U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
INSPECTIONS DIVISION
INSPECTION OF THE
CONSOLIDATED ASSET TRACKING SYSTEM
March 1997
Report Number I-97-02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Office of the Inspector General and General Accounting Office Reports
Results of the CATS Status Review
Obtaining Reimbursable Work Authorizations
Lack of Site Preparation Coordination
Results of the CATS User Survey
General Participant Agency Information
CATS Implementation and Installation Schedule and Coordination
APPENDIX I - Scope and Methodology - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX II - List of OIG Inspection and Audit Reports and GAO Reports on Asset Forfeiture 1989-1995 - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX III - User Survey - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX IV - CATS User Survey Results: General Participant Agency Information - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX V - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Implementation and Installation Schedule - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX VI - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Implementation and Installation Coordination - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX VII - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Data Conversion Efforts - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX VIII - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Participant Agency Legacy Systems - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX IX - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Training - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX X - CATS User Survey Results: CATS Security - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX XI - Justice Management Division's Response to Draft Report - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX XII - Office of the Inspector General's Analysis of Management's Response - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
APPENDIX XIII - Abbreviations - NOT INCLUDED IN THIS HYPERTEXT VERSION.
The Assistant Attorney General for Administration (AAG/A) requested that the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Inspections Division, review the Consolidated Asset Tracking System (CATS) to ascertain the status of system implementation as of January 1, 1995, when the Justice Management Division (JMD) assumed responsibility for the program. In concert with the JMD, Asset Forfeiture Management Staff (AFMS), we collected information on the status of CATS implementation and found that user dissatisfaction emerged as the most critical issue affecting successful system implementation. We also identified other issues including program costs, contract monitoring and system security classification that were affecting full system implementation.
We spoke with AFMS officials, the asset forfeiture program managers and CATS User Group representatives in the Department of Justice (DOJ) and non-DOJ participant agencies. We briefed the AAG/A and members of his staff on the results of our status review in August 1995. Upon conclusion of this briefing and in response to the request of the AAG/A, we conducted a user survey in Fall 1995. This report summarizes the results of the initial status review and the follow-up user survey. Based on information obtained during our status review and our user survey, we believe that the significant delays and continual revision of the CATS implementation date and the ever-increasing costs of the system are cause for serious concern and must be monitored closely.
In our view, the success of CATS is contingent upon effective cooperation and coordination among the participant agencies. In September 1993, the DOJ and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) signed a memorandum of understanding agreeing to jointly support CATS. Nevertheless, the United States Customs Service (USCS), decided at the onset that it would not participate in CATS, and, in July 1995, IRS informed AFMS that it would no longer participate in CATS. IRS justified its withdrawal from CATS because site installation was significantly behind schedule, CATS would not be available nationwide in the foreseeable future, and, like USCS, IRS believed that CATS could not provide needed financial reports.
We believe that the continual delays in system implementation, increasing system costs, the impact of the IRS withdrawal from CATS and the USCS' decision not to participate in the system have been detrimental to the success of CATS. The CATS feasibility study was completed in late 1990 and the initial projected system completion date was December 1992 at a cost of $24 million. The $24 million estimate did not include costs, which have increased from an early estimate of $20.5 million to an estimate of $45 million in 1996, for the development and installation of a telecommunications network. However, full system implementation has not yet occurred and is now estimated for the Spring of 1997. The estimated costs have risen to $106.2 million. In June 1996 the AFMS estimated that 50 percent of the total number of planned CATS sites are installed and operational and 59 percent of planned workstations are installed and operational. During our review, we were unable to obtain a consistent, clear and comprehensive explanation concerning the status of CATS because implementation dates, the number of users and sites, and costs continued to change significantly. Given this history, we question if CATS can be fully implemented and operational by the Spring of 1997. If the planned date for full implementation and operation continues to change, we believe participant agencies may reevaluate their level of participation in CATS and either withdraw from, or curtail their use of, the system.
#####