real property and they separately store assets seized under each program that are in some cases located within the same geographic area. For example, both the United States Marshals Service (Marshals)--the primary custodian of Justice's seized assets--and Treasury maintain vehicle storage facilities, 40 percent of which are within 20 miles of each other. GAO recognizes the separate legal authorities of the asset forfeiture funds, but those authorities do not preclude consolidating certain management activities within the programs. Conducting a study to evaluate the feasibility of consolidation that considers associated costs and benefits, among other things, could help Justice and Treasury effectively identify the extent to which consolidation would help increase efficiency, effectiveness, and cost savings.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that Justice and Treasury conduct a study to evaluate the feasibility, costs, and benefits of consolidating their asset management activities. Justice and Treasury concurred with GAO's recommendation.