CITY OF HARTFORD
 
Date:
 April 27, 2015
 To:
 James Rovella, Chief, Hartford Police Department
From:
 H. Patrick Campbell, Chief Auditor 
 Telephone:
 860.757.9951
 Subject:
 Special Review of the Accounts and Operations of the Hartford Police Department Shooting Range At your request we performed a special review of the accounts and operations of the Hartford Police Department (HPD) Shooting Range. The scope of our review concentrated on the  purchase and use of and the accounting for ammunition by the HPD. Background The HPD maintains a shooting range which is located at 50 Jennings Road in Hartford, CT. The shooting range is used primarily for police officer firearm training and certification of purposes. Each police officer is required to meet and maintain State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection Police Officer Standards and Training Council (POST) firearm certification requirements. This requires each police officer to shoot a designated number of rounds of ammunition per year and achieve a minimum standard score. According to HPD management, however, they are bound by a more stringent firearm training and qualification requirement that exceeds the State of Connecticut standards as a result of an agreement in the settlement of the Maria Cintron, Et Al vs. Thomas Vaughn, Et Al law suit. A designated police officer is responsible for all aspects of the management and oversight of the shooting range. This includes, but is not limited to, purchasing, storing and distributing ammunition and making arrangements for and overseeing required firearms training. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 HPD budgeted and paid $115,000 and $115,131 for ammunitions  purchases respectively. Potential issues and concerns initially came to light regarding the shooting range accounts and operations during an inspection that was initiated by HPD management in March 2014 after a change in firearms training and qualification requirements. General In general, we found that the management oversight of and controls over the shooting range accounts and operations and its police officer administrator (the shooting range administrator) were not adequate and needed significant improvement. We noted that policies, procedures and controls over the purchase and use of and accounting for ammunition by the HPD and other related key functions of the shooting range were not documented or sufficient to manage or control the operation of the shooting range. In addition, documentation relating to ammunition
 
INTERDEPARTMENTAL
 
MEMORANDUM
 
 
 2  purchases, the related inventory and subsequent distribution for use was not adequate to ensure that all ammunition was properly accounted for, used for HPD purposes and not misappropriated. Of particular concern is that this was not detected earlier because the shooting range administrator was circumventing the budget by purchasing ammunition on account without the knowledge or consent of HPD management. In addition, it appears that the shooting range administrator was purchasing more than twice as much ammunition than was necessary or required to meet police officer firearm training and qualification requirements and operate the shooting range. HPD management indicated that many of these issues were carried over from  prior HPD administrations. Review Results Various tests of the purchase and use of ammunition and reviews of the administration and oversight of the accounts and operations of the shooting range disclosed the following: 1.
 
Shooting Range Accounts and Operations a.
 
Policies, procedures and controls over the key operations and functions of the shooting range were not documented and needed significant improvement.  b.
 
The shooting range administrator did not obtain or maintain documentation to support the periodic purchases of ammunition. It should also be noted, that the system and methods used by the vendor to account for purchases on account were antiquated and insufficient to effectively support these transactions. As a result, other than relying on representations made by the vendor and shooting range administrator there is no other way to independently verify the accuracy and propriety of the amount of ammunition  purchased, invoiced and subsequently paid for by the HPD. c.
 
When the shooting range administrator purchased ammunition from the vendor he did not request or obtain a receipt detailing the date of the transaction or the items  purchased. In addition, the vendor did not record these transactions in an automated  point of sale system or application. The only documentation created and maintained
 by the vendor to support these transactions was a manual notation on a 5” by 8” lined
 piece of paper. This document was not reviewed, approved or obtained and maintained by the shooting range administrator to subsequently verify and approve the transactions for payment. d.
 
The shooting range administrator did not account for and maintain records of the inventory of ammunition purchased, held in storage and distributed to police officers for firearm training or other purposes. As a result, there is no documentation to support the receipt and recording of ammunition into inventory after purchases were made, the removal of ammunition from inventory and assignment to police officers for firearms training or the ongoing perpetual inventory of ammunition on-hand in storage. e.
 
Rather than ordering ammunition and having the vendor deliver it to the HPD, the shooting range administrator was driving up to
the vendor’s store and warehouse in
Greenfield, MA as frequently as once a week to purchase ammunition. This was both
 
 3 unnecessary and costly. We estimated that this cost the City/HPD at least $110 per trip or more than $3,000 per year. 2.
 
Shooting Range Administrator a.
 
Based on standard firearm training qualification requirements and discussions with HPD management it appears that the shooting range administrator purchased considerably more ammunition than was necessary or required to meet firearm training and qualification requirements and operate the shooting range. According to State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection POST range qualification requirements, on an annual basis, each police officer must shoot four courses consisting of 60 rounds of ammunition. According to HPD management, however, they are bound by a more stringent firearm training and qualification requirement as a result of an agreement in the settlement of the Maria Cintron, Et Al vs. Thomas Vaughn, Et Al law suit.
According to the settlement “The Hartford
Police Department has implemented a change in its firearms training schedule in order to improve the efficiency of officers in the familiarization and use of firearms. Each officer shall now qualify every three months, firing a total of one hundred and
twenty rounds from his issued weapon”
. During the six fiscal years ended December 31, 2014 the HPD purchased an average of about 485,000 rounds of ammunition or about 970 rounds of ammunition per police officer assuming a force of 500 police officers. Based on the state training and qualification standards we estimated that the HPD would be required to use a minimum of 120,000 rounds of ammunition a year. Based on the Cintron agreement we estimated that the HPD would be required to use a minimum of 240,000 rounds of ammunition per year. According the HPD management, however, they were only shooting four 60 round courses per year per officer for qualification purposes to reduce ammunition costs. It should be noted that this met the state training and qualification requirements. In addition, during  preliminary discussions with HPD management they estimated that the HPD was using closer to 180,000 rounds per year or about 360 rounds of ammunition per police officer as a result of additional training on the new hand guns and certain police officers not meeting qualification requirements on the first try. Again, it appears that the shooting range administrator was purchasing more than twice as much ammunition annually than was necessary or required to meet police officer firearm training and qualification requirements and operate the shooting range.  b.
 
The HPD has an established annual budget for the purchase of ammunition. For the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 the HPD’s budget for ammunition was $
115,000. As with other items purchased by departments throughout the City the standard policy and procedure for ammunition is to purchase and pay for what is needed on an ongoing basis while staying within budget or requesting revisions to the budget if deemed necessary. We noted, however, that the shooting range administrator circumvented the established budget and applicable policies and procedures by making arrangements with the vendor to purchase ammunition on account and to pay for it at a later date and in a subsequent fiscal year. This allowed the shooting range administrator to exceed the annual ammunition budget without the knowledge or consent of HPD management. When this came to light by HPD management in
View on Scribd