The mission of the Bureau of Internal Audit is to support the Secretary and our Department by ensuring that: (1) agency goals are met; (2) agency resources are used consistent with laws, regulations, and policies; (3) resources are safeguarded against waste, loss, and misuse; and (4) reliable data is obtained, maintained, and fully disclosed.
The Bureau’s primary purpose is to take a proactive approach in meeting our agency's needs and protecting its resources. Toward that end, we have four key goals:
The Bureau of Internal Audit comprises three sections: Audit, Information Technology and Contract Review. These sections report to the Bureau Chief who functions as the Director of Auditing. The Bureau conducts compliance, performance and information technology audits and contract reviews per Section 20.055 Florida Statutes. Audits are conducted in accordance with the current International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing published by the Institute of Internal Auditors.
Compliance/Performance Audit Section
The Audit Section employs an Audit Supervisor and six auditors. Staff includes two Certified Government Audit Professionals (CGAPs), a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and a Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE).
Information Techonology Audit Section
The Information Technology Section is staffed by an Audit Supervisor who is a Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA). This section conducts IT audits/reviews and provides technical and analytical support for audits, contract reviews and investigations.
During FY 2008-09, the Compliance/Performance and Information Technology Audit Sections completed six audits, six follow-up audits and seven reviews. The reports are listed below, in order of date issued:
|FY 2008-09 Audit Section|
|Report Number||Project Title||Report Issue Date|
|A09002F||Follow-up to Contracts for Water/Waste Water Treatment Operators Audit||8/5/2008|
|A08023||Audit of Office of Department Initiatives' Performance Measures||8/6/2008|
|A09004F||Follow-up to OPPAGA Report No. 08-10 Delay in Screening||8/26/2008|
|R08024||Review of Marion CI Employee Benefit Trust Fund||8/28/2008|
|A09001||Audit of Laboratory Corporation of America - Contract #C2133||10/8/2008|
|R09010||Florida Parole Commission - Information Technology||12/17/2008|
|A09003||Construction Bid Process Audit||12/23/2008|
|R09008||2008 Florida Risk Assessment Survey - Information Technology||12/30/2008|
|A09007F||Follow-up to OPPAGA Report No. 08-20 Contractor's Contract Effort is Sound||1/28/2009|
|A08020||Audit of Arsenal and Security Supplies||3/3/2009|
|A09015F||Follow-up to Auditor General Report #2009-011 Offender-Based Information System||3/27/2009|
|R09018||Review of Inmate Complaint regarding Keefe Inmate Canteen at Columbia CI||4/14/2009|
|R09020||Review of Dorm and Control Room logs - Hendry CI||5/14/2009|
|R09016||Review of Staff Housing Assignments||5/19/2009|
|A09017F||Follow-up to Auditor General Report No. 2009-023 Contract Management||5/20/2009|
|A09011||Audit of Extradition Services Contract# C2355||5/27/2009|
|A09005F||Follow-up to Audit of Inmate Property at Reception Centers||6/2/2009|
|A09006||Audit of Property Accountability||6/3/2009|
|R09021||Review to Assist Everglades CI Investigation||6/11/2009|
Contract Management Review Section
The Contract Management Review (CMR) Section employs an audit supervisor and two auditors. Staff includes a Certified Internal Auditor (CIA). Reviews during FY 2008/2009 focused on contracts and vendors providing re-entry services such as substance abuse treatment and Probation and Restitution Center operations. Auditors found that most offenders participating in those programs were receiving training and counseling as intended and were able to gain successful employment in the community. Weaknesses were identified with vendors’ failure to correctly calculate subsistence fees and meet performance measures for staffing and drug testing requirements.
Contract reviews facilitated improvements in drug testing, staffing and performance measures. Offenders who had been overcharged by contractors were reimbursed and accountability for offender funds was enhanced to better assist offenders in their re-entry to society. Two reviews and four follow-up reports completed last year are listed below:
|FY 2008-09 Contract Management Review Section|
|CMR 09-002F||Follow-up: Bridges of America - St. Petersburg||9/8/2008|
|CMR 09-003F||Follow-up: Non-Secure Programs Inc.||9/8/2008|
|CMR 09-004F||Follow-up: Non-Secure Programs Inc.||1/20/2009|
|CMR 09-001F||Follow-up: Salvation Army PRC||1/20/2009|
|CMR 09-005||Non-Secure Programs Inc. - Tallahassee||4/20/2009|
|CMR 09-006||Non-Secure Programs Inc. - Ocala||4/20/2009|
The Bureau views its audit/contract review mandate as an opportunity not only to identify deficiencies, but also to identify areas that are well designed and are meeting management's expectations. Examples of reports issued by the Bureau of Internal Audit for FY 2008-09 include:
Our audit revealed that, overall, adequate internal controls exist for DC’s bid process. Furthermore, the bid process that was applied for the select DC construction contracts was consistent with applicable laws, rules, and procedures.
We also found that the bid process for construction services and/or materials is in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. Additionally, the quantity of commodities or services ordered and received, as well as the prices invoiced, agreed with the original Invitations to Bid (ITB); however, one issue was identified that, if addressed as recommended by the auditors, will improve bid documentation.
We found that property items were properly recorded by the Department; prescribed procedures were followed when transferring property from one organization code to another; and physical inventories were conducted in accordance with prescribed procedures. However, we noted issues concerning responsibilities of “new” property delegates that, when addressed, will improve accountability for DC’s tangible personal property items.
We found that the Department performed some level of monitoring for the extradition services contract; however, we identified issues that, when addressed, should enhance monitoring and facilitate improved contractor compliance with contract terms and conditions.