Summary of Administrative Review Findings

To: "A  - Division Chief and Staff"<distribution>,
        "B  - Branch Chiefs and Offices"<distribution>,
        "DC - All District Chiefs"<distribution>,
        "AO - All Administrative Officers"<distribution>
cc: "Lois A Dabaie, Secretary, Reston, VA" <ladabaie>
Subject: Summary of Administrative Review Findings
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 14:23:48 -0500
From: "Lois A Dabaie, Secretary, Reston, VA" <ladabaie>

The following memorandum was also sent out in hard copy.

In Reply Refer To:
Mail Stop 442

                                  MEMORANDUM

                                                    December 13, 1995

To:	 District Chiefs
	 Branch Chiefs

From:	 Catherine L. Hill
	 Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Operations

Subject: Summary of Administrative Review Findings

The Water Resources Division (WRD) initiated a formal administrative review 
procedure in fiscal year (FY) 1993.  The intent and purpose of this procedure,
 to "evaluate the effectiveness of management control systems, assist in 
developing procedures that streamline administrative processes and cut costs; 
and to provide a constructive learning environment for the staff and team 
members," was officially communicated throughout the division by WRD 
Memorandum No. 94.10.  During the past 3 years, reviews of 30 percent of 
the division's cost centers have been completed.  Review teams have visited 
four districts each in the Northeastern and Central Regions, three in 
Southeastern Region, one in the Western Region and one of the Headquarters 
cost centers.

For the most part, cost centers have internal control mechanisms in place 
to deter the occurrence of any questionable or illegal act.  However, there 
are areas that need strengthening and improvement.  Listed below are the 
significant findings to date.  This list includes items that have surfaced 
in at least 38 percent of the reviews (5 cost centers) and are shown in 
descending order.

1. Noncompliance with payroll regulations or improper recordkeeping 
   (77 percent)

2. Absence of management analysis of administrative processes and associated 
   costs (54 percent)

3. Lack of participation by the administrative officer in the development 
   and review of project budgets contained in proposals; administrative 
   officer not attending project progress reviews (46 percent)

4. Absence of formal delegation of authority documentation (46 percent)

5. Failure to utilize streamlined authorities and processes to enhance 
   administrative operations (i.e., maximize use of bankcards, ATM travel 
   advance program, FTS 2000 cards, remote field payments, etc.) (46 percent)

6. Absence of routine reporting of financial information to project chiefs 
   (46 percent)

7. Insufficient budgeting - lack of district financial plan and/or common 
   services plan; lack of regional approval of deviations to common services 
   policy as required by WRD Memorandum No. 92.21; absence of budgets for 
   projects and/or components of the common services plan (46 percent)

8. Nonconformance with division policy on quarterly billing of cooperators 
   (46 percent)

9. Absence of organization charts and functional statements for the 
   organizational components of the cost center (38 percent)

Of major concern is the noncompliance with payroll regulations and 
recordkeeping guidance in more than two-thirds of the cost centers reviewed. 
The Senior Administrative Officers have formed a committee to examine payroll 
processes and requirements and develop guidance and training for cost centers.
This training will be conducted during FY 1996 in conjunction with WRD's 
implementation of the new paperless time and attendance system.  

Most of the other findings will be addressed in the training courses being 
developed for new administrative staff.  The first of these courses will be 
offered March 4-8, 1996, at the National Training Center.  An announcement 
with a course agenda will be issued in the next few weeks.

The division will continue to conduct a least five administrative reviews 
per year.  If resources are available, the process will be accelerated.  
Specific comments or questions concerning the review process and/or findings 
should be directed to your Regional Administrative Officer.

Copy to:  Administrative Officers
	  Senior Staff