GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Defense audit agency maps out response to damaging report

• 84418
  

  Why is it always "auditors against managers"? When I read all these articles and comments I am concerned. As everyone knows, there is always more than one side to any situation.

  A Taxpayer

  A Taxpayer Posted August 9, 2009 4:01 PM
• 61247
  

  I started with DCAA more than 20 years ago. This abusive behavior by supervisors, branch managers, and RAMS was going on when I joined the agency. This abuse and misuse of these phony metrics has been going on for years.

  Metrics were abused before they even called metrics. The idea was to push out more reports in less time. The result was that we did useless audits that had meaningless findings. Worse, because everyone was trying to get their work done under budget, they didn't have the time to get a view of the big picture. No one had a comprehensive idea of what contractors were doing on a large scale because DCAA was concentrating on incurred cost audits and floorchecks.

  former auditor WR Posted October 20, 2008 7:43 PM
• 59257
  

  What took so long. I've worked for this agency for over 20 years now. The conditions as mentioned here as well as in the GAO findings has always been around but more intense now since the introduction of the metrics used to monitor audit assignment activity. I cannot not help but hold admiration for that one and single auditor, Thi Le, for having the courage and endurance to bring down this house of cards. She stood her ground and projected what all of us should represent in this profession. That is competence, integrity, honesty in independently representing the American tax payer. This is what we were taught to uphold by the very institution that has not abided by these values. I am now disallusioned by these words. I now know never to fully trust those in a position of authority in this agency again. Those who are not able to practice what they have been preaching.

  Opinion Only Posted September 24, 2008 12:44 PM
• 59031
  

  Obviously Who's Who in NNEBO does not know me. Who's Who is obviously a management suck up, who has taken work home to exceed budgets to screw everyone else, has an "uncle" in the region and got his 20 suck up points for a country club atmosphere the region is known for and probably would not know an audit finding if it bit him in his/her hindquarters. I would further venture that this person is management based on their anti-union bias. Maybe it is one of the supervisors who lost a case to AFGE because he/she was abusive to one of their staff.

  anon northeastern Posted September 23, 2008 7:21 AM
• 58819
  

  Oh please. That puff piece on KC is just too much. Do you work directly for her? Perhaps you are wishing to be rated that coveted "5" under nsbs...i mean NSPS.

  Mr. Smith Posted September 19, 2008 9:59 AM
• 58589
  

  If someone had a less than desirable experience working for Karen Cash, there was probably some associated less than desirable work being performed. I had the privilege of working for Karen, and I learned more about auditing and effective management during that time than at any time with DCAA. One of the benefits she brought to the table, besides being most knowledgeable on the issues, was she held everyone accountable for their work. If you failed to perform your job functions, she made you answer for it and get it right instead of dumping your workload on the responsible employees (a common theme among other offices, SCBO is a prime example). .If I were still with DCAA, I'd do everything I could to work for Karen. She gives direct, honest, and constructive feedback. If you perform inadequately, she does not let it slide, and if you are capable and dedicated, she rewards you for it. This cannot be said for many of the other managers within DCAA, many just play the CYA game instead of trying to improve the office environment and quality of work.

  Here today, gone tomorrow Posted September 16, 2008 12:27 PM
• 57880
  

  Can anyone still with DCAA explain how an agency that promotes people like Dave Eck, Fran Cornett and Karen Cash to high-level senior positions can deny that there is a pattern of abusive management? And that this behavior is not only tolerated but tacitly encouraged, and rewarded? Ask anyone who has worked for these three about abusive behavior - if the DCAA Director wants to clean house, there are three easy fixes.

  Former DCAA auditor Posted September 6, 2008 12:55 PM
• 57871
  

  Looks like the game plan in the Western Region is to create more GS-14s and RAMs. The System is fine folks, all that's needed is more micro-management.

  True change will only come from without. DCAA Managers will never change a system that has made them successful. Perhaps an outsider will force DCAA management to apply that crazy concept called "materiality" to budgets and due dates.

  dcaa auditor Posted September 6, 2008 9:51 AM
• 57569
  

  A good number of DCAA management has a MBA degree, but somehow the learned knowledge was not being applied within the agency.

  Communication: Worse. Auditors seldom have any type of communication with management except immediate level of supervisory. Branch Manager and above levels of management only communicate with employees who are their favorites. Politics are rampant and drive promotion, not talent or knowledge.

  Employees Moral: Worse. The management does not truly care about how auditors feel. All they did is giving out commands of what they want.

  Work Productivity: Worse. The metric drives the work. For the last 10 years, audit quality greatly suffer. I currently work for a manager who still demand auditors to wrap up audits without adequate field work. This is still happening. Quality Audit month is just a joke and waste of time.

  If the Agency Director really want a change, then talk to the auditors. What she is doing now is just a show.

  A Long Time Auditor Posted September 1, 2008 7:18 PM
• 57523
  

  DCAA makes the Federal Bureau of Prisons look like a great place to work. Check out the 100 Best Places to Work in Federal Government. DCAA falls behind the Federal Bureau of Prisions in many respects.

  BigNoise Posted August 29, 2008 3:43 PM
• 57341
  

  You mean Stand Around Day? I've had: (i) an adverse opinion on financial capability shot down for no good reason by the RAM (3 years worth of retained earnings deficits equivalent to 50% of sales needed to be "updated"); (ii) a contractor complain that I "had no business being there" and then have my Supervisor pull me from that location (because I made them provide evidential matter to support my tests); and an adverse opinion on an accounting system get shot down in exchange for a memorandum to close the file (because the contractor would not provide access nor cooperate). This is all in the last 12 months. I have also had a Supervisor try to extend the due date on an assignment with significant questioned costs in order to make me look bad (also in the last 12 months). This was retaliation because I would not put up with his abusive treatment, which was condoned by the Western Region RAM and Branch Manager. The abusiveness at the DCAA is and has been pervasive at all management levels and aspects, with a long legacy, reaching back more than 20 years in my experience. This Agency is out of control, especially the Western Region. Cognizance needs to be restructured, garnered from the ground up.

  Fran Posted August 27, 2008 1:46 PM
• 57277
  

  At the Stand Down Days in the Western region, the regional director said there was nothing wrong with the metrics, just with the way they were used. That should tell everyone something.

  Auditor is right - Stephenson should talk to the little people to find out what's going on. The others are more likely to lie than not.

  MJ Posted August 26, 2008 8:45 PM
• 57061
  

  I really can't place blame on the Regional Director for not answering questions. Sure he should have as a stand up guy with so many years answered questions but it was painfully obvious that this man was just taking orders from above to have the "Stand Down Day." Sometimes actions speak louder than words. I don't know where he even really addressed the stated subject matter "audit quality." So where do we place the blame for all this? I think it again, goes right to the top of the Agency. Where is the leadership? If the Regional Director appears to be in the dark about what is going on, how can the problems be addressed? Maybe HQ should have a solid plan to address the problems and then go about fixing them, rather than these "Shows". Maybe it's a sensative metric.

  Burt Posted August 24, 2008 4:26 PM
• 57060
  

  I really can't place blame on the Regional Director for not answering questions. Sure he should have as a stand up guy with so many years answered questions but it was painfully obvious that this man was just taking orders from above to have the "Stand Down Day." Sometimes actions speak louder than words. I don't know where he even really addressed the stated subject matter "audit quality." So where do we place the blame for all this? I think it again, goes right to the top of the Agency. Where is the leadership? If the Regional Director appears to be in the dark about what is going on, how can the problems be addressed? Maybe HQ should have a solid plan to address the problems and then go about fixing them, rather than these "Shows". Maybe it's a sensative metric.

  Burt Posted August 24, 2008 4:26 PM
• 57041
  

  If the Director wants to hear the truth she needs to talk to the auditors not the messengers(the Regional Directors, the RAMs, Branch Managers or RAs)

  Auditor Posted August 23, 2008 11:25 PM
• 56998
  

  Concerned Auditor, the reason management will fight till the end about metrics is because the metrics justify all the management jobs. Managements solution is to add more managment by breaking down existing offices into smaller offices.

  These Stand Down Days have been all for show, no substance. Why did the Regional Director never come back for questions? Because he does not want to hear it and what does he care, he has 39 years in. Do you really think he sees any problems with an environment in which he excelled? In fairness to him, he is just playing the game like everyone else. I think the next step should be to eliminate all auditors, that way we can concentrate on middle management careers and not bother with this audit stuff.

  Lynn Posted August 22, 2008 5:15 PM
• 56991
  

  I work in that office as well, my interpretation and perception of the comments of my Mr. Northeastern reg anon. are as follows: Apparently he is an easily intimidated co-worker here at the Northern New England Branch Office, who is unable to speak-up or ask questions, who has never worked at the Region, and believes that regional people need brownie points (for whatever reason considering that they are already at the region). Based on his TQM comment, he also has more than 10 years of experience. His reference to Telework indicates that management may have cut back on his Telework hours (TW abuser, maybe?) Apparently, he was a guest instructor at some point, and has not been able to pass the CPA exam. He appears disgruntled because he believes he doesn't have "relatives" in the right places. Clearly, he's an anonymous complainer who lacks ambition, and needs several "breaks" during the day (2 hours of work without a break is too much for this guy to handle). He is grateful for the AFGE's "protection", and overall seems like a guy who would never survive in the private sector. I wonder if he's in the cube next to me?? Frankly, I hope that I don't become this guy over time.

  I agree everything is subject to interpretation, including the GAO report, the GE reports, and the comments here.

  Who's Who Posted August 22, 2008 3:53 PM
• 56989
  

  Now, regarding my interpretation and perception of the comments of my co-worker, Mr. Northeastern reg anon. Apparently he is an easily intimidated co-worker here at the Northern New England Branch Office, who is unable to speak-up or ask questions, who has never worked at the Region, and believes that regional people need brownie points (for whatever reason considering that they are already at the region). Based on his TQM comment, he also has more than 10 years of experience. His reference to Telework indicates that management may have cut back on his Telework hours (TW abuser, maybe?) Apparently, he was a guest instructor, who has not been able to pass the CPA exam. He appears disgruntled because he believes he doesn't have "relatives" in the right places. Clearly, he's an anonymous complainer who lacks ambition, and needs several "breaks" during the day (2 hours of work without a break is too much for this guy to handle). He is grateful for the AFGE's "protection", and overall seems like a guy who would never survive in the private sector. I wonder if he's in the cube next to me?? Frankly, I hope that I don't become this guy over time.

  So, as you can see, everything is subject to interpretation, including the GAO report, the GE reports, and the comments here.

  Do not fear...Change is near...... Posted August 22, 2008 3:40 PM
• 56987
  

  To highlight how personal perception and attitude play a significant role in how each person interprets a common event, I'd like to share the following, based on my observations at that same stand-down day attended by my co-worker, Northeastern reg anon. As noted, the Regional director was giving his slide show; the assistant regional director was in the back of room as well as a couple of regional quality auditors. The only ones really making comments were a couple of regional people that the RD put on the spot by calling upon them for a response. The auditors were quiet as usual and most of us were relieved that the RD was asking the questions of the regional personnel and not us. Less than half of the non-regional attendees were auditors with less than 3 years experience; although they may not know what to ask, they did not appear scared or intimated in any way. The RD encouraged questions throughout his presentation. Those who had questions asked; those who did not, remained silent.

  Although I am fairly new to this Agency (less than 10 years), I have not had any negative experiences with the management team at the branch office. I support any efforts to improve morale and the overall working environment throughout DCAA, as I would for any employer. It's just good for business.

  Do not fear...Change is near...... Posted August 22, 2008 3:38 PM
• 56975
  

  So, is the "Dan Hawkins" who's posting here the author of the letter sent to Sen McCaskill's office? Is he a Senior Auditor or not & is he management running a shill game? Curiouser & curiouser....

  PCO USAF Posted August 22, 2008 12:28 PM
• 56944
  

  Attention Director Stephenson:

  There is a very simple solution to IMMEDIATELY make EVERY audit quality issue, both present and future, a thing of the past in this Agency; solve all your metric issues; significantly improve employee morale; retain who you would consider to be your most talented senior auditors, supervisory auditors and auditor trainees; exhorbitantly increase costs questioned and sustained; and substantially increase fraud referrals. A DRD even blessed the idea when it suggested by an auditor at a staff meeting. It's strange that Mr. Hawkins, as sharp as he thinks he is, never thought of this one. Here it is - just get rid of the timesheets.

  Concerned Auditor Posted August 21, 2008 9:43 PM
• 56844
  

  If this isn't the kettle calling the pot burnt! Yes, GAO and DCAA are both guilty of writing audits now and then with management directed predetermined findings. I wonder who at DCAA upset a member of Congress?

  Retired KO Posted August 20, 2008 7:12 PM
• 56837
  

  I agree not all managers are "Nazi's" and not all auditors are "Idiot's." But the current metric driven environment in DCAA brings out the worst metric driven performance in far too many managers. And we all know DCAA will never admit to a mistake once they promote someone to management no matter how abusive or inept that person is.

  Yes, why are all the 14's and 15's leaving HQ? I would assume most are sick of the meaningless "Make Work" and they see all the people going to other Agencies and hearing them say "I had no idea how bad DCAA was until I left."

  Timothy Posted August 20, 2008 4:52 PM
• 56835
  

  Are the GS-14s and GS-15s exiting from HQ leaving DCAA or returning to the field? If they are leaving the Agency, isn't this a good thing?

  Sometimes I wonder how an office and even a region would run differently with less GS-15s and more auditors and supervisors. If a GS-15 leaves, the cash flow from that position would probably buy three GS-7 trainee Auditors, 2 Senior Auditors, or perhaps 1.5 supervisors. I'm not certain of the actual numbers because geographic pay adjustments would need to be included in the analysis too. I'm just thinking that such attrition might be a way to funnel more resources down to the lower levels where it is most needed.

  How much value do the GS-15s add? The ones I have seen largely spend their days reviewing metrics, following up on metrics, etc. If the Agency focused less on metrics and more on the auditors and supervisors who actually produce the direct revenue so to speak, would things balance out a bit? This is most likely an oversimplification, but it's a start.

  Shelley Posted August 20, 2008 3:52 PM
• 56805
  

  The real story at DCAA is the steady exiting of GS-15s and GS-14s from HQ.

  Bob Posted August 20, 2008 10:39 AM
• 56771
  

  The road to recovery for DCAA is going to be long and arduous. For the credibility and reputation to be once again considered "beyond reproach," the agency is going to have to experience some change.

  Although I truly believe, for the most part, that pervasive problems are localized in few areas, we cannot ignore the PERCEPTION that these Southern California issues exist nationwide. That being the case, I think it would do the agency good to develop a DCAA Employee Bill of Rights. This document can be displayed at each FAO right next to the EEO policy statement. Just like on the EEO policy statement, the DCAA Employee Bill of Rights can be signed by all of the executive management to reinforce that it is indeed the agency's policy to fully support and abide by these bill of rights. In addition, the GAO hotline number should be included in the document.

  The first three "rights" can include the following:

  1. An environment of mutual trust and respect is a right of all employees.

  2. No supervisor or manager or RAM can make any significant changes to workpapers or audit reports without first discussing the changes with the auditor.

  3. Budgets shall be realistic and based upon sound risk assessments, not based on metrics.

  Dan Hawkins Posted August 20, 2008 12:53 AM
• 56754
  

  Lets keep it real people. Not all DCAA Managers are Nazi's and not all auditors are idiots. There are some very good Managers and Auditors in DCAA that have worked very hard to protect the taxpayers and do the "right things". The GAO report appears to be part fact and part fiction. Lets take it for what it is and keep things real !!

  Realist Posted August 19, 2008 7:30 PM
• 56749
  

  I wish to address the following comment from one post:

  "I think this article and the whole situation, like everything else related to the Federal Government, is myopic, at best. If this behavior has been going on, as so many "former" employees have stated, they were part of the problem, and their comments now serve the same purpose as their previous in-action, and hopefully no more destructive.

  Individual accountability (notice the word, "account", think accountant, think auditor, get it?) shouldn't be checked at the door and in the case of GAO report, it wasn't. Auditors questioned themselves and their independence and they did something about it. The system worked."

  ***

  Have you not heard what former (why the quotes?) employees have been saying? Those who did try being independent and individually accountable were retaliated against for creating additional work for the over-burdened supervisors. Most former employees became former employees BECAUSE they would not look the other way when asked.

  These same people have been calling the hotline for years, and I would venture to say that Congressmen and Senators have received calls from their individual constituents employed by DCAA over the years as well. However, the powers that be were reluctant to do anything until now because of all of the $$$ that DCAA returned to the Treasury. (As messed up as it is, DCAA still returns $4-$7 for every dollar it receives in resources.) It was a political dilemma that no one wanted to touch until the devastation became too significant to ignore.

  Please consider that most former employees are NOT part of the problem, and it is naive to think they are. Most former employees tried and tried to improve the situation until they could no longer continue to beat their heads against a wall for no reason. Because of retaliation and fear and no response until now to issues, they ultimately had to leave - to make a sacrifice themselves - to become part of the solution. Excessive employee turnover is one of the reasons that someone is finally listening to these issues.

  Shelley Posted August 19, 2008 5:24 PM
• 56741
  

  This explains alot, recognizing the growing lack of accountability in the management of major defense contractors, their record profits, and 100% failure to deliver on time and on budget.

  As it is clear that the audits were compromised in favor of these defense contractors, logic would suggest that their was innappropriate influence being exerted on DCAA leadership. Why is this not being investigated?

  For the sake of the war fighter, I hope transparency and accountability of such a critical organization is restored, and our government leaders understand the importance of assuring that are tax dollars are being spend wisely and not lining the pockets of undeserving contractors.

  Honest Broker Posted August 19, 2008 3:19 PM
• 56737
  

  I think we need more RAM's!!!! This stimulates the economy by keeping Marriott Hotels busy and think of all the Rewards Points they earn. They add so much value to the offices when they hunker down in a cube staring at a computer screen and never bothering to talk to the actual people in the office, managers or grunts.

  What is the favorite flavor of Kool Aid at CMU?

  Larry Posted August 19, 2008 2:11 PM
• 56726
  

  The issues at DCAA did not happen overnite, they took years to build and will take years to breakdown. EEO is not effective in Central Region. First Line Supervisors have Nazi tactics and convince upper management to be against you also. Most auditors are afraid to speak up because of fear of retaliation. Most of the new auditors follow the first line supervisor in creating a hostile environment for a senior auditor; you can't trust anyone in the organization. Instead of saving taxpayer dollars, DCAA is abusing taxpayers' dollars. I had one manager who was walking around the office saying "I have the power." I had another manager tell me before I could open my mouth that "I stand behind my managers." The first line supervisors are also training the next generation of first line supervisors to disregard all ethics, treat people inhumanly, be secretive about what's occurring in the office; and keep information that should be shared with the team or share data with a selected few. I have been horribly treated in this DCAA office and I don't expect much to happen to the management team. I did everything I could and I will continue to stand up for myself. I have been excluded from team interactions with the contractor, my supervisors (firstline,CAC,CAC Asst)even had the Defense Contract Executive not speaking to me as well as certain contractor personnel. My teammembers have CPAs and Masters, yet none of them questioned management as to why they should not interact with me. They followed management blindly. These are not the people I can depend to do a decent audit. If they can't question why they're treating a fellow auditor badly, then they're worthless. My supervisor has lied on me and put it in writing. We'll see how far any of this goes. Its probably a mechanism for DCAA employees to let out steam knowing full well as soon as it quiets down, everything will be back to normal for DCAA. Oh well.

  Taxpayer also Posted August 19, 2008 12:45 PM
• 56670
  

  One of the problems with DCAA management is that a significant number of them obtained their education at Central Michigan University (CMU). Since a lot of them obtained the same education, they often think alike and there are not many new ideas. DCAA needs to do away with its MBA program at CMU. DCAA should instead just have its employees obtain advance degrees at different universities. This way, maybe DCAA will be able to obtain a group of management employees with new and diverse ideas!

  Senior Auditor Posted August 19, 2008 12:03 AM
• 56667
  

  Just wait until the "metrics" of NSPS infiltrates and rots the DoD workforce as a whole. DCAA is just the beginning.

  Paul Saunders Posted August 18, 2008 10:28 PM
• 56660
  

  I was told by a Regional Audit Manager, Robert Krachtovil, that "even 1 hour over budget can be construed as unacceptable". Atta boy Dr. Bob, way to enlist a sense of propriety and ownership from the corp of college graduates. Gee, do you think DCAA Western Region may want to just drive out the veteran auditors who are the "heavy earners" (a quote from John Doherty, another RAM in Western Region). That way, DCAA-WR keeps its head count up, which drives the Regional jobs, but saves money for their bonuses. Saving the taxpayer money - who cares about that? Investing 2 million dollars in each Senior Auditor who has 20 years or more? Who cares about that either? After all, its not the Taxpayers money, it's the Western Region management's money - right?

  Fran Posted August 18, 2008 8:50 PM
• 56656
  

  Now they are addressing the issue by adding RAMs to every region. Wonderful, maybe we can have one RAM for every auditor. Talk about non value added... when has a RAM signed a report or been listed as a contact? How about anyone at headquarters or region? They monitor "stuff" and they do it with metrix. To fix things cut the number of regions- we all know there are too many. Cut the number of staff people and cut the number of RAMs. Add supervisors to the FAOs- that will actually improve quality.

  dan hawkins fan Posted August 18, 2008 6:09 PM
• 56565
  

  "In the Aug. 7 memo, DCAA also announced that it would conduct a comprehensive assessment of staffing. The review, Stephenson said, would determine if the agency has the right number of employees and offices, whether offices are in the right locations and whether they are distributed appropriately across DCAA regions."

  This line from April in one of her memos only proves how "Broken" DCAA is. I thought the reason for all the metrics, competitions between the regions, and countless hours first line supervisors, office managers, RAMS, Regional management and HQ management (Wow look at the overlap of fat) spend on program plans and tracking work, were so that we had the correct number of employees by office and location? Now, April admits that all of this insanity may not actually even work. I could have told her that after my 2nd week here. PS. Will the Audit Qulaity Month of August be extended till September 7? Cause I thought we got 30 days for evertyhing. Won't this hurt a metric being tracked at HQ? Thanks for the laughs April.

  Sue Posted August 16, 2008 10:12 AM
• 56560
  

  I am sure DCAA is feeling quite pressured by now because this has all become public.

  I do hope that the efforts to communicate with and elicit information and concerns from the employees will not go the way another defense agency's (DIS/DSS) "plan" did, with employees being told to trust the one doing the surveys and interviews, and that their concerns would be handled professionally, and individuals would not be targeted.

  It is my considered opinion, that the person doing the surveys and compilation (Carol Haave) knew how to APPEAR to be using Inclusive Leadership skills, but had no commitment philosophically to the inherent honesty and integrity of the process. She convinced field personnel across the country to trust her in this process, but then took the information given to her in good faith, and without sharing the results with the participants, scuttled off to the upper management with the information. Shortly after that, the targeted harassment began of those who had the courage to speak up.

  Nothing improved and the agency lost many good employees to retirement or resignations, as they did not take kindly to the unprofessional way their concerns were handled. Those that would speak up, really were trying to help their agency solve problems and make it be the best it could be. Their experience was most certainly a "no good deed goes unpunished" event.

  I wish the DCAA employees luck.

  G. Florence Scott Posted August 16, 2008 1:33 AM
• 56555
  

  If I were Stephenson, I'd still watch out for that regional director out there.

  MJ Posted August 15, 2008 11:57 PM
• 56549
  

  I love Dan Hawkins. He's my favorite imaginary co-worker and friend. Whenever any audit problem arises, I ask "What would Dan Hawkins Do?" And when I request budget increases I sign my request "Dan Hawkins" because "Dan Hawkins" never had a budget increase denied in 20 years.

  And just remember Auditors if DCAA is trouble - don't blame the managers. They're just innocent bystanders. Well, thats what Dan Hawkins told me.

  Dcaa auditor Posted August 15, 2008 8:53 PM
• 56548
  

  Score another direct hit by GE. A good article. We had our stand-down day and we had several extras from the region attend. They person running the meeting said that they were allowed to attend because they could not go to their own stand-down day. It was intimidation in its most blatant form. The Regional director was giving his slide show, the assistant regional director was in the back of room as well as a couple of regional quality auditors. The only ones really making comments were a couple of regional people in the audience trying to get brownie points from the regional director. The auditors were quiet. Half of the non-regional attendees were auditors with less than 3 years experience; they would not know what to ask even if they weren't scared.

  I really don't think this will change anything. There will be committees to study things and it will get swept under the rug by November. It will go the way of TQM and the agency's initiative a couple of years ago to increase telework. In the end they will say they can't do without the metrics.

  This agency does not care about its employees, it was one of the first DoD agencies to try to embrace NSPS, thank God for the AFGE. If this agency was serious about audit quality and building trust, it would dump the metrics then NSPS implemenation. It would promote based on the broad range of audit experience and that the candidate spent time in both branch and residency experience in the agency, not whether or not a person can pass a CPA exam and kiss ass in the region.

  If you know someone in the region and get a regional audit position you get 20 promotion points. A CPA gets you 14 points; CMA, CISA, CIA and MBA all count for 8 points each. Guest instructing only 3 points. No points for years in a branch and years in a residency. So if you get one of those regional 12 slots because you have an "uncle" at region you are golden.

  One other point on our stand down day. The regional director droned on for 2 hours without a break. When it came to questions he asked, do you guys want to ask questions or take a break. We opted for a break. Of course he did not show up after the break to any questions.

  My whole take is noting will change, at least from what I have seen in the northeastern.

  northeastern reg anon. Posted August 15, 2008 8:52 PM
• 56540
  

  Just some food for thought . . .

  Several of my former colleagues at DCAA verified that there is no "Dan Hawkins" in the global DCAA Outlook Directory. In addition, anyone who has been a Senior Auditor (GS-12) for 25 years typically does not receive outstanding ratings. Those who receive outstanding ratings are pressured to move up if they are any good at all. A Senior Auditor would also be subject to billable hours and would most definitely NOT have the time to dissect the GAO report as this writer apparently did, nor would a Senior Auditor have been given access to the 19-page rebuttal that DCAA sent to the GAO. Only regional management and HQ personnel would most likely have been granted access to this.

  Incidentally, DCAA does have an ethical code of conduct and a series of "Leadership Values". My personal experience was that many did aspire to achieve these goals day in and day out. However, many also considered them "lip service".

  In addition, it's worth noting that DCAA employees below the GS-13 level are not free to pursue direct legal action against abusive supervisors or managers due to collective bargaining restrictions - even if one is not a member of the union. If conduct is illegal, it typically must violate Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines for any action to be taken. In certain regions, the union is stronger than in others so some employees may be able to file a union grievance for action to be pursued. However, retaliation typically begins (if it is going to begin) upon the filing of a union grievance or EEOC complaint in my experience.

  Finally, on a more positive note, I am glad to see the "about face" by April Stephenson. If anyone can save the Agency, it will be her. She is not the issue in my opinion. She, unfortunately, must clean up someone else's mess. In my opinion, these issues began with her predecessor, and these issues persist today with those in middle management, the GS-14s and GS-15s (or the NSPS equivalent). Many of these individuals are the most responsible for the metrics, but they do not understand what is required to complete an audit because they have not done one in the last several years. It is easier for them to manipulate the metrics than to better understand the audit process themselves.

  Shelley Posted August 15, 2008 4:53 PM
• 56538
  

  Great reporting Mr. Brodsky. Top DCAA management is in "Bunker Mode Mentality" to save their jobs and DCAA's reputation. I suspect that Mr. Dan Hawkins (No such actual person at DCAA) is a high level DCAA employee who excels in writing long winded memos. Gee April, you think we went a littel too far with the metrics? I thought we were a system of processes and they were working fine. What would Bill Reed do? Oh well, I have to get back to work and review the slide I am presenting at the Quality Conference in Novemebr.

  John Posted August 15, 2008 4:08 PM
• 56535
  

  I think this article and the whole situation, like everthing else related to the Federal Government, is myopic, at best. If this behavior has been going on, as so many "former" employees have stated, they were part of the problem, and their comments now serve the same purpose as their previous in-action, and hopefully no more destructive.

  Individual accountability (notice the word, "account", think accountant, think auditor, get it?) shouldn't be checked at the door and in the case of GAO report, it wasn't. Auditors questioned themselves and their independence and they did something about it. The system worked.

  Change is inevitable, and for the most part, a good thing. Fire, the wheel, the combustable engine, these are changes that have advanced us. A change in business-as-usual, I look forward to it.

  Bryan B. Posted August 15, 2008 3:36 PM
• 56516
  

  I still stand by my words!! DCAA is an AWESOME place to work. GOOOO DCAA!!! Sincerely, an Auditor that wants to work in the same office Dan works!!

  Dan Hawkins Wannabe Posted August 15, 2008 11:57 AM
• 56507
  

  "Dan Hawkins"? Didn't he used to work at the Office of Special Counsel?

  Contract Specialist Posted August 15, 2008 11:22 AM
• 56462
  

  Unfortunately, the DAA still doesn't get it. The Government mid-level management is not equiped professionally to manage contracts. Look at Ft Polk and A76 contractor AECOM GSI. Bob Shirron has personnel that can not get a security clearance in positions that require them. Folks get DUIs and fail drug tests and no actions. He dates peers and employees and forces people out of positions if they don't follow his unethical leadership. If you are not accountable - you can not pass an AUDIT or meet your REQUIREMENTS.

  Fred Franklin Posted August 14, 2008 10:06 PM
• 56460
  

  Director Stephenson can start by issuing an ethical code of conduct applicable to the agency's supervisors and managers, and by holding these supervisors and managers accountable for their unethical and sometimes illegal actions. The next observation is in regard to Mr. Hawkins' July 25, 2008 letter to Sen. McCaskill. What is the calibre of the gun that DCAA's management is holding to Mr. Hawkins' head? Mr. Hawkins states that DCAA has been involved with complaints and litigation. Complaints, litigation, and high employee turnover are a function of poor management. To quote the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, DCAA's "chickens have come home to roost."

  Concerned Citizen Posted August 14, 2008 8:02 PM