Expenditures by The Department of Veterans Affairs
Case: B-247563.3
Agency: Central Intelligence Agency
Protester: Expenditures by The Department of Veterans Affairs
Date: 1996-04-05
Appropriations Law
B-247563.3
Apr 05, 1996
Jump To
VIEW DECISION
RELATED PAGES
GAO CONTACTS
Highlights
The Department of Veterans Affairs' appropriation for medical care was not available for the purchase of novelty items to potential employees. Were not justified under the "necessary expense rule.". The Department of Veterans Affairs was not authorized to use its medical care appropriation for contest prizes during Women's Equality Week absent evidence that the expenditures related to authorized activities of the department. The Department of Veterans Affairs' appropriation for medical care was not available to pay the sponsor fees and other costs associated with employees' participation in a competitive sporting event since such events are personal activities of the participants. Agency officials who are not designated as accountable officers are not personally liable for illegal.
View Decision
Matter of: Expenditures by The Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma File: B-247563.3 Date: April 5, 1996
The Department of Veterans Affairs' appropriation for medical care was not available for the purchase of novelty items to potential employees. These items did not directly contribute to an authorized function and, therefore, were not justified under the "necessary expense rule." The Department of Veterans Affairs was not authorized to use its medical care appropriation for contest prizes during Women's Equality Week absent evidence that the expenditures related to authorized activities of the department. The Department of Veterans Affairs' appropriation for medical care was not available to pay the sponsor fees and other costs associated with employees' participation in a competitive sporting event since such events are personal activities of the participants. In the absence of a statute or regulation imposing liability, agency officials who are not designated as accountable officers are not personally liable for illegal, improper, or incorrect payments. Officials for whom the Department of Veterans Affairs requests relief are not accountable officers and, thus, are not liable for unauthorized payments. To enhance accountability and help to safeguard public funds, agencies should designate officials authorized to issue third party drafts under the Department of the Treasury's third party draft system as accountable officers or issue regulations under which such individuals would be held financially liable for improper payments.
DECISION
In the aftermath of an investigation by the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Office of Inspector General (IG), VA has requested an opinion on the legality of 72 expenditures made between March 1990 and September 1991 by the VA Medical Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma from VA's medical care appropriation. VA has also requested relief from liability for seven Medical Center officials believed to be liable for the payments. Finally, VA has requested guidance on the liability of various procurement and financial management officials for improper payments.
To facilitate our analysis and discussion, we have divided the 72 expenditures at issue into four general categories: recruitment, contests, refreshments, and miscellaneous purposes. In this decision, we address the Medical Center's 15 expenditures for recruitment and contests. [1] We will address the 57 expenditures for refreshments and miscellaneous purposes in a separate decision.
As discussed below, we conclude that of the eight recruitment-related expenditures totalling $10,096.71 submitted for our review, four, totalling $2,782.21, were unauthorized. In addition, we conclude that all seven of the Medical Center's contest-related expenditures totalling $2,394.59 were unauthorized. Finally, we conclude that the officials for whom VA has requested relief are not liable for the improper payments.
BACKGROUND
During the period covered by the IG's investigation, the Medical Center purchased a variety of novelty items for distribution in connection with its recruiting efforts. [2] Specifically, the Medical Center separately purchased holiday rope pens, folding scissors, and shoe laces imprinted with the Medical Center's logo or slogan totalling $2,507.10 for potential nurse recruits at three colleges where VA maintains adjunct facilities. [3] In addition, the Medical Center purchased $275.11 worth of patches for the local Explorers Post.
During the same period, the Medical Center purchased three gift certificates for local restaurants and a silk plant, totalling approximately $80.00, for distribution as prizes during Women's Equality Week, 1990. The Medical Center also made three expenditures totalling $2,314.60 in connection with the 1991 Presbyterian Hospital Corporate Challenge, a local athletic event in which Medical Center personnel participated. Specifically, the Medical Center paid a $1,200.00 sponsor fee, purchased t-shirts for Medical Center participants, and rented a tent for the event.
Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...