DeKalb County Board of

Commissioners Purchase Card Audit
Commissioner District 7:
Unhap py Tax-payer--&--Vet-e-F.Ee-ml-----
I I I I
DEKALB COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONER DISTRICT NO. 7
RJ ~PORT ONAGREED-UPON PROCEDURES
FOR THE PERIODS APRIL 2004TOAPRIL 2014
DeKalb County Board of Commissioners Purchase Card Review
District 7
I
OaHu PLUNKETT & COe, P.C.
I I , , =FI I I I "" "" I I I I 1 1 1 1 "" ""
ACCOUNTANTS & CONSULTANTS· 1 800 PElI CHTREE RD. NW· SUI TE 333· ATLANTA GEORGI A 30309· VOI CE (404) 351 -6770' FAX (404) 351 -6845
1 050 1 7TH ST., N.W.· SUI TE 600' WASHI NGTON, DC· 20036· VOI CE (202) 496-5307· FAX (202) 466-2400
EMAI L' plunkelt@ohpcpa.com WEB· WWW.OHPCPA.COM
DeKalb County Georgia Board of Commissioners
Commissioner District NO.7
DeKalb County, Georgia
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES
We have performed the procedures engagement as listed in the Table of Contents, which were
agreed to by the DeKalb County Board of Commissioners ("the BOC"), SOielYto assist J th
monitoring proper application of certain policies and procedures relating to analyzing the
expenditures of each member of the BOC and their staff for the years commencing April 2104
through April 2014. .
These services are delivered by applying a set of agreed-upon queries to records contained in
your system database via computer-assisted data-mining technologies. The objective of these
procedures was to identify within the database any anomalies or other matters ~at would require
further investigation. Such anomalies could be an indication of an error, either intentional or
unintentional, aneed to refine your internal control framework or aneed to improve operational
efficiencies. I
The County's management is responsible for the contents of the database and all related
accounting records. Tllis procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency
of these procedures is solely the responsibility of the specified party to this report. Consequently,
we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures as listed in the Table of
.lontents either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.
We were not engaged to, and did not conduct an audit, the objective of which would be the
expression of an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have
come to our attention that would have been reported to you.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the BOC and its management and
should not be usedby anyone other than those specified parties.
I ~ \ ~ ~ .
Atlanta, Georgia
I
October 3, 2014
, .
I
I 'OeKcilb County Board of Commissioners-Purchase Card Review District 7
REPORT ON AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES
COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 7
DEKALB COUNTY GEORGIA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 2004 to APRIL 2014
Table of Contents
PAGE N([).
A.
Executive Summary 1 .4-5
B. Agreed-Upon Procedures Defined 6
c.
General Information , 6
DeKalb County Policies 6-7
e Purchase Card Policy
~ Travel Policy
IiJ Mobile Policy
e Retention Policy
D.
E. Summary of Procedures Performed 7-8
e Purchase Card Expense Review
5 Non Purchase Card Expense Review
F. Summary of Findings Purchase CardTransactions................... . 9-11
" General
s Specific
G. Purchase Card Review - Individuals 12-13
H. Non Purchase Card Transactions 14-'15
~ General
I I I
DeKalb County Board of Commissioners' Purchase Card Review
District 7
I
Executive Summary - District 7
We
l
performed those procedures stipulated in the DeKalb County's Georgia Professional Service
Invitation to Bid, (ITB No. 14-100413) as mandated by the Board of Commissioners' resolution dated
April 22, 2014. The objective of these procedures were to review DeKalb's County Procurement Card (P-
Card) expenditures to consider (a) whether purchases were for appropriate material goods used by a
Commissioner inthe normal functioning of aCommission office; (b) whether there is evidence of avalid
work product when a service is purchased; and (c) what evidence exists that meals and travel expenses
wer~ for County business. The scope of this review was to cover the periods commencing April 2004
through April 2014. The sufficiency of the procedures performed is solely the responsibility of those
parties specified inthis report. I
P-Cards offer a quick and efficient means of making business purchases. According to a National
Association of Purchasing Card Professionals (NAPCP) evaluation, typical savings resulting fromP-Ca1d
usage are $63 per transaction.' Efficiencies include the cost of vendor maintenance, purchase orders,
wages of employees that process payments, and resources for check disbursements. Inconsistent
compliance with P-Card policies provides aless than desirable internal control environment and reduces
level of transparency for County resources utilization.
During our engagement, we reviewed internal audit reports issued by the Internal Audit & Licensirig
Division on all of the District and Central offices covering transactions from2009 to 2011. Deficienci~s
cited in these reports included: (a) improper or nonexistent transaction logs; (b) charges unsupported ~y
receipts or other documentation; (c) lack of approval at the appropriate levels by authorized personnells
identified in the Policies and Procedures Manual; and (d) incorrect coding of transactions by budget lirle
categories. Our procedural review revealed deficiencies concurrent with those previously found by tHe
Internal Audit reports. A substantial portion of the supporting documents including the P-Ca~d
accounting logs were never prepared or submitted inaccordance with the Policies and Procedures adopted
by the County. J
This procedural review took into consideration the County's five (5) year mandatory record retenti '1 1
policy inclusive of the limited availability of any records prior to 2009. Additional efforts were therefore
made to secure any documentation still inpossession by former employees. Letters were sent to addresses
on I file with DeKalb County Human Resources requesting assistance in providing supporting
documentation. .
Specifically, our review of District 7 covered aperiod for which current Commissioner Watson has held
his Ipositon since 2010 after succeeding former Commissioner Connie Stokes. District P-Card purchases
cOlymenced in2006 andtotaled approximately $57,937. Three (3) people within the district were granted
purchasing cards during the scope period, Of the 3 cardholders observed, we received no supporting
documentation for 1 former employee whose 84 transactions totaled $7,041. We reviewed all related
transactions and determined that based on the individual transaction descriptions, the expenditures
aPrared to be County business related.
Individual card expenditures ranged from $5,206 for K. Lajoie to $45,689 for Commissioner S. Watson.
The concentration of purchase card incurred expenses was applicable to county business related travel,
training and conferences. Purchase card usage within District 7 remained consistent through 2010 before
increasing four-fold in 2011 to $11,836, decreasing by 40% in 2012 to $7,253, before nearly tripling in
I .
2013 to afull year hightotal of$21,659.
1www.napcp.org
41ipage
I I
/DeK31b County Board of Commissioners Purchase Card Review District 7 ..
District 7P-Card expenditures revealed limited deficiencies in the availability of transactional support for
it cfrdholders. The current administration presented approximately 78% of supporting receipts for its
transactions. We reviewed the individual transaction descriptions and note they appear to be County
business related; however without the observation of actual receipts, reasonable assurance was limited.
We boted the District's overall compliance with existing policies.
Policies and procedures provide a valuable management control on P-Card operations. Mandatory
procedures help provide an essential framework for integrating financial and operational best practices.
Corhpliance by all levels of County staff, including the Commissioners is recommended to ensure
financial transparency and objective stewardship of County resources.
To mitigate non-compliance and exposure to fraud, waste and abuse, mandatory training on P-Card
Policies and Procedures should be implemented for all authorized users. A periodic reassessment of these
policies and procedures should be viewed as ameans by which internal controls are enhanced on the use,
authorization, and documentation and approval process. Further, there should be areview of the P-Card
system integration with the County's organizational structure. The current policy is vague on which
management position is accountable and appropriate to review and approve Commissioner level
transactions.
51 Page
I
Distrlct 7"
DeKalb County Board of CommissionersPurchase Card Review
Agljeed-Upon Procedures Defined
An agreed-upon procedures engagement differs from a financial statement audit. A financial statement
audit is a"snapshot" of the financial picture of an organization at apoint intime. In an audit, the auditor
obtains reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, examines
evidence supporting the financial statements, and assesses both accounting principles used and overall
finahcial statement presentation, The auditor then renders an opinion on whether the financial statements
are presented fairly inconformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
This engagement, anagreed-upon procedures engagement, is defined as one inwhich we perform specific
prodedures andreport findings. We did not performan audit or provide an opinion relating to the subject
matter or assertion about the subject matter. Rather, we performed only those procedures that have been
agreed upon with management and report findings. These procedures often are at amore detailed level
than is customary inafinancial statement audit.
General Information
On April 22, 2014, the BOC passed aresolution by the governing authority of DeKalO County, Georgia
directing the Executive Assistant to obtain the services of a Certified Internal Audi~or or a Certified
Government Audit professional to:
1. Review the expenditures for the past tenyears (2004 through 2014) by each me~ber of the Boa d
of Commissioners, his/her respective staff and office, and the central office of the Board f
Commissioners. I I
2. The auditor shall review expenditures to consider (a) whether purchases were for appropriate
material goods by a Commissioner in the normal functioning of a Commissioner office; (b)
whether there is evidence of a valid work product when a service is purchased; and (c) what
evidence exists that meals and travel expenses were for County business.
The review was conducted in accordance with the following DeKalb County policies in effect during the
I
projcledural scope period, 2004 to 2014: Purchasing Card Policy, March 2004; Mobile Policy; Tra~el
Policy; and the Retention Policy as required by the Georgia Records Act (O,C.G,A § 50-18-90 et seq.),
whose revised schedules were filed with the Division of Archives and History, Office of Secretary of
State, as ofJ uly 30, 2010.
Pllrc~zase Card Policy
I
The 2.004 Purchase Card Policy states that "DeKalb County has established aPurchasing Card (P-Card)
program that allows designated employees the ability to purchase selected, business-related goods and
services whose value is less than $1,000. This program is intended to be an alternative method for the
purchase of small dollar, miscellaneous expense materials and services. These policies and procedures
ap~IY to the use of the Bank of America VisaPurchasing CardlP-Card.
DeKalb County is exempt from paying State of Georgia sales tax. This infers that DeKalb County staff
may need to provide written documentation to vendors and service providers for recognition of the
eXlmpt status on procured services and purchases.
, I I
DeKalb County Board-ufCommissioners Purchase-Card Review District 7
I
I
Thel2004 Purchasing Card policy has been updated and was replaced in April 2014. For the purposes of
our review, we followed the guidelines ofthe March 2004 policy which was in effect for the entire scope
I
period.
Tratel Policy .
The DeKalb County Travel Policy, revised April 2006, sets out the guidelines for approval for travel and
training expenses incurred while conducting authorized County business.
Mobile Policy
I
i
The DeKalb County Wireless Policy, March 2009, sets out the guidelines for employees who require a
wireless device for performing essential job functions. Employees may be issued a Blackberry, PDA ~r
wireless card with monthly service paid by the department. Wireless devices and plans are to be used for
official County business only.
Records Retention Policy
The DeKalb County Records Retention Policy is filed with the Division of Archives and History, Office
of Secretary of State as of J uly 30, 2010. The policy and subsequent revised schedules stipulate tlf1e
mandatory minimum retention period for accounting records including: Accounts Paya~le Files; Invoice;
J ournal Entries; J ournals and Registers; Travel - Registration Fee Payments; and Travel Authorizatio 1
and Reimbursement Records. All stated documents have aretention classification of "lemporary - Sho
Term", The stated accounting records have a S-year minimum retention stipulation; the travel relat~d
documentation has a4-year minimum retention stipulation.
This procedural review factored the County's S-year minimum record retention policr, inclusive of the
limited availability of any records prior to 2009. As a result, the transaction logs an receipts prior to
2009 were limited during our review.
Procedures
p-lard Expense Review
The 1-Card review consisted of the Board of Commissioners for Districts 1through 7 (past and current),
their staff, and the Board of Commissioner's Central Office personnel who maintained aP-Card for any
period between April 2004 and April 2014. For each individual identified, a history of all P-Card
transactions was obtained and reviewed against established policies and procedures. We reviewed
cardhiolder transactions, cardholder statements, invoices, receipts and transaction logs to determine the
following:
l~ The P-Card Administrator maintained the transaction log on amonthly basis.
2) The cardholder attached applicable receipts to the monthly transaction log.
3) Transactions were for County business related goods and services and/or appropriate for
department spend.
4) Individual transactions and monthly total transactions did not exceed guidelines established by P-
Card policy.
IS) Transactions were approved in accordance with established policy.
7 liP age
peKalb' County Board of Commissioners Purchase Card Review 'District 7
Non P-Card Expense Review
'We Ireviewed vendor payment activity for accounts where the percentage of P-Card expenditures in
relation to the accounts payable transactions' was relatively small as shown in Fig. 2, P-Card
Expenditures as Percentage of Annual Account Total. This review was targeted on the following
accounts:
e Other Professional Services
$ Other Miscellaneous Charges
e Travel-Airfare
i Travel-Accommodations/Hotel and, Training and Conference Fees
We identified seJ ect vendors with high payment activity and reviewed supporting documentation to assess
if e*penditures were for County business and to the extent possible, actual service or product was
received by the County.
81Page
De•.. o County Board of Commissioners Purchase .d Review D L . .:t7
-----Review Results.for.District 7
District 7 2004·2014
P-(ard Total
$ 5,390.25
s 4,439.84
$ 3,003.80
s 6,147.49
$ 552.54
$ 8,054.46
s 2,194.68
s 1,337.64
$ 9,813.80
s 1,337.64
$ 15,243.38
$ 212.00
$ 209.42
$ 57,936.94
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
P-Card P-tard P-Card p,Card P-Card P-tard P-Card P-Card P-Card P-Card P-Card
$ - $ $ $ - $ $ $ - $ 11.25 $ $ 3,343.00 s 2,036.00
$ $ $ s - $ s $ $ 857.03 $ 983.72 $ 1,737.25 $ 861.84
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 296.11 $ 1,091.82 $ 1,615.87
$ s $ $ $ $ $ $ 2,422.59 $ 317.60 s 2,577.30 $ 830.00
$ $ s $ - $ $ $ - $ 539.54 $ 13.00 $ $
$ $ - $ $ $ s $ $ 3,654.13 $ 281.51 $ 3,063.27 s 1,055.55
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,717.49 s - s 477.19 $
$ $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ 425.13 $ 198.26 $ 615.25 $ 99.00
$ $ s s $ $ $ $ 1,600.80 $ 2,574.00 $ 3,419.00 $ 2,220.00
$ $ - $ $ 145.82. $ $ $ 193.95 $
20.41
$ 127.98 $ 786.75 $ 62.73
$ s $ 827.16 s 1,911.63 $ 1,932.26 $ 704.16 $ 1,325.77 $ 587.80 $ 2,350.95 $ 4,448.59 $ 1,155.06
$ $ - s $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ $ 212.00
$ s - $ $ $ $ $ $ s 109.42 s 100.00 $
$ $
.
$ 827.16 $ 2,057.45 $ 1,932.26 $ 704.16 $ 1,519.72 $ 11,836.17 $ 7,252.55 $ 21,659.42 $ 10,148.05
Expe nse Account
Other Professional Services
Othe r Telecommuncation Services
Printing Services
'rravel. Airfare
Travel· Car Rental
Travel· Accomodations/Hotel
Travel- Per Diem
Travel- Miscellaneous
Training and Conference Fee· External
Other Miscellaneous Charges
Operating Supplies
Food and Groceries
_~<?_9~~_?~.~2~_~~~!~p!~_~~~ _ '."._._ .,_
Grand Total
Fig. 1 - Total Pi-Card Spend for District 7(April 2004 - April 2014)
• As shown in Figure 1 above, P-Card usage did not begin within District T until 1'006. The concentration of P-eard expenditure occtrrs
primarily in five categories. The Operating Supplies category of $15,243 was found to contain account classification errors for additional
Training and Conferences, Other Telecommunication Services, Travel and Travel related charges inthe amount of $4,240.38.
• During our review we noted 389 transactions totaling approximately $57,936.94 during the April 2004 through April 2014 scope period.
Based on the documentation provided, the current administration had 78% of all transactions supported by transaction logs or receipts. The
remaining 22% appeared to be County business related but had no receipts as is inaccordance with the County's P-Card policy.
• We noted that 100% of the transaction logs provided for review lacked an approval signature as directed by the P-Card Policy. This lack
of signed approval on the transaction logs were observed as commonplace and occurring frequently within most Districts. A global
recommendation for this evidentiary measure to be re-emphasized and clarified regarding who is required to do so. The P-card policy
states the cardholder's "Department Director" is to sign the transaction log. Clarification will be provided within the Districts that
Commissioners are to sign the logs inthe stead of aDepartment Director.
• Due to the limited documentation in support of significant P-Card spends for goods and services, we could not adequately assess the sales
tax exemption as stipulated in under P-Card Policy.
91 Page
D, b County Board of Commissioners Purchase •.d Review Dis~,.ct 7
District 7 2004-2014 2004 2005 2006 2007
P-Card Account P-Card %of P-Card P-'CardY-'cf P-Card Account ~of P-Card Account P-Card %of_
Expense Account P-Card Total Spend Total '5 end
""T';~I
Send Total Send Total Total
Other Professional Services 5,390.25 $ 0% $ 0% $ 0% $ $15,913.44 0%
... . . -. . . , .
;(439:84 . $ $ $ $ .OtherTelecommuncation Services 0% nja 0% $ nja
Printi,ng S~rv~~es 3,003.80 $ n/a $ 3,621.77 0% $ 0% $ $ 693.00 0%
," '0"
TraveJ - Airfare 6,147:49 $ n/a S nja $ n/a $ $ n/a
Travel - Car Rental 552.54 s n/a s n/a $ n/a $ $ n/a
Trav.e.1- Accomodati oris/Hotel 8,054.46 s nfa S n/a $ n/a s $ n/a
Travel - Per Diem 2,194.68 $ n/a $ nja $ n/a $ s n/a
Travel ~ Miscellaneous .1,337.64 $ n/a $ n/a $ n/a $ $ n/a
. . ..
9,813.80 $ $ $ $ $
l!_ainin~.-,,~<!c:onfe r~-"<.:e. ~e.~.:.§x!e~nal ...
2,547.00 iJ < '1o 8,223.81 0% 0% 9,728.16 0%
Othe r.Mis.celI ane ous .C_harge..s 1,337;64 $ 3,847.26 0% $ 2,656.17 0% $ 0% $ 145.82 $ 4,379.51 3%
Operating Supplies
15,243.38 . $ 841,50 iJ < '1o $ 7,086.76 0% $ 827.16 9% $ 1,911.63 $ 4,544.76 42%
Food and Groceries
'212~OO $ n/a $ $ n/a $ $ n/a
_~~~~Sub~'!.~ptions
209:42 $ nla $ $ 0% $ $ 399.00 0%
Grand Total 57,936.94 $ 0% $ $ $ $35,657.87 6%
District7
Expense Acc?unt. P-Card Tctal
Other Professional Services '$ . , 5,390:25.
Oih..~·;T~!~~~m·m~n~~ti·o~s~rvi ces. '$ 4,439.84
Printing Services $ 3,603.80
.Travel - ~irfare $6,14?49
Tr~~~!..~_.C:.a~. R_ent.~I. .s. . 552.54
Tr~el : ~ccomodations/H~!el s . ' 8~05~,46
Travel - Per ~.iem. $2,194.68
Travel - Misc~lI.aneDus$i;337:6Li
.T!.alni~!L~!'9_C.()~!~re.n-"e~,,-e.: E~terrl.~1 $ 9,813~lio
()t_he:rv1i~c~.I.lan~ous Charges $1,337.64,
Ope ratj ng Suppli es $ J ..!?;Z43'38:
Food and Groceries .$ . . '212.00,
B~oks-~ndS~b~cr;Ption~ $. C" ,' •• 209:;12
Grand Total 1,$ '57;936:94 :1
.::,""" -.:::=:', '" .. ""., ', . .. ..'.'
, ' -.'j' '.
,
2008 2009 2010 2011
-
..
,·P-tarei;: -;Account P.: .Ca' rd %: 6f
P-Card Account P-Card %of P-Card Account P-Card % of P-Card Account P-Card% of
Spend Total Total ~;;~~d :. Tot~ L"" ;'i,,;-"i.
Spend Total Total S;,e~d Total Total
$ $ 9,797.44 0% $ $32,772.64 0% $ - $15,240.35 0% $ 11.25 $14,363.25 0" 10
$ $ - n/a S S 220.00 0% $ - $ nla S 857.03 S 857.03 100%
..
$ $14,450.00 0% $ $ 9,571.21 0% $ - S 1,192.44 0% $ - $ 2,370.74 0%
$ S - n/a S S n/a S - S - n/a S
2,422.59 $ 2,422.59 100%
$ S - n/a S - $ - nla $ - s n/a S 539.54 S 539.54 100%
S - $ n/a S $ 381.29 0% $ - $ n/a $ 3,654,13 s 3,529.65 104%
s $ - n/a S - $ - n/a $ - $ n/a S
1,717.49 $ 1,717.49 100%
$ $ - n/a S - S 244.00 0% $ - $ n/a S 425.13 s 425.13 100%
S S 8,498.21 0% $ S
5,928.71 0% $ - S nla $ 1,600.80 $ 1,600.80 100%
$ - $ n/a S $ 964.35 0% $ 193.95 $ 193,95 100% $ 20.41 $ 20.41 100%
$1,932,26 $ 5,515.15 35% $ 704.16 $ 6,082.79 12% $ 1,325.77 $ 2,453.97 54% $ 587.80 $ 2,185.16 27%
$ $ n/a S $ n/a $ - $ n/a S $ - n/a
$ $ 589.00 0% $ $ 523.00 0% $ - $ n/a $ $ - n/a
$1,932.26 $38,849.80 5% $ 704.16 $56,687.99 1% $ 1,519.72 $19,080.71 8% $11,836.17 $30,031.79 3 9" 10
..•. :j:", ): •...
'.' .
'" ', ' , '<>. """, .""", -. , .:- ..." . ",
10 1 P age
D•....;jlbCounty Board of Commissioners
District 7
Expense Account
Other Professional Services
Other Telecomrrruncation Services
Pri ntl ng Se rvices
Travel ~Airfare
Travet- Car Rental
Travel- Accornodations/Hote l
Travel· Per Diem
Trave l- Miscellaneous
Trainin~ andConterence F~e: External
Other. Miscellaneous Char:g_es
Operating Supplies
Food and Groceries
Books and Subscriptions
P·Card Total . ..
s .5,390.25
s 4,439:~84
s 3,003:80
s 6:147.49
s . 5~2:S4
s '8,054.46
$ '2,1~~:iJ .8 .
$ i,337,,64
.s ,'9,81.3:00
$ . :'1,337:64
$:. ·····15:243,38·
.~ '~ 6~ :~ '"
Grand Total $ 57,936:94
Purchase _drd Review
Discrict 7
..
-
2012 2013 2014
P-Card Account P·Card % of P·Card J \~co~:~~ .," .P-card %'of P-Card Account P-Card %of
..
Spe·nd··· .T6tal •..:, ":T~i.il '.'
Spend Total Total Spend . Total Total
$ - $13,150.00 0% $ 3,343.00 $21,553.00 16% $ 2,036.00 $14,701.00 14%
s 983.72 $ 983.72 100% $ 1,737.25 $ 1,737.25 100"/0 s 861.84 $ 920.91 94%
$ 296.11 $ 3,387.79 9% $ 1,091.82 s 2,657.35 41% $ 1,615.87 $ 2,407.67 67%
$ 317..60 $ 317.60 100% $ 2,577.30 $ 2,577.30 100% $ 830.00 S 830.00 100%
$ 13.00 $ 13.00 100% $ $ n/a $ $ n/a
$ 281.51 s 281.51 100" 10 $ 3,063.27 $ 3,063.27 100% $ 1,055.55. $ 1,084.94 97%
$ - S n/a $ 477.19 S
477.19 100% s $ - n/a
S 198.26 $ 198.26 IDO"l. $ 615.25 s 615.25 100% $ 99.00 $ 154.01 64%
$2,574.00 S 2,574.00 1DO " 10 $ 3,419.00 $ 3,419.00 100% $ 2,220.00 $ 2,570.00 86%
0-
$ 127.98 $ 127.98 100"10 $ 786.75 $ 1,285.80 61% $ 62.73 $ 117.65 53%
$2,350.95 $ 2,500.95 94% $ 4,448.59 $ 7,103.28 63% $ 1,155.06 $ 1,799.68 64%
s $ - n/a $ - $ n/a $ 212.00 $ n/a
$ 109.42 $ 109.42 100" 10 $ 100.00 S 100.00 lDO " I o s $ n/a
s7,252.55 $23,644.23 31% $21,659.42 $44,588.69 49% $10,148.05 $24,585.86 41%
Fig, 2- Pi-Card Expenditures as Percentage oj Annual Account Total
lllPage
!DeKalbCounty Board of Commissioners Purchase Card Review District 7
IDistrict Metrics and Breakdown ofP-Card Spend for 2004 through 2014 - By Individual
District 7
Total P-Card Total P-Card
%of
%
Transactions
%of
Spend 2004thru Transactions
Breakdown by District Personnel
2004thru 2014
District
201,.
District
w/Receipts .
S. Watson - Commissioner 259 67% $ 45,6~9.31. 79% 78%
K Lajoie 46 12% $ 5,206.88. 9% 80%
Current Administration Totals
305 $ .50,896.19
78%
C. Stokes - Fonner Commissioner* **
84 21% $ 7,040.75· 12%
0%
I
Totals 389 $ 57;936.94
I
***Note: For individuals for whom no documentation was available through the current district
administration due to retirement or having been under a prior administration, we attempted to contact
them via mail to inquire of documentation availability. At the time of report release, no further
docuementation was obtained or made available.
S. Watson Total
%of
Spend
Other Professional Services $ 5,379.00 12%
Other Telecommunication Services $ 4,439.84 10%
Printing Services $ 1,705.73 4%
Travel- Airfare $ 6,147.49 13%
Travel - Car Rental $ 552.54 1%
Travel - Accomodations / Hotel $ 8,054.46 18%
Travel - Per Diem $ 2,194.68 5%
Travel- Miscellaneous $ 1,337.64 3%
Training and Conference Fee -External $ 9,813.80 21%
Other Miscellaneous Charges $ 869.89 2%
Operating Supplies $ 4,984.82 11%
Books and Subscriptions $ 209.42 0%
Total $ 45,689.31
General Observations
Combissioner Watson's P-Card activity represented 79% of the overall District expenditures while
accoi nting for 67% of the transactions. The highest concentration of spending, $18,286.81 was inthe five
categories of Travel, Training and Conferences Fee - External, Other Professional Services, Other
Telecommunication Services and Operating Supplies.
Ex~ended Review Details
O ur review of the Operating Supplies account revealed an additional $2,175 in travel related expenses
that was improperly coded. We noted $9,806.35 or 31% of transactions without accompanying receipts.
Based on observed vendors, transactions lacking invoices appeared to have a County business purpose,
however, the lack of accompanying receipts limited the provision of reasonable assurance.
1211 P age
I DeKalb County Board of Commissioners-Purchase Card Review District 7.
Potih and Procedures Compliance
Supporting receipts were missing fromsubstantially all of the months reviewed. Therefore, asubstantial
number of other expenditures not supported by appropriate documentation could not be asserted as
County business expenses.
C. Stokes Total
%of
1
Spend
Other Miscellaneous Charges $ 339.77 5%
Operating Supplies $ 6,700.98 95%
Total $ 7,040.75
General Observations
Former Commissioner Stokes's P-Card activity represented 21% of the overall District expenditures
while also accounting for 12% of the transactions. The concentration of her P-Card expenditures was
categorized as Operating Supplies. Based on observed vendors, transactions lacking invoices appeared to
have a County business purpose; however, lack of accompanying receipts limited the provision of
reasonable assurance.
K laJ oie Total
%of
Spend
Other Professional Services $
11.25 0%
Printing Services $ 1,298.07
25%
Other Miscellaneous Charges $ 127.98 2%
Operating Supplies $ 3,557.58 68%
Food and Groceries $ 212.00
4%
Total $ 5,206.88
G~neralObservations
Employee K. Lajoie's P-Card activity represented 12% of the overall District expenditures while also
accounting for 9%ofthe transactions. The expenditures were primarily for office supporting supplies and
printing services.
Extended Review Details
A card holder from 2011 to present, we noted transactions totaling $1,303.86, or 20% of transactions
without accompanying receipts. Of these 9transactions we noted they are primarily composed of office
supplies. Based on observed vendors, transactions lacking invoices appeared to have a County business
p~rpose, however, the lack of accompanying receipts limited the provision of reasonable assurance.
13IPage
I
"'/ Dekalb County Board of Commissioners Purchase Card Review
Non Pi Card Expense Review I
DuLng the scope period of 2004 - 2014, we reviewed invoices from larger volume District 7 vendor
activity to ascertain the nature of expenses ,or services provided. All paid vendor invoices reviewed were
identified with County business related expenses or services. The vendors provided avariety of services
including the following; graphic design, bUblic relations consulting, travel services for County staff,
other consulting services, printing, catering for government meetings, technology equipment suppliers,
offiice supplies, and other services. No hnusual activity was noted for the vendor invoice activity
reviewed. I
Fori the purpose of this report, a vendor ~sclassified as a person or business receiving payment from
DeKalb County through the Accounts Payable process. Employees (i.e. former Commissioner Stokes)
submitting reimbursement requests through the County's Oracle IExpense System for expenses incurred
while conducting County business are shown asvendors. We note that all vendor activity occurring prior
to 2010 was prior to the Commissioner Watson's administration.
AADCO PRTNTING & MAILING
56,708.20 December 2004 thru April2014
10 $ 58,285.00 December 2008 thru December 2009
BANK OF AMERICA NA 398 s
RENEE SMITH· 54 $ 27,540.00 May 2009 thru May 2010
17,813.48 November 2008thru December 2009
OFFICE DEPOT INC 439 $ 18,304.42 December 2004 thru April 2014
17,091.55 October 2005 thru September 2006
TONZA CLARK" 140 s
16,391.67 October 2004 thru October 2006
A TLANTA MAILING & FULFILLMENT INC 9 $
15,964.76 February 2005 thru October 2008
WALLACE GRAPHICS INC 19 $
14,218.71 J anuary 2005 thru March 2006
DECATUR TRAVEL AGENCY 22 $
WRIDENNIS· 31 $
10,902.10 Octo-ber 2004 thru October 2009
DELL MARKETING LP 15 s 11,083.94 J une 2004 thru February 2011
8,849.22 March 2006 thru October 2013
CONNIE] STOKES" 38 $
8,225.00 April 2011 thru April 2014
DECA TUR A TLANT A PRINTING 53 $
7,825.00 Apri12011 thru April 2014
ELLERYHILL* 27 s
Total
289,203.05
BROADWA Y CONSULTING GROUP
36 $
*Note: We identified persons who worked for the Districts on atemporary or consistent basis without the
classification of full time DeKalb County employee. These individuals were identified as having a 1099
fidng with DeKalb County and are considered professional service providers. Where available, we
reviewed a sample of their invoices and noted the description of professional services to include: IT
seivices, professional writing and public relations consulting, website design and maintenance, and
community organization and strategy.
1,291 : s
**Note: We identified full time employees who incurred County business related expenses which were
submitted through the County's Oracle !Expense System for reimbursement. District personnel can
submit items for reimbursement directly for approval through the Accounts Payable system. These
expenses are not Purchase Card initiated transactions, but instead out of pocket expenses which are
I
submitted with supporting documentation, and reviewed by the Accounts Payable Department using
similar stringent guidelines to ensure they are validprior to approval and reimbursement.
I
I I
DeKalb County Board of CO-rYllnissionersPurchase Card Review District 7
Comments for Each Vendor
Ba1k of America NA
I I Amount is for total payments to Bank of America for Purchase Card expenditures during the
scope period.
I
l
C
°Professional printing and mailing services were provided by AADCO Printing and Mailing frob
December 2008 through December 2009. We reviewed the December 2009 invoice for $20,l42
with a description of services including " Printing and mailing for District 7 Year-end Report,
i
postage and newsletters. "
O J ) ce Depot I nc.
Office supplies were purchased with Office Depot from December 2004 - April 2014. Total
vendor invoice payment activity was $18,304. The supply invoice activity ranged from $1 -
$1,046. Supply expenses are customary for County operations.
Wallace Graphic I nc.
Atlanta Mailing & Fulfillment I nc. I -
f) The invoice for this expense item Iwassubject to the 5-year retention policy and was remov d
fromrecords; no invoice was available for review.
<l> The invoice for this expense itemIwassubject to the 5-year retention policy and was remOVld
fromrecords; no invoice was availa~le for review.
Decatur Travel Agency
o The invoice for this expense item was subject to the 5-year retention policy and was removed
fromrecords; no invoice was available for review.
Dell Marketing LP
I !l Computer equipment was procured with Dell Marketing from J une 2004 - February 2011. Total
vendor invoice payment activity was $11,084. The vendor invoice activity ranged from $110-
$3,604. We reviewed an April 2009 invoice for pc equipment purchased and installed for County
staff.
Dertur Atlanta Printing
~ Printing services were provided by Decatur Atlanta Printing from March 2006 - October 2013.
Total vendor payment activity was $8,849. The vendor invoice activity reflected arange from$12
- $750 which appears reasonable for the scope of services provided.
Broadway Consulting Group
I . Community development services were provided by the Broadway Consulting Group during
April 2011 through April 2014 totaling $7,825. We reviewed two invoices with service
descriptions of " J uly 2013 and March 2014 Community Work for District 7, and community
consulting fee. J J
15 I P age
I