Army can’t track spending on $4.3b system to track spending, IG finds. by Mark Flatten.
From the post:
More than $725 million was spent by the Army on a high-tech network for tracking supplies and expenses that failed to comply with federal financial reporting rules meant to allow auditors to track spending, according to an inspector general’s report issued Wednesday.
The Global Combat Support System-Army, a logistical support system meant to track supplies, spare parts and other equipment, was launched in 1997. In 2003, the program switched from custom software to a web-based commercial software system.
About $95 million was spent before the switch was made, according to the report from the Department of Defense IG.
As of this February, the Army had spent $725.7 million on the system, which is ultimately expected to cost about $4.3 billion.
The problem, according to the IG, is that the Army has failed to comply with a variety of federal laws that require agencies to standardize reporting and prepare auditable financial statements.
…
The report is full of statements like this one:
PMO personnel provided a system change request, which they indicated would correct four account attributes in July 2014. In addition, PMO personnel provided another system change request they indicated would correct the remaining account attribute (Prior Period Adjustment) in late FY 2015.
PMO = Project Management Office (in this case, of GCSS–Army).
The lack of identification of personnel speaking on behalf of the project or various offices pervades the report. Moreover, the same is true for twenty-seven (27) other reports on issues with this project.
If the sources of statements and information were identified in these reports, then it would be possible to track people across reports and to identify who has failed to follow up on representations made in the reports.
The first step towards accountability is identification of decision makers in audit reports.
Tracking decision makers from one position to another and linking them to specific decisions is a natural application of topic maps.
I first saw this in Links I Liked by Chris Blattman, September 7, 2014.