oversight

Justice Department: Better Management Oversight and Internal Controls Needed to Ensure Accuracy of Terrorism-Related Statistics

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 2003-01-17.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

               United States General Accounting Office

GAO            Report to the Honorable Dan Burton,
               House of Representatives



January 2003
               JUSTICE
               DEPARTMENT
               Better Management
               Oversight and Internal
               Controls Needed to
               Ensure Accuracy of
               Terrorism-Related
               Statistics




GAO-03-266
               a
                                               January 2003


                                               JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

                                               Better Management Oversight and
Highlights of GAO-03-266, a report to the      Internal Controls Needed to Ensure
Honorable Dan Burton, House Committee
on Government Reform                           Accuracy of Terrorism-Related
                                               Conviction Statistics


In accordance with the                         Beginning in fiscal year 2001, DOJ switched from using the FBI’s terrorism-
Government Performance and                     related conviction statistics to using those of the Executive Office of U.S.
Results Act of 1993, the                       Attorneys (EOUSA) for its annual performance report. This change was in
Department of Justice (DOJ)                    response to concerns raised by a newspaper article’s allegation that DOJ had
provides the Congress and the                  inflated terrorism statistics in its Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report. It
public with an annual performance
report. These reports serve as an
                                               was also part of an effort to report conviction statistics that would be less
important measure of DOJ’s                     likely to be misinterpreted, according to DOJ officials. The FBI historically
progress related to its strategic              classified more convictions than EOUSA as terrorism-related because it used
goals and objectives, including                a different classification system and included convictions obtained in
statistics on its efforts to                   international, federal, and state courts. EOUSA only included federal
investigate and prosecute terrorist            convictions. Our review of a sample of cases investigated and classified by
acts. A December 2001 news article             the FBI as terrorism-related, including U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) cases
alleged that DOJ had inflated                  covered by the article, found documentation to support the terrorism-related
terrorism statistics in its Fiscal             classifications for these cases.
Year 2000 Performance Report.
We were asked to review the                    As for the accuracy and reliability of EOUSA’s terrorism-related statistics
accuracy of DOJ’s terrorism-related
conviction statistics. Among other
                                               included in its annual performance reports, we found that DOJ does not have
objectives, in this report we                  sufficient management oversight and internal controls in place, as required
(1) identify how DOJ develops its              by federal internal control standards, to ensure the accuracy and reliability
terrorism-related conviction                   of its terrorism-related conviction statistics. At least 132 of the 288 USAO
statistics and (2) assess whether              cases (about 46 percent) were misclassified as resulting in terrorism-related
DOJ has sufficient management                  convictions in fiscal year 2002. Without the implementation of adequate
oversight and internal controls in             management oversight and internal controls to ensure accurate and reliable
place to ensure the accuracy of                terrorism-related conviction data, DOJ’s and the Congress’s ability to
terrorism-related statistics included          accurately assess terrorism-related performance outcomes of the U.S.
in its annual performance reports.             criminal justice system will be limited.

                                               A Review of EOUSA Fiscal Year 2002 Terrorism-Related Convictions Revealed
To improve the accuracy and                    That at Least 46 Percent Were Misclassified a
reliability of terrorism-related                                        Number of USAO Number of USAO
conviction statistics in DOJ’s                                          convictions prior    convictions after
                                               Type of terrorism-              to EOUSA                EOUSA      Percentage
annual performance reports, we                 related conviction       validation efforts   validation efforts       change
recommend that the Attorney
                                               International terrorism                174                    43         -75%
General, in accordance with federal
                                               Domestic terrorism                      92                    85          -8%
internal control standards,
                                               Terrorism-related
implement a formal system to
                                               hoaxes                                  22                    28          27%
oversee and validate the accuracy
                                               Terrorist financing                       0                    0           0%
of case classification and                                                                                     b
                                               Total                                  288                  156          -46%
conviction data entered in                     Source: GAO generated based on EOUSA data.
EOUSA’s case tracking system.
DOJ agreed to implement this                   a
                                                At our request, EOUSA followed-up with USAO districts reporting four or more domestic
recommendation.                                or international terrorism-related convictions to validate and test the accuracy of
                                               conviction data reported for fiscal year 2002.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-266.
                                               b
To view the full report, including the scope    The classification of these remaining cases is questionable because EOUSA’s
and methodology, click on the link above.      validation efforts were limited to USAO districts reporting four or more international or
For more information, contact Laurie           domestic terrorism convictions.
Ekstrand, (202) 512-8777, or
ekstrandl@gao.gov.
Contents


Letter                                                                                       1
               Scope and Methodology                                                         2
               Background                                                                    3
               Results in Brief                                                              4
               FBI and EOUSA Classification Criteria Differ                                  7
               Number of Reported FBI and EOUSA Terrorism-Related
                 Convictions Differs                                                         8
               DOJ Used the FBI’s Terrorism-Related Statistics in Its 2000
                 Performance Report but Has Since Switched to Reporting
                 EOUSA Statistics                                                          10
               FBI Case Files Contained Documentation to Support Terrorism-
                 Related Classifications                                                   10
               Several Factors Contributed to Recent Increases in EOUSA’s
                 Number of Terrorism-Related Convictions                                   11
               DOJ Lacks Internal Controls to Ensure Reliability of EOUSA
                 Terrorism-Related Statistics                                              12
               Conclusions                                                                 14
               Recommendation for Executive Action                                         14
               Agency Comments and Our Evaluation                                          14

Appendix I     Summaries of Selected Statutory Terrorism
               Definitions                                                                 16



Appendix II    Summary of Case Files GAO Reviewed                                          17



Appendix III   GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments                                      20
               GAO Contacts                                                                20
               Staff Acknowledgments                                                       20


Tables
               Table 1: Total Number of Terrorism-Related Convictions for the
                        FBI and EOUSA                                                        5
               Table 2: Misclassification of Fiscal Year 2002 Terrorism-Related
                        Convictions Reported by Various USAOs                              13




               Page i                    GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
Figure
         Figure 1: Difference in the Number of FBI and EOUSA Terrorism-
                  Related Convictions for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2002              9




         Abbreviations

         DOJ           Department of Justice
         EOUSA         Executive Office for United States Attorneys
         FBI           Federal Bureau of Investigation
         LIONS         Legal Information On-line System
         TRAC          Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse
         USAO          United States Attorneys Office




         Page ii                  GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548




                                   January 17, 2003

                                   The Honorable Dan Burton
                                   House of Representatives

                                   Dear Mr. Burton:

                                   In accordance with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993,1
                                   the Department of Justice (DOJ) provides the Congress and the public
                                   with an annual performance report. These annual performance reports
                                   serve as an important mechanism of accountability and measure of DOJ’s
                                   progress related to its strategic goals and objectives, including statistics on
                                   its efforts to investigate and prosecute terrorist acts. A December 2001
                                   Philadelphia Inquirer article alleged that DOJ had inflated terrorism
                                   statistics in its Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report to the Congress by
                                   labeling cases as terrorism-related that involved crimes not generally
                                   defined as terrorism. This article further alleged that DOJ had overstated
                                   the number of terrorism-related convictions in its annual reports, in part,
                                   to justify its budget request.

                                   You asked us to examine how DOJ reports terrorism-related conviction
                                   statistics. On September 17, 2002, we briefed your office on the results of
                                   our review. This report summarizes and adds to the information presented
                                   during that briefing. Specifically, we are providing information on (1) the
                                   criteria DOJ’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Executive Office
                                   for United States Attorneys (EOUSA)2 used to classify cases and any
                                   resulting convictions as terrorism-related prior to fiscal year 2002;
                                   (2) what effect, if any, the use of different classification systems had on
                                   the number of convictions classified as terrorism-related prior to fiscal
                                   year 2002; (3) the basis for the number of terrorism-related convictions in
                                   DOJ’s Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report; (4) whether FBI case files
                                   contained documentation to support its terrorism-related classifications;
                                   (5) the factors contributing to recent increases in terrorism-related
                                   conviction statistics reported by EOUSA; and (6) whether DOJ has
                                   sufficient management oversight and internal controls in place to ensure


                                   1
                                    P.L. 103-62 (Aug. 3, 1993).
                                   2
                                   EOUSA is the executive office representing the 94 USAOs that prosecute federal cases.
                                   Among other things, EOUSA provides guidance, management direction, and oversight to
                                   USAOs, including policies and procedures for classifying cases.



                                   Page 1                         GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
              the accuracy and reliability of terrorism-related statistics included in its
              annual performance report.


              To address our objectives, among other things, we interviewed DOJ’s
Scope and     Criminal Division, Justice Management Division, FBI, and EOUSA officials;
Methodology   reviewed FBI’s and EOUSA’s policies and guidance for classifying cases;
              researched terrorism definitions in the United States Code and Code of
              Federal Regulations; compared FBI and EOUSA conviction data for fiscal
              years 1997 through 2002; and reviewed conviction data included in DOJ’s
              Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 Performance Reports and similar data the 94
              USAO districts had reported to EOUSA for fiscal year 2002.

              Additionally, to determine whether documentation supported the FBI’s
              classification of certain cases as terrorism-related, we reviewed
              information in the FBI case files for 28 convictions. This included all 19
              convictions that the FBI had classified as terrorism-related for fiscal years
              1999 and 2000 in three FBI field offices (Baltimore, Dallas, and
              Washington, D.C.).3 Additionally, concerning the 18 USAO terrorism-
              related convictions investigated by the FBI that were covered by the scope
              of the Philadelphia Inquirer article, as requested by your staff, we
              reviewed documentation in the FBI case files for all 9 convictions that
              were classified by the FBI as terrorism-related. We did not review
              investigative files for the remaining 9 convictions that were not classified
              by the FBI as terrorism-related convictions because these cases were
              classified under other categories (e.g., violent crime, National
              Infrastructure Protection and Computer Intrusions, foreign
              counterintelligence, and civil rights).

              To determine the scope of USAO’s cases covered by the article, we
              compared and analyzed EOUSA, FBI, and Transactional Records Access
              Clearinghouse (TRAC) data,4 which the Philadelphia Inquirer had relied
              on. We did not review cases that the FBI did not classify as terrorism-
              related or cases that were investigated by other law enforcement agencies.
              We also did not attempt to review the appropriateness of the FBI’s


              3
               We selected these offices because they were located in regions near our assigned staff.
              Also, DOJ’s Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report highlighted by the Philadelphia
              Inquirer article covered these fiscal years.
              4
               TRAC is a data gathering, research and distribution organization associated with Syracuse
              University. Among other things, TRAC data include information about federal enforcement
              activities. We reviewed these data because the Philadelphia Inquirer used this information
              as part of its review.




              Page 2                          GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
             investigative activities. Rather, we sought to determine whether
             documents in the case files detailing the investigative activities supported
             a terrorism-related classification based on the FBI’s classification system.

             Because of concerns we had with the significant increase in the total
             number of USAO terrorism-related conviction statistics that resulted from
             EOUSA’s efforts late in fiscal year 2002 to have USAO districts
             retroactively identify cases relating to terrorism, we reviewed data
             detailing specific statutory charges in these cases. Discrepancies we found
             led to a request that EOUSA follow-up with all USAO districts reporting
             four or more domestic or international terrorism-related convictions to
             validate the accuracy of the districts’ reclassification efforts. The results of
             EOUSA’s follow-up with these districts raise concerns about the accuracy
             and reliability of EOUSA’s fiscal year 2002 statistics included in this report.

             We conducted our work at FBI headquarters and EOUSA in Washington,
             D.C., and at FBI field offices in Baltimore, Dallas, Philadelphia, and
             Washington, D.C., between February and December 2002 in accordance
             with generally accepted auditing standards.


             Multiple federal agencies have a role in U.S. efforts to combat terrorism.
Background   The DOJ components primarily responsible for investigating and
             prosecuting terrorism-related cases are the FBI and the USAOs. The FBI is
             the lead federal agency responsible for investigating crimes for which it
             has primary or concurrent jurisdiction and which involve terrorist
             activities, or acts in preparation of terrorist activities, within the statutory
             jurisdiction of the United States.5 The USAOs prosecute federal criminal
             cases, including those related to terrorism.

             There is no single, uniform definition of terrorism. Several federal statutes
             define terrorism in a variety of contexts. Appendix I provides examples of
             various statutory terrorism definitions. In addition to these statutory
             definitions, the FBI has a regulatory definition of terrorism, which refers
             to the “unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to
             intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment
             thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”6




             5
             28 C.F.R. 0.85(l).
             6
             Id.




             Page 3                      GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                   Although the FBI’s regulatory definition of terrorism relates to cases
                   involving the unlawful use of force or violence, this same regulation
                   designates the FBI as the lead federal agency for investigating both
                   terrorist activities and acts in preparation of terrorist activities.7 Thus, the
                   FBI may investigate cases that do not involve the use of force or violence
                   that may be terrorism-related (e.g., cases involving money laundering or
                   drug trafficking in support of a terrorist organization).


                   The FBI and EOUSA used different criteria to classify cases and resulting
Results in Brief   convictions as terrorism-related. The FBI classified a case as terrorism-
                   related based on the overall violation being investigated; its classification
                   criteria are contained in its Manual of Investigative Operations and
                   Guidelines. USAOs, following EOUSA’s guidance in effect prior to fiscal
                   year 2002, classified a case based on the statute under which an individual
                   was indicted or convicted. The different classification criteria resulted in
                   differences in how each entity ultimately classified a case. For example, if
                   the FBI arrested an individual for money laundering and, as part of its
                   investigation, gathered evidence that indicated that the defendant was
                   laundering money for a terrorist group, it generally classified such a case
                   and any resulting conviction as terrorism-related. On the other hand, if a
                   USAO prosecuted the defendant and obtained a conviction solely on
                   money laundering charges, it generally classified the conviction as a
                   money laundering conviction and not as terrorism-related.

                   The total number of convictions classified by the FBI and USAOs as
                   terrorism-related differed because each entity was using different
                   classification criteria. In addition, because USAOs only prosecute federal
                   cases, their classification system only includes federal convictions. In
                   contrast, FBI’s classification system includes not only federal convictions,
                   but also convictions in state, local, and international courts obtained with
                   FBI investigative assistance.

                   As table 1 shows, the FBI and EOUSA have reported different terrorism-
                   related conviction numbers over the last 6 fiscal years.




                   7
                   Id.




                   Page 4                       GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                                                                                     a
Table 1: Total Number of Terrorism-Related Convictions for the FBI and EOUSA

                                                 Fiscal year
    Component                  1997            1998       1999         2000           2001          2002
    FBI                         124             162        173          249            225           373
    EOUSA                        13              44         59           30             29          156b
Source: GAO-generated based on FBI and EOUSA data.
a
FBI statistics include convictions resulting from terrorism-related hoaxes.
b
 As discussed in more detail later in this report, following September 11, 2001, EOUSA modified its
case classification system and began tracking and including convictions resulting from criminal
activity in support of terrorist activity or organizations and also began tracking and including terrorism-
related hoaxes. However, during the course of our work, we found discrepancies that raise some
concerns about the accuracy of EOUSA’s fiscal year 2002 figure.


In its Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report, DOJ used the FBI’s terrorism-
related investigation and conviction statistics to highlight its
accomplishments. The FBI’s statistics were used because they reflect
DOJ’s accomplishments beginning at the investigative stage through the
prosecutive stage, according to DOJ officials. The Philadelphia Inquirer’s
allegations that DOJ had misclassified certain terrorism-related
convictions were based on how USAOs had classified certain cases versus
how the FBI had classified these cases. Beginning with the Fiscal Year
2001 Performance Report, DOJ switched from using FBI’s statistics to
using the statistics reported by EOUSA. This decision was made,
according to DOJ officials, in response to concerns raised by the
Philadelphia Inquirer article and because EOUSA conviction data was
less likely to be misinterpreted.

Documentation existed in the FBI’s case files for the 28 convictions
included in our review that the FBI had classified as terrorism-related.
Specifically, we found documentation to support all 19 convictions that
the FBI had classified as terrorism-related for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 in
three FBI field offices. We also found documentation in the FBI case files
for the 9 USAO convictions that fell within the scope of the Philadelphia
Inquirer article that were classified by the FBI as terrorism-related.

EOUSA’s terrorism-related conviction data increased significantly, going
from an average of 35 convictions per year for the previous 5 years to
about 160 in fiscal year 2002. 8 EOUSA attributes the increase in its
terrorism-related conviction statistics to (1) the Attorney General’s and



8
 As previously noted, during the course of our work, we found discrepancies that raise some concerns
about the accuracy of EOUSA’s fiscal year 2002 figure.




Page 5                                    GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
President’s direction to make antiterrorism efforts a priority and
heightened awareness, investigation, and prosecutorial efforts after
September 11, 2001, and (2) the implementation of a new EOUSA
classification system in fiscal year 2002, intended to better capture
terrorism-related efforts.

During the course of our engagement, we discovered that DOJ does not
have sufficient management oversight and internal controls in place to
ensure the accuracy and reliability of terrorism-related conviction
statistics included in its annual performance reports. We found that DOJ
lacks a formal system, as required by federal internal control standards, to
verify the accuracy or oversee the reliability of case data entered in its
Legal Information On-line System (LIONS)9 by the various USAO districts
and subsequently included in the annual performance reports. Specifically,
the various USAO districts had originally classified 288 convictions as
terrorism-related for fiscal year 2002. Our subsequent request that EOUSA
follow up with selected USAO districts10 revealed that at least 132 of the
288 convictions (about 46 percent) were misclassified as terrorism-related.
This misclassification occurred despite a semiannual effort by EOUSA
requiring managers in the various USAO districts to certify the accuracy of
case data. These 132 cases did not result in terrorism-related convictions
and were subsequently reclassified under other categories. EOUSA
officials attribute these discrepancies to limited time afforded to the
various USAOs to thoroughly reevaluate caseload and investigative data
during their efforts to retroactively reclassify cases going back to the
beginning of the fiscal year 2002.11

The overall accuracy of the remaining 156 convictions is questionable
because, at the time of our review, EOUSA had not validated the reliability
of the terrorism-related conviction data for USAO districts that reported


9
 LIONS is the automated case tracking system used by the various USAO districts and
EOUSA to manage and track caseload data. It is also the system EOUSA relies on in
deriving annual performance statistics for its fiscal year performance reports.
10
 At our request, EOUSA followed up with USAO districts reporting four or more domestic
or international terrorism-related convictions to validate and test the accuracy of
conviction data reported for fiscal year 2002.
11
  As discussed in more detail later in this report, EOUSA issued an August 7, 2002, memo
instructing the various USAO districts to, among other things, retroactively ensure that all
terrorism and antiterrorism matters were opened in LIONS and that they review all
terrorism and antiterrorism matters and cases closed during fiscal year 2002 to ensure that
the most appropriate terrorism-related or antiterrorism-related criminal program category
code(s) had been entered into LIONS.




Page 6                           GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                          less than four domestic or international terrorism-related convictions or
                          convictions involving terrorism-related hoaxes or terrorist financing. Thus,
                          we have concerns about the overall accuracy of EOUSA conviction
                          statistics to be included in DOJ’s Fiscal Year 2002 Annual Performance
                          Report and the sufficiency of management oversight and internal controls
                          to validate the accuracy of terrorism-related statistics reported by USAO
                          districts. We are making a recommendation intended to better ensure the
                          accuracy and reliability of EOUSA’s terrorism-related convictions.

                          We provided a draft of this report to the Attorney General and the Director
                          of FBI for comment. DOJ and the FBI agreed with the report findings and
                          DOJ agreed to implement our recommendation.


                          Prior to fiscal year 2002, the FBI and EOUSA’s criteria for classifying cases
FBI and EOUSA             and any resulting convictions differed. The FBI classified a case as
Classification Criteria   terrorism-related based on the overall violation being investigated. USAOs,
                          following EOUSA guidance, classified a case based on the charges in the
Differ                    indictment or the charges for which the defendant was convicted. For
                          example, if the FBI arrested an individual for money laundering and, as
                          part of its investigation, gathered evidence that indicated that the
                          defendant was laundering money for a terrorist group, the FBI generally
                          classified such a case as terrorism-related. On the other hand, if a USAO
                          prosecuted the defendant and obtained a conviction solely on money
                          laundering charges, USAO generally classified the conviction in the case as
                          a money laundering conviction and not a terrorism conviction.

                          Although the FBI’s regulatory definition of terrorism refers to cases
                          involving force and violence, as previously noted, this same regulation also
                          designates the FBI as the lead agency responsible for investigating both
                          terrorist activities, and acts in preparation of terrorist activities, within the
                          statutory jurisdiction of the United States.12 Thus, a case need not involve
                          force or violence to be classified by the FBI as terrorism-related. For
                          example, the FBI may also classify nonviolent crimes (e.g., money
                          laundering and fraud) as terrorism-related if they are undertaken to
                          support terrorism-related activities. To capture and track the volume of its
                          counterterrorism work, the FBI used the classification criteria contained
                          in its Manual of Investigative Operations and Guidelines. The Manual,
                          among other things, set forth multiple classification codes for domestic
                          and international terrorism investigations and extensive guidance for



                          12
                           See 28 C.F.R. 0.85(l).




                          Page 7                      GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                      agents and squad supervisors to determine the appropriate classification
                      of an investigation.

                      As stated previously, at the time of the Philadelphia Inquirer’s allegation,
                      EOUSA used a classification system that was based on the charges in an
                      indictment or the charges for which a defendant were convicted. EOUSA’s
                      classification guidelines are set forth in the Legal Information On-line
                      System (LIONS) Users Manual. As outlined in the Manual, for an
                      international terrorism classification, EOUSA used a representative (but
                      not exhaustive) list of statutes that may relate to an international terrorist
                      incident, (e.g., 18 U.S.C. 32 relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft
                      facilities and 18 U.S.C. 1203 relating to hostage taking). For a domestic
                      terrorism classification, the case must involve force or violence or the
                      threat of force or violence undertaken by an individual or group seeking to
                      further political or social goals.

                      EOUSA’s classification had no bearing on the FBI’s classification of a
                      conviction resulting from a terrorism-related investigation, according to an
                      FBI official. Occasionally, the FBI may reclassify a case when new facts
                      become available that were not known at the time of the original
                      classification.13


                      The FBI’s number of reported terrorism-related convictions will differ
Number of Reported    from EOUSA’s because (1) the FBI and EOUSA had been using different
FBI and EOUSA         criteria to classify terrorism-related cases and resulting convictions and
                      (2) the FBI numbers include federal, state, local, or international court
Terrorism-Related     convictions resulting from its investigative efforts while EOUSA’s numbers
Convictions Differs   include only federal court convictions. As shown in figure 1, the FBI has
                      reported a different number of terrorism-related convictions than EOUSA
                      over the past 6 fiscal years.




                      13
                        The FBI’s Manual of Administrative Operations and Procedures outlines the procedures
                      that FBI agents are to use when reclassifying a case, including obtaining Squad Supervisor
                      and Assistant Special Agent in Charge approval. In addition, according to FBI officials, to
                      ensure the accuracy and completeness of all case files, supervisory agents are required to
                      complete a file review every 30 to 90 days. Additionally, FBI case files are subject to
                      periodic reviews by the agency’s Inspection Division.




                      Page 8                          GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
Figure 1: Difference in the Number of FBI and EOUSA Terrorism-Related Convictions for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2002

420     Number of terrorism-related convictionsa
                                                                                                                                         373
                                                                                                                                    8
360                                                                                                                                      65


300
                                                                                                                                         300
                                                                                       249
240                                                                                     88                           225
                                                                                                                8
                                                                                                                      56
180                                                        173
                                 162                  6                                                                                           156b
                                  29                        59                         161                           161
       124
120     12                       133
        112                                                108
                                                                        59
 60                                         44
                                                                                                   30                          29
                    13
  0




                                                                                                                                                    A
                  A




                                           A




                                                                         A




                                                                                                  A




                                                                                                                               A
        I




                                 I




                                                            I




                                                                                        I




                                                                                                                      I




                                                                                                                                          I
      FB




                               FB




                                                          FB




                                                                                      FB




                                                                                                                    FB




                                                                                                                                        FB



                                                                                                                                                 US
                US




                                         US




                                                                      US




                                                                                                US




                                                                                                                             US




                                                                                                                                               EO
              EO




                                       EO




                                                                    EO




                                                                                              EO




                                                                                                                           EO




      1997                     1998                       1999                       2000                           2001                2002
      Fiscal year


                                                                             International court jurisdiction

                                                                             State and local court jurisdiction
                                                                             Federal court jurisdiction

Source: GAO generated based on data provided by FBI and EOUSA.

                                                                a
                                                                 Number of convictions are as of September 30, 2002. FBI statistics include convictions resulting from
                                                                terrorism-related hoaxes.
                                                                b
                                                                 As discussed in more detail later in this report, following September 11, 2001, EOUSA modified its
                                                                case classification system and began tracking and including convictions resulting from criminal
                                                                activity in support of terrorist activity or organizations and also began tracking and including terrorism-
                                                                related hoaxes. However, during the course of our work, we found discrepancies that raise some
                                                                concerns about the accuracy of EOUSA’s fiscal year 2002 figure.




                                                                Page 9                                          GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                         In its Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report provided to the Congress,
DOJ Used the FBI’s       DOJ used the FBI’s number of terrorism-related investigations and
Terrorism-Related        convictions. This report highlighted DOJ’s terrorism-related investigation
                         and prosecution accomplishments. As noted earlier, DOJ used the FBI’s
Statistics in Its 2000   statistics because they track DOJ’s accomplishments beginning at the
Performance Report       investigative stage through the prosecutive stage.
but Has Since            In response to concerns raised by the Philadelphia Inquirer article and to
Switched to Reporting    avoid any misinterpretation of DOJ’s statistics, beginning with the Fiscal
                         Year 2001 Performance Report, DOJ switched from using the FBI’s
EOUSA Statistics         statistics to using the statistics reported by EOUSA, according to DOJ
                         officials. EOUSA’s statistics are intended to be representative of the cases
                         prosecuted in federal courts that result in terrorism-related convictions
                         and are less likely to be misinterpreted, according to DOJ officials. These
                         statistics do not include cases for which the FBI had conducted a
                         terrorism-related investigation that resulted in (1) a conviction in a state,
                         local, or international court or (2) a federal conviction that was
                         investigated by the FBI as terrorism-related but not classified by EOUSA
                         as terrorism-related.


                         We reviewed FBI investigative case files to ascertain whether
FBI Case Files           documentation existed to support the FBI’s classification for 28 FBI
Contained                terrorism-related convictions included in our review. We found
                         documentation to support the FBI’s terrorism-related classifications for all
Documentation to         28 convictions. This included all of the convictions (19) that the FBI had
Support Terrorism-       classified as terrorism-related for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 in three FBI
                         field offices (Baltimore, Dallas, and Washington, D.C.) and 9 of the 18
Related                  USAO terrorism convictions covered by the scope of the Philadelphia
Classifications          Inquirer article that were investigated by the FBI.

                         Concerning the 18 USAO terrorism-related convictions investigated by the
                         FBI that were covered by the scope of the Philadelphia Inquirer article,
                         we found that the FBI had classified 9 of these cases as terrorism-related
                         and had documentation in every case file to support these classifications.
                         The FBI did not classify the remaining 9 convictions as terrorism-related
                         and as a result, we did not review those investigative case files. These
                         cases were classified under other categories (e.g., violent crime, National
                         Infrastructure Protection and Computer Intrusions, foreign
                         counterintelligence, and civil rights). Appendix II provides a summary of
                         the case files that we reviewed, including a description of the cases.




                         Page 10                    GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                        As figure 1 shows, EOUSA’s number of terrorism-related convictions
Several Factors         increased significantly in fiscal year 2002, going from an average of 35
Contributed to Recent   convictions per fiscal year for the previous 5 years to about 160 in fiscal
                        year 2002. EOUSA attributed this increase to (1) the Attorney General’s
Increases in EOUSA’s    and the President’s direction to make antiterrorism efforts a priority and
Number of Terrorism-    heightened awareness, investigation, and prosecutorial efforts after
                        September 11, 2001, and (2) the implementation of a new EOUSA
Related Convictions     classification system in fiscal year 2002, intended to better capture
                        terrorism-related efforts.

                        On November 8, 2001, the Attorney General announced plans to prioritize
                        the Justice Department and its components to focus on antiterrorism. The
                        Attorney General noted that the attacks of September 11, 2001, had
                        redefined the mission of DOJ. He described defending the nation and
                        defending the citizens of America against terrorist attacks as the
                        department’s first and overriding priority. On November 29, 2001, in a
                        speech at a U.S. Attorney’s conference, the President said that terrorist
                        violence on the home front must be prevented and defeated with vigilance,
                        aggressive investigation, and certain punishment.

                        In December 2001, EOUSA issued new procedures for classifying cases as
                        terrorism-related. Through these new procedures, EOUSA instructed all
                        USAO district offices to immediately begin using terrorism-related
                        program codes as the first code to identify and report on criminal and civil
                        matters and cases arising out of terrorist attacks on the U.S. In addition,
                        the policy memorandum added a new code to track terrorism-related
                        hoaxes that had not been previously tracked under the old classification
                        system.14 In an August 7, 2002, policy memo, EOUSA added a new code to
                        track terrorist financing,15 updated its guidance for classifying
                        international and domestic terrorism cases,16 and provided additional



                        14
                          EOUSA generally defines terrorism-related hoaxes as cases where someone knowingly
                        and falsely reports information concerning conduct which if true would constitute a
                        threatened or actual terrorist act.
                        15
                         EOUSA generally defines terrorist financing to include federal criminal violations
                        committed with the intention of providing material support to terrorists or concealing the
                        provision of such support.
                        16
                          Under the new classification policy, domestic and international terrorism cases involve
                        violent or dangerous acts, including threats or conspiracies to engage in such acts, if the
                        crime was undertaken with a terrorist motive; such crimes may include, but are not limited
                        to, the list of “federal crimes of terrorism” in 18 U.S.C. 2332b(g)(5). The difference between
                        the domestic and international terrorism classifications depends on whether the crime was
                        transnational in nature, as discussed in the guidance.




                        Page 11                          GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                       procedures regarding how USAOs are to report terrorism-related cases.17
                       In addition, the August 7, 2002, policy memo, instructed the various
                       USAOs to retroactively review the classification of cases opened or closed
                       during fiscal year 2002 to ensure that all cases related to or involving
                       terrorism-related activities were coded in LIONS and that the most
                       appropriate terrorism-related or antiterrorism-related criminal program
                       category code were used. This resulted in the reclassification of
                       convictions in USAO cases.

                       The new policy introduced changes to EOUSA’s classification system.
                       According to EOUSA officials, under the previous system cases were
                       classified based on the lead charge for which a defendant was indicted or
                       convicted. For example, if the lead conviction charge was money
                       laundering, the primary classification of the case would have been
                       classified as money laundering, even if terrorism-related purposes were
                       also evident during the investigation. Under the new system, a case of this
                       nature would result in the case being classified as a terrorism-related
                       conviction. The new case classification system accounts for evidence that
                       the crime was committed for terrorism-related purposes, as does the FBI’s
                       classification system.


                       Federal internal control standards require agencies to implement adequate
DOJ Lacks Internal     controls over information processing. A variety of control activities may
Controls to Ensure     be used in information processing such as edit checks of data entered into
                       information systems, reconciliation of summary information to verify data
Reliability of EOUSA   completeness, and management review of output reports.18 However,
Terrorism-Related      during the course of our engagement, we discovered that DOJ does not
                       have sufficient management oversight and internal controls in place to
Statistics             ensure the accuracy and reliability of terrorism-related conviction
                       statistics included in its annual performance reports.

                       We found that DOJ lacks a formal system, as required by federal internal
                       control standards, to verify the accuracy or oversee the reliability of case


                       17
                         In the August 2002 policy memo, EOUSA also added seven antiterrorism codes to track
                       any matter or case where the underlying purpose or object of the investigation is anti-
                       terrorism, even where the offense is not obviously a federal crime of terrorism that would
                       be coded under one of EOUSA’s terrorism-related classification codes. Anti-terrorism
                       statistics are not included in the fiscal year 2002 EOUSA terrorism-related convictions
                       statistics included in this report.
                       18
                        U.S. General Accounting Office, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal
                       Government, GAO-00-21.3.1 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1999).




                       Page 12                         GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                             data entered in LIONS by the various USAO districts and subsequently
                                             included in DOJ’s annual performance reports. Specifically, as table 2
                                             shows, the various USAO districts originally classified 288 convictions as
                                             terrorism-related for fiscal year 2002. However, our subsequent request
                                             that EOUSA follow-up with all USAO districts reporting four or more
                                             domestic or international terrorism-related convictions to validate the
                                             accuracy of the districts’ reclassification efforts revealed that at least 132
                                             of the 288 (about 46 percent) USAO convictions were misclassified. These
                                             132 cases did not result in terrorism-related convictions. 127 of the 132
                                             were subsequently reclassified as anti-terrorism-related convictions.19 The
                                             remaining 5 were reclassified as related to other types of crimes. These
                                             discrepancies occurred despite a semiannual effort by EOUSA requiring
                                             managers in the various USAO districts to certify the accuracy of case
                                             data.

Table 2: Misclassification of Fiscal Year 2002 Terrorism-Related Convictions Reported by Various USAOs

                                                        Number of USAO
                                                   convictions originally                Number of USAO
                                                   reported as terrorism-                terrorism-related
                                                  related prior to EOUSA         convictions after EOUSA
 Type of terrorism-related conviction                   validation efforts              validation effortsa                Percentage change
 International terrorism                                              174                               43                              -75%
 Domestic terrorism                                                    92                               85                               -8%
 Terrorism-related hoaxes                                              22                               28                               27%
 Terrorist financing                                                     0                               0                                0%
                                                                                                          b
 Total                                                                288                             156                               -46%
Source: GAO generated based on EOUSA data.
                                             a
                                              As previously noted, at our request, EOUSA followed-up with a sample of the USAO districts to
                                             validate the accuracy of their fiscal year 2002 terrorism-related convictions.
                                             b
                                             The overall accuracy of the classification of these remaining cases is questionable because
                                             EOUSA’s validation efforts were limited to those USAO districts reporting four or more international or
                                             domestic terrorism-related convictions.


                                             EOUSA officials attributed the discrepancies we found with the fiscal year
                                             2002 statistics to limited time afforded the various USAOs to thoroughly


                                             19
                                              EOUSA policy guidance described antiterrorism conviction cases as those resulting from
                                             efforts on the part of DOJ to prevent or disrupt a potential or actual terrorist threat even
                                             where the offense is not obviously a federal crime of terrorism that would be coded under
                                             one of EOUSA’s terrorism-related classification codes. For example, the conviction of a
                                             defendant arrested and subsequently convicted for identify fraud during a sweep of an
                                             airport, as part of a DOJ effort to prevent or disrupt terrorist activity, would be counted as
                                             an antiterrorism conviction.




                                             Page 13                             GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                     reevaluate caseload and investigative data during their efforts to
                     retroactively reclassify and identify convictions in closed terrorism-related
                     cases dating back to the beginning of the fiscal year. Because EOUSA did
                     not validate the accuracy of the terrorism-related conviction data reported
                     by the remaining USAO districts, we have some concerns about the overall
                     accuracy of EOUSA conviction statistics to be included in DOJ’s Fiscal
                     Year 2002 Annual Performance Report.


                     Efforts on the part of EOUSA to implement new procedures to better
Conclusions          ensure that DOJ prosecutors fully account for their efforts to combat
                     terrorism-related activities are commendable. However, because the
                     Congress and the American public rely on DOJ, in accordance with the
                     Government Performance and Results Act, to provide annual performance
                     data on the progress of its efforts to combat terrorism, it is equally
                     important that the various USAOs accurately account for their efforts and
                     not misclassify cases as terrorism-related that are not terrorism-related.
                     Without reliable terrorism-related conviction data, DOJ and the Congress’s
                     ability to accurately assess terrorism-related performance outcomes of our
                     criminal justice system and the results of efforts to combat terrorism will
                     be limited. Discrepancies discovered in the accuracy of fiscal year 2002
                     terrorism-related conviction statistics that the USAO districts had initially
                     provided to EOUSA raise concerns about the overall quality and reliability
                     of EOUSA terrorism-related conviction statistics. In addition, these
                     discrepancies identify the need for improvements in management
                     oversight and internal controls to better ensure the accuracy of USAO
                     terrorism-related performance data.


                     To improve the accuracy and reliability of terrorism-related conviction
Recommendation for   statistics reported by DOJ in its annual performance reports, we
Executive Action     recommend that the Attorney General, in accordance with federal internal
                     control standards, implement a formal system to oversee and validate the
                     accuracy of case classification and conviction data entered in LIONS by
                     the various USAO districts. This system should entail edit checks of data
                     entered into information systems, reconciliation of summary information
                     to verify data completeness, and management review of output reports.


                     We provided copies of this report to the Attorney General and the Director
Agency Comments      of the FBI. DOJ and the FBI agreed with the report findings and DOJ
and Our Evaluation   agreed to implement our recommendation.




                     Page 14                    GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
Unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan
no further distribution until 30 days from the issuance date. At that time,
we will send copies of this report to the Attorney General, the Director of
the FBI, and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to
others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge
on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
Charles Michael Johnson or me at (202) 512-8777 or at
johnsoncm@gao.gov or ekstrandl@gao.gov. Key contributors to this report
are acknowledged in appendix III.

Sincerely yours,




Laurie E. Ekstrand
Director, Justice Issues




Page 15                    GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                                           Appendix I: Summaries of Selected Statutory
Appendix I: Summaries of Selected Statutory                Terrorism Definitions



Terrorism Definitions


 U.S. Code Citation                            Terrorism Definition
 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(iii),(iv)              Generally defines ‘‘terrorist activity’’ as an unlawful activity, undertaken with the intent to endanger
                                               the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property, which involves the
                                               hijacking or sabotaging of any conveyance; hostage-taking; violent attacks upon internationally
                                               protected persons; assassinations; the use of weapons or dangerous devices, including explosives,
                                               firearms, biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons; or a threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of
                                               the foregoing. The statute further defines the term “engage in terrorist activity”— conduct that can
                                               render an alien inadmissible to the United States. The term encompasses not only the commission
                                               of terrorist activities, but a broad range of conduct in support of terrorist activities, generally involving
                                               such things as preparation or planning; gathering information on potential targets; soliciting funds or
                                               members, or affording material support.
 18 U.S.C. 2331(1),(5)                         Generally defines terrorism as unlawful acts that are dangerous to human life and that appear
                                               intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by
                                               intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination,
                                               or kidnapping. Terrorism may be domestic or international under 18 U.S.C. 2331 depending on
                                               whether the crime occurred primarily outside or within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States,
                                               or whether the crime transcended national boundaries in certain respects defined by the statute.a
 18 U.S.C. 2332b(g)(5)                         Lists numerous offenses in defining the term “Federal crime of terrorism” where the offense was
                                               calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion or to retaliate
                                               against government conduct.b
 22 U.S.C. 2656f(d)                            Defines “terrorism” for purposes of the State Department’s annual country reports as premeditated,
                                               politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or
                                               clandestine agents. Further defines “international terrorism” as terrorism involving citizens or the
                                               territory of more than one country.
 22 U.S.C. 2708(j)                             Defines an “act of international terrorism” for purposes of the State Department’s rewards program
                                               as any act substantially contributing to the acquisition of unsafeguarded special nuclear material or
                                               any nuclear explosive device by individuals, groups, or non-nuclear weapon states, or any act that
                                               materially supports the conduct of international terrorism, including the counterfeiting of U.S.
                                               currency or the illegal use of other monetary instruments.
Source: GAO summary of U.S. Code provisions.
                                                           a
                                                            The terrorism definitions at 18 U.S.C. 2331 are used for the Attorney General’s rewards program for
                                                           information concerning terrorist acts. See 18 U.S.C. 3071(a), 3077(1). In addition, U.S. nationals
                                                           injured by an act of international terrorism have a civil cause of action under 18 U.S.C. 2333.
                                                           b
                                                            The Attorney General has primary investigative responsibility for “Federal crimes of terrorism.”
                                                           18 U.S.C. 2332b(f). In addition, the federal Sentencing Guidelines provide for a sentence
                                                           enhancement if the offense involved, or was intended to promote, a federal crime of terrorism. U.S.
                                                           Sentencing Guidelines Manual, Sec. 3A1.4 (2001).




                                                           Page 16                             GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                          Appendix II: Summary of Case Files GAO
Appendix II: Summary of Case Files GAO    Reviewed



Reviewed

                                          The following table provides a summary of Federal Bureau of
                                          Investigation (FBI) field office case files we reviewed for 28 convictions to
                                          determine whether documentation existed to support the FBI’s
                                          classification of these cases.



                   FBI case           Type of                                                          No. of No. of convictions
FBI Field office   classification     case          Summary of case                               defendants cited in case files
Baltimore, Md.     Domestic terrorism State/local   The case involved a man who made                        1                  1
                                                    repeated bomb threats against, among
                                                    other things, a federal building and a
                                                    courthouse in Maryland. During these
                                                    telephoned threats, the defendant
                                                    referred to himself as a “terrorist.” Note:
                                                    Based on FBI guidance, all bomb threats
                                                    in which a case is opened are classified
                                                    as terrorism-related.
                   Domestic terrorism State/local   The case involved a man who was a self-                1                  2
                                                    proclaimed neo Nazi with a violent history.
                                                    He was alleged to be stockpiling firearms
                                                    and explosives at his home in preparation
                                                    for starting his own militia group.
                   Domestic terrorism State/local   The case involved a group of anti-military             4                  4
                                                    activists who broke into an Air National
                                                    Guard facility and intentionally damaged
                                                    U.S. Air Force aircraft in promotion of
                                                    their antimilitary beliefs.
Dallas, Tex.       Domestic terrorism State/local   This case involved threats to bomb a                   1                  1
                                                    public school in an attempt to stop an
                                                    Scholastic Aptitude Test. This incident
                                                    took place in May 1995, 1 month after the
                                                    Oklahoma City bombing.
                   Domestic terrorism Federal       This case involved a paroled felon with a              2                  2
                                                    history of violent crime. While on parole,
                                                    the defendant was arrested for
                                                    possession of firearms and ammunition,
                                                    as well as for conspiring to commit armed
                                                    robbery to raise money for a suspected
                                                    hate group.
                   Domestic terrorism Federal       This case involved a man who threatened                1                  1
                                                    to blow up a federal building by filling up
                                                    his recreational vehicle with explosives
                                                    and parking it in front of the federal
                                                    building. His vehicle was found to contain
                                                    no explosives.
                   Domestic terrorism Federal       The defendant in this case was found to                1                  2
                                                    have mailed a vial labeled as anthrax and
                                                    to have placed another vial labeled as
                                                    anthrax in a public area.




                                          Page 17                        GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                          Appendix II: Summary of Case Files GAO
                                          Reviewed




                   FBI case           Type of                                                          No. of No. of convictions
FBI Field office   classification     case          Summary of case                               defendants cited in case files
                   International      Federal       This case involved a joint FBI and                      1                  1
                   terrorism                        Immigration and Naturalization Service
                                                    task force in which the defendant was
                                                    arrested for harboring an illegal alien.
                                                    During the investigation, the FBI
                                                    uncovered evidence (i.e., telephone
                                                    records and wire transfers) linking the
                                                    defendant to a known associate of Usama
                                                    bin Laden who was connected to the U.S.
                                                    Embassy bombings in Kenya and
                                                    Tanzania.
                   International      Federal       This case involved a man who was                       1                  1
                   terrorism                        deported from the United States in 1997
                                                    for counterfeiting, but who had returned to
                                                    the United States and owned and
                                                    operated convenience stores in Texas.
                                                    The FBI investigated him for laundering
                                                    money, using stolen and fraudulent credit
                                                    cards, and shipping generators to a
                                                    Middle Eastern country, in violation of a
                                                    U.S. embargo.
                   International      Federal       The case involved two brothers who were                2                  2
                   terrorism                        arrested in a joint FBI/Bureau of Alcohol,
                                                    Tobacco and Firearms operation in which
                                                    the men were attempting to purchase
                                                    automatic weapons and deal guns without
                                                    a license. During the investigation, FBI
                                                    agents learned that the men were
                                                    originally from India and were associated
                                                    with a violent Sikh faction.
Washington,        International      Federal       This case involved a foreign national and              1                  1
D.C.               terrorism                        his son who had attempted to enter an
                                                    agreement with a Middle Eastern country
                                                    to build an electrical power plant in
                                                    violation of a U.S. embargo on doing
                                                    business with this country. The State
                                                    Department had designated this country
                                                    as a sponsor of terrorism.
                   Domestic terrorism State/local   In this case, a juvenile made a threat to              1                  1
                                                    bomb FBI headquarters in Washington,
                                                    D.C.




                                          Page 18                        GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                                                                  Appendix II: Summary of Case Files GAO
                                                                  Reviewed




                             FBI case                       Type of                                                          No. of No. of convictions
 FBI Field office            classification                 case            Summary of case                             defendants cited in case files
 Miami, Fla.                 International                  Federal         Four defendants were investigated for                 4                  4
                             terrorism                                      purchasing and shipping dozens of
                                                                            weapons from various U.S. locations to
                                                                            the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland.
                                                                            The weapons were purchased at various
                                                                            gun shows, shops and from individual
                                                                            person. The defendants were citizens of
                                                                            the United Kingdom and the Republic of
                                                                            Ireland, and one of the defendants had
                                                                            claimed membership in the Irish
                                                                            Republican Army. Among other items
                                                                            found by investigators, was literature on
                                                                            the Irish Republican Army. The Anti-
                                                                            terrorist branch of New Scotland Yard
                                                                            opened this investigation and contacted
                                                                            the FBI.
 Philadelphia, Pa.            Domestic terrorism Federal                    This case involved a defendant that made             1                  1
                                                                            bomb threats against a federal
                                                                            government facility in New Jersey. FBI
                                                                            agents found that the defendant had
                                                                            made a pipe bomb.
                             Domestic terrorism Federal                     This case involved a man who made a                  1                  1
                                                                            biological bomb threat against a U.S.
                                                                            courthouse in Pennsylvania. A Joint
                                                                            Terrorism Task Force investigated this
                                                                            case.
                             Domestic terrorism Federal                     This case involved a man who mailed                  1                  1
                                                                            letters including the words, “Anthrax,
                                                                            Anthrax, Anthrax” to his former place of
                                                                            employment.
 San Francisco,              Domestic terrorism Federal                     This case involved a defendant who fired             1                  1
 Calif.                                                                     20 shots to the Pacific Gas and Electric
                                                                            power substation in Redwood City. His
                                                                            actions eliminated power in the immediate
                                                                            area and caused over $500,000 in
                                                                            damage. The suspect was described as a
                                                                            possible terrorist member and to have
                                                                            protested the Oklahoma City trial.
 Seattle, Wash.              Domestic terrorism Federal                     This case involved a defendant who made              1                  1
                                                                            death threats against a U.S. Magistrate
                                                                            Judge and two other individuals. The
                                                                            defendant belonged to a group that refers
                                                                            to themselves as Cypherfunks who
                                                                            advocate the overthrow of established
                                                                            governments via crypto-anarchy.
 Total                                                                                                                          26                 28
Source: GAO generated based on review of FBI investigative case files.




                                                                  Page 19                       GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                  Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff
                  Acknowledgments



Acknowledgments

                  Laurie E. Ekstrand (202) 512-2758
GAO Contacts      Charles Michael Johnson (202) 512-7331


                  Chan My J. Battcher, Christopher Conrad, Christine F. Davis,
Acknowledgments   Michele Fejfar, Melissa Hinton, Anne E. Laffoon, and Kay Muse made key
                  contributions to this report.




(440172)
                  Page 20                        GAO-03-266 Management Oversight and Internal Controls
                         The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, exists to
GAO’s Mission            support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help
                         improve the performance and accountability of the federal government for the
                         American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal
                         programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other
                         assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
                         decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values
                         of accountability, integrity, and reliability.


                         The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is
Obtaining Copies of      through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full-
GAO Reports and          text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older
                         products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents
Testimony                using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,
                         including charts and other graphics.
                         Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
                         correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site
                         daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail
                         this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily
                         E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.


Order by Mail or Phone   The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A
                         check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents.
                         GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a
                         single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:
                         U.S. General Accounting Office
                         441 G Street NW, Room LM
                         Washington, D.C. 20548
                         To order by Phone:    Voice:     (202) 512-6000
                                               TDD:       (202) 512-2537
                                               Fax:       (202) 512-6061


                         Contact:
To Report Fraud,
                         Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
Waste, and Abuse in      E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Federal Programs         Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470


                         Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs           U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
                         Washington, D.C. 20548