YELLOW SHEET
Office of the State Auditor of Missouri
Claire McCaskill
|
YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri |
Report No. 2004-49
June 17, 2004
The following findings were noted as a result of an audit conducted by our office of the Office of the Attorney General.
The Office of the Attorney General (AGO) needs to improve its accounts receivable records, policies, and procedures. In July 2001, the office consolidated most of its collection efforts to recoup money owed to the state, state officers, or state agencies, including restitution for consumers from cases handled by the Consumer Protection Division. This collection effort is handled by the financial services unit (FSU). This unit collected approximately $16 million during the four years ended June 30, 2003. In addition, the no call unit, within the Consumer Protection Division also maintains accounts receivable records for violations of the state's No Call laws. During the four years ending June 30, 2003, the no call unit collected approximately $885,900 for the recovery of cost of investigation and/or prosecution of violations and approximately $35,000 in civil penalties.
The FSU's manual and/or computerized database records are not always complete or accurate. Our office noted several instances where payments had not been properly recorded in the manual log and/or computerized database. In addition, the beginning receivable balance for two cases was not accurate due to mathematical errors. Also, when the unit upgraded its computerized database in March 2003, the payment histories were not included for all cases. Therefore, the unit cannot generate an accounts receivable report with current and accurate balances for each case.
Collection efforts are not always performed in a timely manner. There appeared to be little collection efforts performed on no call accounts receivable cases since November 2002. As of January 2004, there were eight cases with outstanding balances, totaling approximately $154,000. Additionally, the FSU does not maintain a control list of all uncollectible accounts which had been written-off and office management does not review and/or approve significant accounts written-off.
The Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has not established adequate procedures to ensure the proper handling of checks received. During a cash count, on November 19, 2003, we noted twenty-four checks, totaling $77,510, which had been received, but not recorded by the EPD. Procedures are not adequate to ensure all checks and related check information are properly recorded in the division's computerized receipts system. Also, the EPD did not always forward checks to the applicable entity in a timely manner. During a cash count, on November 19, 2003, we noted eight checks, totaling $81,762, had been held for more than 30 days after they had been received.
The Governmental Affairs Division (GAD) has not established adequate procedures to ensure the number of hours billed for work performed by the division's attorneys are properly charged to the applicable professional boards.
The AGO does not require all employees to prepare time sheets to account for hours worked and leave taken during the month. Only attorneys and hourly employees prepared time sheets. Additionally, the AGO has not established procedures to track the costs per case. During the four years ended June 30, 2003, the AGO spent over $72 million in personnel and expense and equipment costs to operate the office. The AGO routinely receives reimbursement for the cost of the investigation and/or prosecution of consumer protection, antitrust, and no call cases. However, these costs are not supported by detailed documentation. Also, the office does not track work performed by its investigators and administrative personnel. Similar conditions were noted in several prior reports.
The AGO does not maintain documentation to support the costs comparisons of commercial flights to the costs of using Office of Administration (OA) planes for out-of-state travel. During the four years ended June 30, 2003, 8 out-of-state flights and 216 in-state flights were taken in state planes at a cost totaling over $19,000 and $169,000, respectively. To ensure the most economical use of state resources, the office should prepare and retain documentation comparing the costs of commercial flights to the costs of using OA planes. A similar condition was also noted in the prior report.