Audit of the Office of Justice Programs Victim Compensation Grants Awarded to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, Phoenix, Arizona

• NCJ Number: 309903
• Date Published: 2024
• Length: 27 pages

Annotation

This report provides detail of an audit of the Office of Justice Programs Victim Compensation Grants Awarded to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, Phoenix, Arizona.

Abstract

This audit of the Office of Justice Programs Victim Compensation Grants Awarded to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (CJC), Phoenix, Arizona, concluded that Arizona CJC used its grant funds to compensate crime victims. This audit did not identify significant concerns regarding Arizona CJC’s drawdowns, victim compensation claim expenditures, and administrative expenditures. However, auditors identified discrepancies with annual state certification forms, performance reporting, monitoring of subrecipients, and financial reporting. The objective of the audit was to evaluate how the Arizona CJC designed and implemented its crime victim compensation program. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General completed an audit of three Victims of Crime Act victim compensation formula grants awarded by OJP’s Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) to Arizona CJC. Auditors found that Arizona CJC, through its subrecipients, distributed program funds to victims of crime as required. However, auditors identified the following weaknesses: Auditors determined that Arizona CJC’s controls did not ensure that amounts reported on annual state certification forms were accurate. Further, Arizona CJC did not have internal policies and procedures to prepare and maintain the information reported on the annual certification forms. Auditors found that 9 of the 12 federal financial reports auditors reviewed did not match Arizona CJC’s accounting records. Due to the lack of monitoring for performance data, there is no assurance that performance reports were accurate. Arizona CJC maintained limited and inconsistent documentation to support its monitoring activities. It also did not verify the accuracy of programmatic and financial information reported by subrecipients and did not conduct site visits in accordance with its policies.