United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao legislative 2010-08-12 U.S. Government Printing Office 2001-11-28 monographic deposited born digital 56 p. GA 1.13:GAO-02-25 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25 P0b002ee180382e4f f:d0225 DGPO 2010-08-12 2011-03-24 GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25 machine generated eng fdlp REPORT GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25 GAO-02-25 Discretionary grants Grant monitoring Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program Other Written Product A02374

GAO reviewed selected aspects of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Justice Program's (OJP) grant monitoring and evaluation efforts. Specifically, this report discusses the monitoring of discretionary grants awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance's (BJA) Byrne Program and the Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) within OJP. Byrne and VAWO discretionary grants grew, in constant 2000 dollars, about 85 percent--from $105 million to $194 million between fiscal years 1997 and 2000. These funds were awarded to state and local governments, either on a competitive basis or pursuant to legislation allocating funds through congressional earmarks. BJA and VAWO, together with OJP's Office of the Comptroller, are responsible for monitoring these grants to ensure they are implemented as intended, are responsive to grant goals and objectives, and compliant with statutory regulations and policy guidelines. OJP's monitoring requirements include the development of monitoring plans that articulate who will conduct monitoring, the manner in which it will be done, and when and what type of monitoring activities are planned. Grant managers are to maintain documentation in grant files using such techniques as written reports of on-site reviews and telephone interview write-ups. GAO's review of 46 Byrne and 84 VAWO discretionary grants indicated that only 29 percent of Byrne and 11 percent of VAWO award files contained monitoring plans. In addition, for awards covering the most recent 12-month period, grant managers were not consistently documenting their monitoring activities. BJA and VAWO cannot systematically oversee grant managers' compliance with monitoring requirements because documentation is not readily available. Both BJA and VAWO rely on staff meetings and discussions to identify grant problems or monitoring issues, and neither have management information systems to compile and analyze data about monitoring activities. OJP has begun to work with its bureaus and offices to address grant management problems, but it is too early to tell whether OJP's efforts will effectively resolve many of the issues GAO and others, including OJP itself, have identified. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25/pdf/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25.pdf GAO-02-25 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-GAO-02-25 Other Written Product GAO-02-25; Justice Discretionary Grants: Byrne Program and Violence Against Women Office Grant Monitoring Should Be Better Documented; Discretionary grants Grant monitoring Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program Title 20 Section 1152 20 U.S.C. 1152 Title 42 Section 3750 42 U.S.C. 3750 Public Law 100-690 Public Law 103-62 Public Law 103-322 Public Law 106-386