Audit of Department of Justice's Key Indicators
Audit Report 08-18
Office of the Inspector General
|MEMORANDUM FOR:||Raymond J. Beaudet
Assistant Inspector General for Audit
Office of the Inspector General
|FROM:||Kenneth E. Melson
|SUBJECT:||Comments on the Draft Audit Report - Audit of Department of Justice Key Indicators
During the summer of 2007, the Office of the Inspector General, Denver Regional Audit Office, reviewed the Department of Justice’s 28 key indicators presented in the Performance and Accountability Report (PAR). In February 2008, the audit team met with key members of each component and provided its recommendations to the General Legal Activities components. We appreciate the professionalism shown to EOUSA by the OIG staff during this review and the opportunity to comment on this draft audit report.
The report examined data that EOUSA provides to Justice Management Division for inclusion as a key indicator in the PAR. Specifically, OIG reviewed data for the key indicator entitled “Percent of Cases Favorably Resolved.” We note that the OIG report affirmatively states that it is making no recommendation to EOUSA with regard to collection and storage of this data (draft Report at page 29), validation and verification of this data (draft Report at page 31), and limitations on this data (draft Report at 32).
Recommendation 11 of the report does state that EOUSA, along with the Antitrust, Civil, Criminal, Civil Rights, Tax, and Environment and Natural Resources Divisions, as well as the FBI, the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees, the Office of Justice Programs, and the Bureau of Prisons should:
“Examine the accuracy of the MD&A (management discussion and analysis) narratives covering the key indicators and verify supporting information necessary to ensure the accuracy of the key indicator performance data. Additionally, component management should notify staff of the significant need for accuracy of the key indicator information presented in the MD&A for the PAR.”
EOUSA attests to examining the accuracy of our MD&A narratives covering the key indicators and to verifying supporting information necessary to ensure the accuracy of the key indicator performance data. Additionally, EOUSA management will notify staff of the significant need for accuracy of the key indicator information presented in the MD&A for the Performance Accountability Report (PAR).
To ensure that this occurs, we are taking or have taken the following actions to resolve and close this recommendation:
I am directing my Case Management Staff, Data Analysis Staff, and Legal Initiatives Staff to ensure a careful review of any data forwarded for inclusion in the PAR, as well as the narrative for the PAR dealing with our data on the Percentage of Cases Favorably Resolved. Further, I am directing my Resource Management & Planning Staff to request the PAR narrative from Justice Management Division once it has been compiled so that the EOUSA staffs can review it for any confusion as to overlapping case data from other components.
In addition, we will continue as active participants in the development of the DOJ-wide litigation case management system (LCMS), which should serve to eliminate submission of overlapping case data among different litigating components at DOJ. This new system, when fully operational, will be accessible to all litigating components and should eliminate any double counting of cases.
We appreciate the careful work of your auditors during this review and the recommendations that you have made.
|« Previous||Table of Contents||Next »|