Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />002333 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />C. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION <br /> <br />The u. S. ,Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species program lacks <br />adequate management information and internal review systems. Prudent <br />program management and proper internal controls require that program <br />costs and results be tracked accurately and that periodic management <br />reviews be performed consistently. The Service has not fully supported a <br />centralized automated core information system and has not been successful <br />with prior attempts to track detailed program information. The recent <br />changeover from a centralized program management structure in the U. S. <br />Fish and Wildlife Service to one of decentralization is another reason <br />for the lack of these management systems. As a result, the Service lacks <br />the basic management tools to effectively administer the endangered <br />species program. <br /> <br />Kana~ement Information <br /> <br />The Service did not have a management information system to track the <br />actual individual employee time spent on its various separately funded <br />activities. For example, activities of Fish and Wildlife Enhancement are <br />separately funded under a Service Assistant Director and include work on <br />endangered species, ecological services. environmental contaminants, and <br />the national wetlands inventory. However, Service officials could not <br />tell us what portion of this funding was actually incurred for these <br />separate activities. In addition, Enhancement's Division of Endangered <br />Species and Habitat Conservation, which is responsible for most domestic <br />endangered species program activities, does not track actual individual <br />employee time spent on the major subactivities of the program, which <br />include listing. consultation, and recovery. Since activities within <br />Fish and Wildlife Enhancement are salary intensive, the failure to track <br />the actual time spent by employees prevents the Service not only from <br />developing accurate historical cost data on the actual usage of program <br />resources but also from accurately determining whether appropriated funds <br />are being spent in accordance with Congressional intent. We believe that <br />the lack of accurate actual cost information can distort current <br />endangered species program expenditures, both in total and within the <br />major program components of listing, recovery. and consultation. This <br />lack of information also impedes effective program analysis and planning <br />by both the Service and the Congress because future program needs and <br />direction are based on inaccurate program costs. <br /> <br />We found that the Service's accounting records did not accurately reflect <br />the costs associated with progIam work loads. For example, at Region 4, <br />amounts budgeted for endangered species program subactivities were simply <br />allocated to individuals based on a combination of funding available and <br />estiDated time to be spent by individuals in particular areas. At the <br />Sacramento Field Office, actual time spent on subactivities was verified <br />by employees until one or mOre subactivity budgets were exceeded. At <br />that time, any subactivity with a positive balance could be charged for <br />employee tu.e spent on a subactivity with the shortfal1. At Region 6, <br />the Regional person responsible for endangered species consultations <br />informed us that all his tiDe was chaIged to ecological services while he <br />was working in more than one area. <br /> <br />16 <br />