DeKalb County P-Card Audit
Mark Niesse and Johnny Edwards wrote an article titled, “Audit: Spending reports sloppy” on October 24, 2014 in the AJC newspaper. The front page article was an investigative piece highlighting the results of a ten year audit of the Board of Commissioners, their office staff and the clerk’s office purchase card usage.
DeKalb County has been lax in its oversight of spending by elected commissioners, and some officials frequently paid for items on their government debit cards without submitting required receipts, according to an audit released Thursday.
The audit shows the seven commissioners used taxpayer funds to pay for everything from steakhouse dinners to speeding tickets…
The DeKalb commission submitted receipts for just 57% of the transactions. However, the p-card spending by commissioners include (according to the AJC):
1. Elaine Boyer: $103,665 with 40 percent supported by receipts
2. Jeff Rader: $34,606 with 77 percent supported by receipts
3. Larry Johnson: $78,757, with 97 percent supported by receipts
4. Sharon Barnes Sutton: $108,720, with 25 percent supported by receipts
5. Lee May: $57,283, with 39 percent supported by receipts
6. Kathie Gannon: $26,327, with 97 percent supported by receipts
7. Stan Watson: $57,937, with 78 percent supported by receipts
Original Title
DeKalb County P-Card Audit: Commissioner Stan Watson
DeKalb County P-Card Audit
Mark Niesse and Johnny Edwards wrote an article titled, “Audit: Spending reports sloppy” on October 24, 2014 in the AJC newspaper. The front page article was an investigative piece highlighting the results of a ten year audit of the Board of Commissioners, their office staff and the clerk’s office purchase card usage.
DeKalb County has been lax in its oversight of spending by elected commissioners, and some officials frequently paid for items on their government debit cards without submitting required receipts, according to an audit released Thursday.
The audit shows the seven commissioners used taxpayer funds to pay for everything from steakhouse dinners to speeding tickets…
The DeKalb commission submitted receipts for just 57% of the transactions. However, the p-card spending by commissioners include (according to the AJC):
1. Elaine Boyer: $103,665 with 40 percent supported by receipts
2. Jeff Rader: $34,606 with 77 percent supported by receipts
3. Larry Johnson: $78,757, with 97 percent supported by receipts
4. Sharon Barnes Sutton: $108,720, with 25 percent supported by receipts
5. Lee May: $57,283, with 39 percent supported by receipts
6. Kathie Gannon: $26,327, with 97 percent supported by receipts
7. Stan Watson: $57,937, with 78 percent supported by receipts
DeKalb County P-Card Audit
Mark Niesse and Johnny Edwards wrote an article titled, “Audit: Spending reports sloppy” on October 24, 2014 in the AJC newspaper. The front page article was an investigative piece highlighting the results of a ten year audit of the Board of Commissioners, their office staff and the clerk’s office purchase card usage.
DeKalb County has been lax in its oversight of spending by elected commissioners, and some officials frequently paid for items on their government debit cards without submitting required receipts, according to an audit released Thursday.
The audit shows the seven commissioners used taxpayer funds to pay for everything from steakhouse dinners to speeding tickets…
The DeKalb commission submitted receipts for just 57% of the transactions. However, the p-card spending by commissioners include (according to the AJC):
1. Elaine Boyer: $103,665 with 40 percent supported by receipts
2. Jeff Rader: $34,606 with 77 percent supported by receipts
3. Larry Johnson: $78,757, with 97 percent supported by receipts
4. Sharon Barnes Sutton: $108,720, with 25 percent supported by receipts
5. Lee May: $57,283, with 39 percent supported by receipts
6. Kathie Gannon: $26,327, with 97 percent supported by receipts
7. Stan Watson: $57,937, with 78 percent supported by receipts
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 20042014 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~!~~~mm~n~~tio~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 PCard 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 PCard % of PCard J \~co~:~~ .," .P-card %'of P-Card Account P-Card %of .. Spend .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