Audit Report on the Financial and Operating Practices of the Bronx County District Attorney’s Office

AUDIT REPORT IN BRIEF

We performed an audit on the compliance of the Bronx County District Attorney’s Office with certain payroll, timekeeping, purchasing, and inventory procedures, as set forth in the Office of Payroll Administration policies and procedures, the Procurement Policy Board (PPB) Rules, and the New York City Comptroller’s Internal Control and Accountability Directives(Comptroller’s Directives). During Fiscal Year 2002, the Personal Service (PS) expenditures for the Bronx County District Attorney’s Office (DA’s Office) were $41,771,104; the Other Than Personal Services (OTPS) expenditures were $3,583,401.

The DA’s Office generally adhered to policies and procedures of the Office of Payroll Administration, PPB Rules, and Comptroller’s Directives with respect to payroll, timekeeping, purchasing, and inventory management. Our examination of the DA’s Office Personal Services and Other Than Personal Services expenditures disclosed no instances in which monies were improperly used. In addition:

• employees’ annual leave balances did not exceed the two-year accrual limit;
• all employees sampled were bona fide;
• employees signed the required Form 319s when picking up their paychecks;
• all pay increases were accurately calculated and properly authorized;
• employees were accurately paid upon separation from City service;
• purchased items were necessary for DA’s Office operations;
• vouchers and purchase orders were properly completed and accurately calculated and paid;
• the DA’s Office complied with Comptroller’s Directive #3. In that regard, Imprest Fund purchases did not exceed $250; invoices to support Imprest Fund payments were maintained; checks had the required authorized signatures and designated specified payees; and each check bore the inscription "void after 90 days";
• the Imprest Fund bank account was accurately reconciled;
• up-to-date and accurate inventory lists were maintained and identification tags were affixed to the sampled inventory items.

However, we found that the DA’s Office: did not charge one employee’s leave balance for 12 hours not worked; permitted employees to carry compensatory time beyond the 120 day limit; and paid employees in excess of their Career and Salary Plan title salary ranges. Moreover, our sample of payment vouchers found that some of the purchase requisitions were either missing or did not contain the required signature of a bureau chief.

To address these issues, we recommend that the DA’s Office should:

• Ensure that timekeeping transactions are carefully reviewed so that timekeeping errors are avoided.
• Require employees to use compensatory time within 120 days after it is earned. If an employee does not adhere to this requirement, the compensatory time should be converted and incorporated into the employee’s sick leave balance.
• Ensure that employees obtain the appropriate authorization to carry over compensatory time if they have not received approval to use compensatory time within 120 days.
• Transfer employees whose salaries currently exceed their title limits into other titles that they qualify for and that have salary ranges encompassing their current pay levels.
• Implement a supervisory purchase review process that ensures that all necessary documents are on file and that the necessary approvals are obtained.