TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

 

 

Attestation Review of the Internal Revenue Service’s Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Accounting of Drug Control Funds and Related Performance

 

 

 

January 31, 2011

 

Reference Number:  2011-10-021

 

 

This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration disclosure review process and information determined to be restricted from public release has been redacted from this document.

 

Phone Number   |  202-622-6500

Email Address   |  inquiries@tigta.treas.gov

Web Site           |  http://www.tigta.gov

 

 

HIGHLIGHTS

ATTESTATION REVIEW OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE’S FISCAL YEAR 2010 ANNUAL ACCOUNTING OF DRUG CONTROL FUNDS AND RELATED PERFORMANCE

 

Highlights

Final Report issued on January 31, 2011

Highlights of Reference Number:  2011-10-021 to the Internal Revenue Service Chief Financial Officer and Chief, Criminal Investigation.

IMPACT ON TAXPAYERS

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reported that it expended $61.3 million on Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)-related activities and participated in 405 ONDCP-related cases that resulted in convictions in Fiscal Year 2010.  Based on our review, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the assertions in the Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report are not appropriately presented in all material respects in accordance with ONDCP-established criteria.  Complete and reliable financial and performance information is critical to the IRS’s ability to accurately report on the results of its operations to both internal and external stakeholders, including taxpayers.

WHY TIGTA DID THE AUDIT

This review was conducted as required by the ONDCP and the ONDCP Circular:  Drug Control Accounting, dated May 1, 2007.  The National Drug Control Program agencies are required to submit to the Director of the ONDCP, not later than February 1 of each year, a detailed accounting of all funds expended (the ONDCP Circular requires amounts obligated) during the previous fiscal year.  Agencies also need to identify and document performance measure(s) that justify the results associated with these expenditures.

The Chief Financial Officer, or another accountable senior level executive, of each agency for which a Detailed Accounting Submission is required, shall provide a Performance Summary Report to the Director of the ONDCP.  Further, the Circular requires that each report be provided to the agency’s Inspector General for the purpose of expressing a conclusion about the reliability of each assertion made in the report prior to its submission.

WHAT TIGTA FOUND

Based on our review, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the assertions in the Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report are not appropriately presented in all material respects in accordance with ONDCP-established criteria.  The IRS reported that it expended $61.3 million on ONDCP-related activities and completed 788 ONDCP-related investigations in Fiscal Year 2010.  The IRS also reported it participated in 405 ONDCP-related cases that resulted in convictions, with an 82.3 percent conviction rate.

WHAT TIGTA RECOMMENDED

TIGTA made no recommendations in the report.  However, key IRS officials reviewed this report prior to its issuance and agreed with the facts and conclusions presented.

 

January 31, 2011

 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

                                         CHIEF, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

 

FROM:                            Michael R. Phillips /s/ Michael R. Phillips

Deputy Inspector General for Audit

 

SUBJECT:                    Final Audit Report – Attestation Review of the Internal Revenue Service’s Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Accounting of Drug Control Funds and Related Performance (Audit # 201010021)

 

This report presents the results of our attestation review of the Internal Revenue Service’s Fiscal Year 2010 Office of National Drug Control Policy Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report (the Report).  The purpose of this review was to express a conclusion about the reliability of each assertion made in the Report.  This review was included in our Fiscal Year 2011 Annual Audit Plan and addresses the major management challenge of Leveraging Data to Improve Program Effectiveness and Reduce Costs.  The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration made no recommendations as a result of the work performed during this review.  However, key Internal Revenue Service officials reviewed this report prior to its issuance and agreed with the facts and conclusions presented.

Copies of this report are also being sent to the Internal Revenue Service managers affected by the report results.  Please contact me at (202) 622-6510 if you have questions or Nancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Management Services and Exempt Organizations), at (202) 622-8500.

 

 

Table of Contents

 

Background

Results of Review

Summary of the Attestation Review of the Fiscal Year 2010 Office of National Drug Control Policy Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report

Appendices

Appendix I – Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Appendix II – Major Contributors to This Report

Appendix III – Report Distribution List

Appendix IV – Internal Revenue Service’s Fiscal Year 2010 Detailed Accounting Submission and Related Performance Summary Report

 

 

Abbreviations

 

FY

Fiscal Year

IRS

Internal Revenue Service

ONDCP

Office of National Drug Control Policy

 

 

Background

 

National Drug Control Program agencies are required to submit to the Director of the ONDCP, not later than February 1 of each year, a detailed accounting of all funds expended during the previous fiscal year. 

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988[1] establishes as a policy goal the creation of a drug-free America.  A key provision of the Act is the establishment of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to set priorities, implement a national strategy, and certify Federal Government drug control budgets.  The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) supports the National Drug Control Strategy through its continued support of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force.  The mission of Criminal Investigation in Federal law enforcement’s anti-drug efforts is to reduce or eliminate the financial gains (profits) of major narcotics trafficking and money laundering organizations through the use of its unique financial investigative expertise and statutory jurisdiction.

This review was conducted as required by the ONDCP[2] and the ONDCP Circular:  Drug Control Accounting, dated May 1, 2007.  The National Drug Control Program agencies[3] are required to submit to the Director of the ONDCP, not later than February 1 of each year, a detailed accounting of all funds expended (the ONDCP Circular requires amounts obligated) during the previous fiscal year.  Agencies also need to identify and document performance measure(s) that justify the results associated with these expenditures.  The Chief Financial Officer, or another accountable senior level executive, of each agency for which a Detailed Accounting Submission is required shall provide a Performance Summary Report to the Director of the ONDCP.  Further, the Circular requires that each report be provided to the agency’s Inspector General for the purpose of expressing a conclusion about the reliability of each assertion made in the report prior to its submission.  Beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2006, ONDCP funding became a part of the IRS budget.  In prior years, IRS-related ONDCP funds were reimbursed by the Department of Justice.

This review was performed at the IRS Headquarters offices of the Chief Financial Officer and Chief, Criminal Investigation, in Washington, D.C., during the period August 2010 through January 2011.  Our review was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  In general, our review procedures were limited to inquiries and analytical procedures appropriate for an attestation review based upon the criteria specified in the ONDCP Circular.  Detailed information on our audit objective, scope, and methodology is presented in Appendix I.  Major contributors to this report are listed in Appendix II.

 

 

Results of Review

 

Summary of the Attestation Review of the Fiscal Year 2010 Office of National Drug Control Policy Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report  

We reviewed the assertions in the IRS’s ONDCP Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report (the Report) for FY 2010, which ended September 30, 2010, (see Appendix IV).  This Report was prepared pursuant to 21 U.S.C. Section 1704 (d) and the ONDCP Circular:  Drug Control Accounting, dated May 1, 2007.  The IRS is responsible for preparing the report.  The IRS reported that it expended $61.3 million on ONDCP-related activities and completed 788 ONDCP-related investigations in FY 2010.  For FY 2010, the IRS also reported it participated in 405 ONDCP-related cases that resulted in convictions, with an 82.3 percent conviction rate.

Our review was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  An attestation review is substantially less in scope than an examination, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the ONDCP Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report.  Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. 

The Report assertions, as required by Section 6.b. of the ONDCP Circular, include statements that the methodology used is reasonable and accurate, including explanations and documentation of any estimation assumptions used; the methodology disclosed was the actual methodology used; and the data presented are associated with obligations against a financial plan that reflects changes, if made.  The assertions, as required by Section 7.b. of the ONDCP Circular, also include statements that the performance reporting system is appropriate and applied, explanations for not meeting any performance targets are reasonable, and the methodology used to establish performance targets is reasonable and applied.  ONDCP-established criteria require well-documented sources of data, documented and explained calculations, and complete and fair presentation of data from financial systems.

Based on our review, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the assertions in the Report are not appropriately presented in all material respects in accordance with ONDCP-established criteria. 

While this report is an unrestricted public document, the information it contains is intended solely for the use of the IRS, the United States Department of the Treasury, the ONDCP, and Congress.  It is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

 

Appendix I

 

Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

 

The overall objective of this review was to perform an attestation review of the IRS’s reporting of FY 2010 ONDCP expenditures and related performance for the purpose of expressing a conclusion about the reliability of each assertion made in the Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report.  To accomplish our objective, we:

I.                   Obtained an understanding of the process used to prepare the FY 2010 Detailed Accounting Submission and Performance Summary Report.

A.    Discussed the process used to record ONDCP expenditures and performance information with responsible IRS personnel.

B.     Obtained documents such as written procedures and supporting worksheets that evidence the methodology used.

II.                Evaluated the reasonableness of the drug methodology process for detailed accounting submissions.

A.    Reviewed data supporting the Detailed Accounting Submission to establish its relationship to the amounts being reported.

B.     Verified whether all drug-related activities are reflected in the drug methodology.

III.             Performed sufficient verifications of reported obligations for detailed accounting submissions to support our conclusion on the reliability of the assertions.

A.    Verified that the Detailed Accounting Submission included all of the elements specified in Section 6 of the ONDCP Circular:  Drug Control Accounting.

B.     Verified the mathematical accuracy of the obligations presented in the Table of FY 2010 Drug Control Obligations.

C.     Traced the information contained in the Table of FY 2010 Drug Control Obligations to the supporting documentation.

IV.             Evaluated the reasonableness of the methodology used to report performance information for National Drug Control Program activities.

A.    Reviewed data supporting the Performance Summary Report to establish its relationship to the National Drug Control Program activities.

B.     Verified whether all drug-related activities are reflected in the performance information.

V.                Performed sufficient verifications of reported performance information to support our conclusion on the reliability of the assertions.

A.    Verified that the Performance Summary Report included all of the elements specified in Section 7 of the ONDCP Circular:  Drug Control Accounting.

B.     Verified the mathematical accuracy of the performance information presented.

C.     Traced the performance information presented to the supporting documentation.

D.    Reviewed the supporting documentation for reasonableness.

 

Appendix II

 

Major Contributors to This Report

 

Nancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Management Services and Exempt Organizations)

Jeffrey M. Jones, Director

Anthony J. Choma, Audit Manager

Angela Garner, Lead Auditor

Mary F. Herberger, Senior Auditor

Rashme Sawhney, Auditor

 

Appendix III

 

Report Distribution List

 

Commissioner  C

Office of the Commissioner – Attn:  Chief of Staff  C

Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support  OS

Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement  SE

Deputy Chief, Criminal Investigation  SE:CI

Deputy Chief Financial Officer  OS:CFO

Chief Counsel  CC

National Taxpayer Advocate  TA

Director, Office of Legislative Affairs  CL:LA
Director, Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis  RAS:O

Office of Internal Control  OS:CFO:CPIC:IC

Audit Liaisons:

            Chief, Criminal Investigation  SE:CI

Chief Financial Officer  OS:CFO

 

Appendix IV

 

Internal Revenue Service’s Fiscal Year 2010
Detailed Accounting Submission and
Related Performance Summary Report

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224

 

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

January 12, 2011

 

MEMORANDUM FOR MICHAEL PHILLIPS

     DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR AUDIT

 

FROM:                            Gregory E. Kane /s/ Gregory E. Kane

    Acting, Chief Financial Officer

 

SUBJECT:                       Annual Accounting and Authentication of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Drug Control Funds, Related Performance and Assertion of Performance Information

 

The IRS is resubmitting its Detailed Accounting Submission of Drug Control Funds to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) in compliance with Section 8, Inspector General Authentication, of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Circular: Drug Control Accounting, dated May 1, 2007. This circular requires TIGTA to perform an attestation review before the IRS submits this document to the ONDCP. This resubmission reflects the changes to the report agreed upon at the January 5, 2011, conference call with the IRS Chief Financial Officer, Criminal Investigation, and TIGTA staff. After the IRS receives TIGTA's conclusion as to the reliability of each assertion, I will forward the document to the ONDCP.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 622-6400, or have a member of your staff contact Ursula Gillis, Acting Associate Chief Financial Officer for Corporate Budget, at (202) 622-8770.

Attachments

Attachment 1

January 7, 2011 (UPDATE)

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

Annual Accounting and Authentication of Drug Control Funds and Related Performance

 

DETAILED ACCOUNTING SUBMISSION

 

A. Table of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Drug Control Obligations

Drug Resources by Function              ($000)

 

Investigations                                      $61,305

Total                                                    $61,305

 

Drug Resources by Decision Unit

Narcotics Crimes                                 $61,305

Total                                                    $61,305

 

1) Drug Methodology

a) All Drug Control Obligations (the resources appropriated and available for these activities) are reported under one Drug Control Function and one Budget Decision Unit, as shown in the above chart.

b) The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Drug Control Budget encompasses the Criminal Investigation (CI) Narcotics-related program. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) requires CI to report only on the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) portion of the Narcotics program. CI's overall Direct Investigative Time (DIT) applied to narcotics cases for FY 2010 was 11.2 percent of total DIT. The OCDETF subcomponent of this program was 10.4 percent of total DIT or 93 percent of the total narcotics DIT.

The methodology for computing the resources appropriated and realized for the OCDETF program is the application of the DIT attributable to OCDETF cases and applying the DIT percentage to the total realized appropriated resources, reduced by reimbursable funds and Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) resources, for the year for which the resources are being reported. The result is determined to be the amount of resources expended on OCDETF cases. This methodology has been approved by CI, the IRS Chief Financial Officer, and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (T1GTA) during the FY 2006 ONDCP attestation review.

Fiscal Year 2006 was the first year OCDETF funding became a permanent part of the CI's budget. In the past, OCDETF was a reimbursable program administered by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Attachment 1

January 7, 2011 (UPDATE)

2) Methodology Modifications

    None

3) Material Weaknesses or Other Findings

     None

4) Reprogramming or Transfers

     None

5) Other Disclosures

     None

B. Assertions

1) Obligations by Budget Decision Unit

Obligations reported by the Budget Decision Unit are a result of applying DIT data derived from the Criminal Investigation Management Information System (CIMIS) to the actual obligations from the CI realized Financial Plan, less reimbursements and EITC funds.

2) Drug Methodology

The methodology used to calculate obligations of prior-year budgetary resources is reasonable and accurate.

a) Data

Data is derived from CIMIS to determine the DIT applied to the OCDETF activities. Each special agent submits CIMIS time reports monthly detailing their activities relating to specific investigations. Each investigation is associated with a specific program and sub-program area. The percentage of DIT applied to each program area is calculated monthly with a final annual percentage determined after the close of the fiscal year. The annual percentage of DIT relating to OCDETF sub-program area items is applied to the total resources expended for FY 2010 in the CI budget (excluding reimbursables and EITC). These OCDETF percentages include High Intensity/OCDETF, OCDETF, and Terrorism/OCDETF program areas, These OCDETF DIT percentages are used to determine the total resources expended on the OCDETF program.

Attachment 1

January 7. 2011 (UPDATE)

b) Other Estimation Methods

    None

c) Financial Systems

The IRS Integrated Financial System (IFS) is the final authority for the IRS resource obligations and yields data which fairly presents drug related obligation estimates.

3) Application of Drug Methodology

The methodology disclosed in this section was the actual methodology used to generate the required table and meets all requirements described in section 6 of the ONDCP Circular: Drug Control Accounting. Calculations made using this methodology are sufficiently documented to independently reproduce all data and ensure consistency between reporting years.

4) Reprogramming or Transfers

The data presented is associated with obligations against a financial plan and properly reflects any revisions occurring during the fiscal year.

5) Fund Control Notices

CI asserts the data presented is associated with obligations against a financial plan that fully complied with all fund control notices issued by the Director under 21 U.S.C. section 1703(f) and Section 8 of the ONDCP Circular: Budget Execution, as applicable.

C. Performance Summary Report

1) Performance Reporting

a) Performance Measures

The IRS reviewed performance measures used by other agencies that support the National Drug Control Strategy as well as budget-level performance measures that are already used to address the effectiveness of CI activities. As a result of the review, the IRS determined that, in addition to the number of subject criminal investigations completed, the most appropriate performance measures to evaluate its contribution to the National Drug Control Strategy were number of convictions and conviction rate. These are both budget-level performance measures already used by CI to evaluate its performance as a whole. Criminal investigations completed for the OCDETF

 

Attachment 1

January 7, 2011 (UPDATE)

program and all other programs are defined as total subject criminal investigations completed during the fiscal year, including those resulting in a prosecution recommendation to the DOJ, discontinuance due to lack of evidence, or a finding that the allegation was false (or other reasons). Convictions are defined as the total number of subject criminal investigations with CIMIS status codes of guilty plea, nolo-contendere, judge guilty, or jury guilty. Conviction rate is defined as the total number of subject criminal investigations with CIMIS status codes of guilty plea, nolo-contendere, judge guilty, or jury guilty divided by these status codes and nolle prosequi, judge dismissed, and jury acquittal.

These measures assess CI's performance of its mission to serve the public by conducting investigations of potential violations of the Internal Revenue Code and related financial crimes (which OCDETF cases are an important component), to foster confidence in the tax system and enhance voluntary compliance. In addition, it reduces or eliminates the profits and financial gains from narcotics trafficking and money laundering.

CI's Narcotics Program supports the goals of the National Drug Control Strategy and the National Money Laundering Strategy by seeking to reduce or eliminate the profits and financial gains from narcotics trafficking and money laundering organizations. CI has participated in the OCDETF program since its inception in 1982 and focuses its narcotics efforts almost exclusively on high-priority OCDETF cases where its contributions will have the greatest impact.

b) Prior Years Performance Targets and Results

Before FY 2008, CI did not set performance targets for the OCDETF Program. However, CI projected for completed investigations which were used as benchmarks. The OCDETF resources became a part of tile IRS budget in FY 2006. Previously, the IRS portion of the OCDETF resources was included in the DOJ appropriation and was reported as part of the DOJ budget submission. The completed investigations for FY 2006 through FY 2009 are shown below:

FY 2006

FY 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009

728

654

824

652

 

As a result of budgetary constraints, CI reduced its narcotics DIT (9 to 11 percent of total) in FY 2006 and FY 2007. In response to the Attorney General's request for the commitment of additional CI resources to OCDETF cases, CI agreed to increase the amount of DIT devoted to narcotics investigations in FY 2008 to between 11 and 13 percent of total DIT. CI maintained this same level through FY 2010.

Attachment 1

January 5, 2011 (UPDATE)

FY 2009 OCDETF

Targets & Performance

FY 2009 OCDETF Targets

Based on Status Date as

of September 30, 2009

Investigations Completed

710

652

Convictions

460

462

Conviction Rate

85%

84.93%

 

c) Current Year Performance Targets and Results

Based on a recommendation from the FY 2008 audit and attestation, to evaluate the cause of the delayed case postings identified and evaluate the feasibility of either improving the timeliness of case postings and/or adjusting its year-end performance information to reflect timing differences caused by late postings of case information, CI calculated its year-end performance using the status date of investigations. The results for FY 2010 are shown below:

 

FY 2010 OCDETF

Targets & Performance

FY 2010  OCDETF Targets

Based on Status Date as

of November 02, 2010

Investigations Completed

680

788

Convictions

480

405

Conviction Rate

85%

82.3%

 

The conviction measure was met in the majority of CI Field Offices nationwide. Several factors impacted a few field offices resulting in the overall conviction measure being slightly under the targeted goal. The primary factor impacting convictions was an increased rate of United States Attorney charge dismissals with an initiative to clear fugitive pipeline cases being a primary contributing factor thereof.

The factors that impacted convictions and conviction rate results for FY 2010 should not affect the performance outcome for FY 2011.

d) Fiscal Year 2011 Performance Targets OCDETF Cases

Criminal Investigations Completed

680

Convictions

460

Conviction Rate

85%

 

e) Quality of Performance Data

To ensure the reliability of the data, all cases have unique numbers assigned in CIMIS which contain validity and business rule checks. The CIMIS database tracks the status of the investigations from initiation through final disposition. The system has sufficient internal checks and balances to assure status updates are input in the proper order.

Attachment 1

January 7, 2011 (UPDATE)

D. Annual Accounting and Authentication of Drug Control Funds and Related Performance

1) Performance Measures Assertions

a) Performance Reporting System is appropriate and applied

The IRS uses the CIMIS to capture performance information accurately and that system was properly applied to generate the performance data.

b) Explanations for not meeting performance targets are reasonable

Explanations offered for failing to meet a performance target and for any recommendations concerning plans and schedules for meeting future targets or for revising or eliminating performance targets are reasonable.

c) Methodology to establish performance targets is reasonable and applied

The methodology described in the Performance Summary Report for FY 2010 to establish performance targets for the current year is reasonable given past performance and available resources.

d) Adequate performance measures exist for all significant drug control activities

The IRS established at least one acceptable performance measure for each Drug Control Decision Unit identified in its Detailed Accounting of FY 2010 Drug Control Funds as required by section 6a(1)(A) for which a significant amount of obligations were incurred in the previous year.

2) Criteria for Assertions

a) Data

The sources of the data used are well documented and the data used in the report is clearly identified and is the most recent available.

b) Estimation Methods

Not applicable.

c) Reporting Systems

The reporting system supporting the above assertions is current, reliable, and an integral part of the agency's budget and management processes.



[1] Pub. L. No. 100-690, 102 Stat. 4181 (1988).

[2] 21 U.S.C. Section 1704(d) (1998).

[3] A National Drug Control Program agency is defined as any agency that is responsible for implementing any aspect of the National Drug Control Strategy.