Overview
Our prior audit of BCDA (No. 2014-1261-3J) found that some forfeited funds were not remitted to BCDA by local law enforcement agencies until up to 232 days after cases were disposed of. During our current audit, we reviewed a sample of 20 forfeitures (totaling $90,644). We found that 7 forfeitures (totaling $9,027) that had been ordered by court motions were not remitted to BCDA by local law enforcement agencies until 31 to 780 days after they were ordered by a court. As a result, BCDA and local law enforcement agencies went without funds to which they were entitled for an extended period.
Authoritative Guidance
The Forfeited Property Procedures in BCDA’s ICP state,
When a forfeiture order (court orders or copy of docket sheet ordering forfeiture) is received, the [Assistant District Attorney] must provide the certified copy to the Director of Fiscal Affairs and provide a second copy to the Chief of Appeals.
According to the procedures, upon receipt of the forfeiture order, the director of Fiscal Affairs works with the police department to obtain the forfeited funds, ensure distribution to the appropriate police department, and deposit BCDA’s portion “in the ‘sweep account’ set up by the State Treasury at a local bank for these purposes.”
Because forfeited funds are in cash, not recording them within one bank cycle (30 days, or one month) increases the risk of theft or loss.
Reasons for Issues
In our previous audit, we determined that the delays in the remittance of forfeited funds resulted from completed cases not being reconciled with forfeited funds in the District Attorney Management Information Office Network (DAMION) system. In response to that finding, BCDA amended its internal control policies regarding the administration of forfeited funds to require reconciliation of forfeiture orders and funds to DAMION to ensure that funds could be properly monitored, received in a timely manner, and reported accurately. However, BCDA’s revised policy did not account for the recording in DAMION of forfeitures made by court motions before the dismissal of cases.
Assistant District Attorneys did not deliver certified copies of all court motions to the appropriate BCDA personnel to facilitate the transfer of these funds in a timely manner. BCDA officials told us they believed this was because the Assistant District Attorneys needed to be periodically reminded to notify BCDA’s director of Fiscal Affairs promptly of forfeited funds. During our audit period, BCDA did provide training on this issue to the Assistant District Attorneys, and according to our audit testing, notifications of forfeitures made by court motions became timelier.
Recommendations
- BCDA should periodically communicate to Assistant District Attorneys that it is their responsibility to notify the chief of Appeals and BCDA’s director of Fiscal Affairs of all forfeitures ordered by court motion in a timely manner.
- BCDA should modify its policies to require that all motions for forfeiture be recorded in DAMION to allow for the tracking of all forfeited funds.
Auditee’s Response
We acknowledge that there have been delays from date of order to deposit and have made improvements in procedures to reduce that time since the prior audit. We are looking at modifications to the current DAMION system that will allow better tracking of orders at all stages of prosecution including motion hearings. We would like to note that some delays from order to deposit are due to appeals filed by the defendants or the need to resolve matters with co-defendants who may have claim to the same forfeited funds and will be more diligent in noting this on orders so reasons for any such delays will be readily apparent. The importance of adhering to the established forfeiture procedures for Assistant District Attorneys is also stressed in the onboarding process.
| Date published: | January 14, 2019 |
|---|