OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
Our objectives were to assess the: (1) effectiveness of COPS in attaining program goals, (2) controls over monitoring of grantees by COPS and OJP, and (3) effectiveness of guidance to grantees. We conducted the audit in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and included such tests of program records as were necessary. Our audits of COPS grantees are funded out of the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. For FY 1999, we received $3.8 million from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund, which represents 1/10th of 1 percent of expenditures paid from the fund.
Our audit focused on hiring and redeployment grants awarded by COPS and OJP under the
community oriented policing program from inception through February 11, 1999. The
following table identifies the type of hiring and redeployment grants awarded, number of
officers funded, and dollar amounts awarded as of February 11, 1999.
OFFICERS AND DOLLARS FUNDED
We conducted audit work at COPS and OJP. We also summarized the audit results of 149 COPS/OJP grantees that we audited from October 1996 through September 1998 (See Appendix III). The grant reports summarized in this document were not selected randomly, and our results may or may not be representative of the universe of grantees. Of the 149 grant audits, 103 were referred to us by COPS or OJP. COPS' policy is to refer to us for audit what it believes to be problematic grantees. The remaining 46 grantees were selected by us based on a variety of factors including type of grantee, the size of the grant, the grantee's geographic location, and potential problem grantees.
To assess the effectiveness of COPS in attaining the President's goal of putting 100,000 officers on America's streets, we:
To assess the controls over grantee monitoring by COPS and OJP, we:
To assess the effectiveness of guidance to grantees, we:
SCHEDULE OF DOLLAR-RELATED FINDINGS
|FUNDS TO BETTER USE24|
|Grants awarded but not accepted within the designated acceptance period that need follow up to determine if the grants should be rescinded and the funds awarded to other agencies.||$485,200,000||12|
|Terminated grants with "ACCEPTED" status that need to be deobligated and the funds awarded to other agencies||$1,000,000||15|
|Terminated grants with "WITHDREW" status that need to be deobligated and the funds awarded to other agencies||$14,100,000||16|
23 While we relied on automated data to achieve the audit objectives, we did not always separately test the reliability of the data. However, when these data are viewed in context with other available evidence, we believe the opinions, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are valid.
24 FUNDS TO BETTER USE are defined as unspent monies that could be more efficiently used in the future if management acts on our findings.