Assessment Report, G-96-020, NASA Property Survey Boards and Officers

ASSESSMENT OF NASA PROPERTY SURVEY BOARDS AND OFFICERS
FINAL REPORT
G-96-020

INTRODUCTION

The NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG), Inspections and Assessment (I&A), initiated an assessment of NASA's Property Survey Boards (Boards) and Officers (Officers) to review the property survey process and evaluate its effectiveness in NASA's overall property management system. In performing our assessment, we reviewed processes at three field locations: NASA Headquarters (HQ), the Langley Research Center (LaRC), and the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). A description of our methodology is contained in Appendix A.

BACKGROUND

In 1995, the NASA OIG conducted an inquiry of NASA HQ controlled property at the request of the Acting Deputy Administrator. The OIG report made several recommendations to improve property management at NASA HQ including improvements aimed at strengthening property survey processes and holding employees accountable for property assigned to them.[Note 1]

The primary Agency policy governing the property survey process is NASA Handbook 4200.1D, Equipment Management Manual, dated April 1, 1992. The Agency is in the process of updating this manual and plans to issue the new version in the near future. No significant changes to Board and Officer responsibilities are anticipated.

A property survey is an administrative process for reviewing, investigating, and documenting the loss, damage, or destruction of Government property. Any equipment accounted for in the NASA Equipment Management System that cannot be located, or which is damaged or destroyed must be surveyed.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The following table illustrates property losses in relation to Agency property holdings, as of September 30, 1996, at the locations sampled:

Field
Location

Number of Items Controlled Dollar
Value of Controlled Items
Number of Controlled Items Surveyed Dollar Value of Controlled Items Surveyed

HQ 13,234 31,719,229 281 410,494

LaRC 63,748 424,136,484 210 528,023

GSFC 120,155 908,340,782 530 1,221,637

Total 197,137 1,364,196,495 1,021 2,160,154

Field Location	Number of Items Controlled	Dollar Value of Controlled Items	Number of Controlled Items Surveyed	Dollar Value of Controlled Items Surveyed
HQ	13,234	31,719,229	281	410,494
LaRC	63,748	424,136,484	210	528,023
GSFC	120,155	908,340,782	530	1,221,637
Total	197,137	1,364,196,495	1,021	2,160,154

The assessment disclosed that NASA needs to improve its property survey process. Specifically, NASA should improve current practices in the following areas: [Note 2]

Investigative activity
- Personal responsibility and accountability
- Timely submission of property survey reports
- Security notification
- Follow-up
- Moves and reorganizations
- Length of appointment and recognition for service

Investigative activity - Boards. [Note 3] NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.319, requires Boards to investigate survey reports for lost, damaged, or destroyed property exceeding $1,000 in acquisition value. Activity by Boards varied from investigating every property survey report to investigating none. The following table illustrates the level of investigative activity at the sample locations:

Sample

Field Location
Board's Level of Investigative Activity

HQ limited; investigates on a case-by-case basis

LaRC extensive; investigates every property survey report

GSFC none; investigates no property survey reports

Differences exist in the dollar value of holdings at the sample locations. Despite these differences, we believe an active Board plays a vital role in NASA's overall property management system.

Investigative activity - Officers. [Note4] In accordance with NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3,

Paragraph 3.308, Officers should investigate losses for property less than or equal to $1,000 in acquisition value. Activity by Officers varied from investigating some property survey reports to investigating none. The following table illustrates the level of investigative activity at the reviewed locations:

Field Location
Officer's Level of Investigative Activity

HQ limited; investigates on a case-by-case basis

LaRC none; investigates no property survey reports [Note 5]

GSFC none; investigates no property survey reports

NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, states "each survey report will be fully investigated . . . ." Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.318, prescribes that the Officer will be a senior management official with authority to approve all survey reports and investigate survey reports not handled by the Board. Therefore, the Officer investigates survey reports for lost, damaged, or destroyed property less than or equal to $1,000 in acquisition value. Our sample showed an average of 49 percent of the surveyed items were less than or equal to $1,000 in acquisition value. [Note 6]

Personal responsibility and accountability. Boards and Officers should consider disciplinary action and pursue monetary recovery when property loss results from negligence. In our sample, Boards and Officers had neither recommended disciplinary action against an employee nor recovered monetary value for a loss. However, our sample included the following survey reports where disciplinary action or recovery appeared to be warranted.

Field
Location
Survey Report Number/Circumstances

HQ [Note 7]

97005. A laptop computer ($4,556) was stolen from an employee's residence. The employee had also previously lost another laptop computer.

97006. A laptop computer ($6,300) was stolen while an employee was on travel. When the employee returned to her residence, the computer was not in the leather carrying case. The computer was stolen either from the hotel or on the airplane flight home. Security's Incident Report concluded the employee was negligent by not properly safeguarding the computer and did not take appropriate steps to try to recover the property. The employee made no effort to notify the hotel or police and displayed "an indifferent attitude concerning the alleged theft."

LaRC
95-35. A printer ($3,175) disappeared after being delivered to a hotel shipping department after use at an Agency conference being held there. The property custodian spoke with LaRC's Office of Chief Counsel (OCC) regarding whether the hotel could be held accountable for the loss. The Board was unaware of any recommendation made by the OCC.

GSFC
S.46.95. A summer student did not return a computer ($3,677 original cost). The student advised a GSFC Security Investigator that he would pay for the lost computer. The GSFC Chief Counsel concluded a claim should be filed since the computer was not returned to GSFC because of the student's negligence. The GSFC Comptroller issued a demand letter to the student for $125, the fair market value of the computer at that time. However, NASA has not received payment.

S.52.97. A computer ($2,299) was stored on the floor of a Government vehicle parked at an employee's residence. The employee reported, "I locked both doors on my side. The other sides [sic] appeared to be locked." The employee did not immediately report the incident to the local police.

NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.310, allows Boards and Officers to recommend disciplinary action. 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart 1261.4, permits NASA to assert a claim. By imposing disciplinary action, Boards and Officers alert employees that NASA holds them responsible for adequately protecting Government property. Further, disciplinary action may help deter future property losses. By pursuing monetary recovery, of property lost due to negligence, Boards and Officers ensure that NASA is properly reimbursed for property value.

Timely submission of property survey reports. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.306, requires the Division Director/Chief to submit the property survey report within 30 working days of the discovery of the property loss, damage, or destruction. Our sample of property survey reports showed an average of 43 percent of the reports were late. By not following this prescribed policy, Division Directors are restricting the Boards and Officers' ability to recover the property through timely audit trails.

Field Location Number of Survey Reports in Sample Number of Survey Reports Submitted More than 30 Working Days Late

Percentage of Late Reports

HQ 59 14 24%

LaRC 81 37 46%

GSFC 74 43 58%

Field Location	Number of Survey Reports in Sample	Number of Survey Reports Submitted More than 30 Working Days Late	Percentage of Late Reports
HQ	59	14	24%
LaRC	81	37	46%
GSFC	74	43	58%

Security notification. Employees must immediately notify the Security Officer when theft is suspected. Our sample of property survey reports indicates that the Security Officer was not timely notified of losses where theft was suspected. At the locations we reviewed, reports to security failed to meet the prescribed time limit at the following rates: at Headquarters, 63%; at LaRC, 9%; and at GSFC,19%.

NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.303, requires that the Security Officer be notified immediately when theft is suspected. By following this prescribed policy, employees facilitate the Security Officer's investigation and help maintain the integrity of potential crime scenes.

Follow-up. The Supply and Equipment Management Officer (or designee) should follow-up on recommendations. None of the field locations had a procedure to ensure the Division Director/Chief implemented the corrective action proposed on the property

survey report or the recommendations suggested by the Boards and Officers. The following examples illustrate circumstances where follow-up would be useful:

Field
Location
Survey Report Number/Circumstances

HQ
97-016. The Division Director reported that personnel were "being made more inventory conscious via inventories, signing 1602 forms, and posting procedures."

97-003. The Division Director reported that he would implement a procedure whereby individuals would verify every piece of equipment assigned to them.

LaRC 96-43. The Board recommended that the Division Director initiate a policy that sensitive equipment not be placed on pick-up tables. An employee should maintain control of the equipment until picked up by transportation personnel.

96-18. The Board recommended "that organizational management follow through with the implementation of the card-key system."

GSFC
S.40.97. The Division Director reported, in part, formal loan agreements would be established.

S.7.96. The Division Director recommended that (1) the contractor perform periodic spot checks of equipment; (2) the 20-4 shipping document be used for all shipments leaving the site; and (3) all material, incoming and outgoing, be coordinated with Logistics.

NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.310, requires the Supply and Equipment Management Officer to ensure follow-up on the implementation of recommendations arising from the survey. By ensuring Division Directors/Chief implement recommendations, future losses may be prevented.

Moves and reorganizations. Management should develop a checklist for office moves and reorganizations. Our sample showed an average of 25 percent of the survey reports related to office moves and reorganizations. These two activities make property more vulnerable to loss, theft, or being misplaced. To minimize loss, management must ensure adequate control, oversight, and accountability.

Length of appointment and recognition for service. Management should consider a term appointment for Board members and Officers. Board members and Officers have served for varying lengths of time, ranging from less than 1 year to over 11 years. Some expressed concern that serving as a Board member or as the Officer is a "thankless" job that is not included in their performance plans. Term appointments, staggered to provide periodic replacement, would facilitate continuity and orderly transition of membership.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend the Acting Associate Administrator for Management Systems and Facilities and the responsible Officials-in-Charge:

Require Boards investigate property survey reports in accordance with NHB 4200.1D and evaluate the efficiency of Officers investigating losses for property valued less than or equal to $1,000.
Require Boards and Officers to recommend disciplinary action against any Government employee for property losses resulting from negligence or failure to follow applicable property management procedures, and require Boards and Officers recommend monetary recovery, where appropriate.
Emphasize to Division Directors/Chiefs the requirement to submit property survey reports within 30 working days of the loss.
Remind all employees to immediately notify the Security Officer of losses where theft is suspected.
Require the Supply and Equipment Management Officer (or designee) followup on the implementation of recommendations arising from the property survey process.
Develop a checklist for management officials to use during moves and reorganizations.
Prescribe a term appointment for Board members and Officers, and ensure that Board members and Officers have appropriate performance standards and recognition relating to their property survey duties.
Perform assessments of the property survey process at the field locations we did not review to ensure compliance with Agency policy.

SUMMARY OF NASA MANAGEMENT'S RESPONSE

NASA's consolidated response to our draft report concurs with our recommendations or with their intent. NASA will take action to improve the current Property Survey Process. We also note management's intention to clarify and define the term "investigate" as it pertains to equipment management directives. The definition will be incorporated into the next revision of the NPD.

NASA's complete consolidated response, dated January 26, 1998, is provided in Appendix E.

EVALUATION OF MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

As explained below, NASA's comments are noted or incorporated in our assessment report.

Our original recommendation 2 was, in part, to have the Boards and Officers "pursue monetary recovery." Based on NASA's comments, we changed the recommendation to clarify that Boards and Officers have the authority and should recommend appropriate disciplinary actions, and/or recommend that responsible officials seek monetary recovery as appropriate.

With respect to investigative activity of the GSFC Survey Board, we disagree with the Agency position that the GSFC Board complies with NHB 4200.1D by questioning or rejecting a Survey Report. In our opinion, the Board and Officer is not complying with NHB 4200.1D when a property management employee prepares the statement of findings on the survey report before the Officer reviews the report or the Board meeting is held to discuss the findings. However, NASA's intention to define the term "investigate" in the forthcoming revision of the NHB should further clarify roles and responsibilities and help resolve this issue.

CONCLUSION

NASA policy sets forth a property survey process for reviewing, investigating, and documenting the loss, damage, or destruction of Government property as part of its property management system. Management's implementation of the OIG's recommendations will strengthen and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the property survey process.

Distribution

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Officials-In-Charge

A/Administrator
AD/Acting Deputy Administrator
AT/Associate Deputy Administrator (Technical)
B/Chief Financial Officer
C/Associate Administrator for Headquarters Operations
F/Associate Administrator for Human Resources and Education
G/General Counsel
J/Acting Associate Administrator for Management Systems and Facilities
L/Associate Administrator for Legislative Affairs
P/Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Director, Langley Research Center

NASA Advisory Council Officials

Chairman, NASA Advisory Committee

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of each of the following Congressional Committees and Subcommittees:

Senate Committee on Appropriations
Senate Subcommittee on VA-HUD-Independent Agencies
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation
Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space
Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs
House Committee on Appropriations
House Subcommittee on VA-HUD-Independent Agencies
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
House Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice
House Committee on Science
House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics

APPENDIX A

METHODOLOGY

The assessment team interviewed Board members, Officers, Security officials, property management officials, and human resource officials. We reviewed relevant Agency policy, including NASA Handbooks and Management Instructions that address equipment management and the property survey process.

We also reviewed property survey reports, security reports, Board meeting minutes, and performance measure data. For property survey reports, we sampled property losses at HQ, LaRC, and GSFC for the years 1995, 1996, and 1997. For security reports, we reviewed those attached to the property survey reports included in our sample. We reviewed Board meeting minutes for the years 1995, 1996, and 1997, and performance measure data for the years 1995 and 1996.

APPENDIX B Recommendations for Improvements to Current Practices
at NASA Headquarters

Practice Recommendation

The Officer is also the Board Chairperson. NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.319, prohibits the Officer from serving on the Board.
The Associate Administrator for Headquarters Operations should appoint a senior management official as the Officer.

For 30 out of 76 (39%) reports in our sample, the Officer or Board did not complete action in a timely manner. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.306, requires action on the survey be completed within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief submittal. (We note that HQ had a backlog of more than 200 reports in 1996.)
The Officer and Board should complete action on the survey reports within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief's submittal.

For 16 of 76 (21%) reports in our sample, where theft was suspected, the Officer or Board did not investigate and approve reports. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires each survey report be fully investigated, and Paragraph 3.311 requires the Officer approve all reports.
The Officer and Board should investigate and approve reports as prescribed in the handbook.

The Officer and Board Chairperson did not prepare a written annual report for 1996. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.313, prescribes the report data.
The Officer and Board Chairperson should ensure written annual reports are prepared.

The Board did not prepare adequate minutes to document meetings. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires the minutes include (1) the facts surrounding the loss, damage, or destruction of the property; (2) the extent or absence of personal responsibility; and (3) all evidence, testimony, and other information considered during the investigation.
The Board should prepare minutes of each meeting that include the information prescribed in the handbook.

Survey reports are incomplete. Information, such as date of discovery or Division Director/Chief recommendations, was missing on some reports in our sample. Some pages for reports in our sample were unavailable.
The Officer and Board should ensure all parties properly complete survey reports. The Supply and Equipment Management Officer should ensure survey reports are properly filed and maintained.

APPENDIX C
Recommendations for Improvements to Current Practices
at Langley Research Center

Practice Recommendation

The Security Officer is not providing copies of investigative reports to the Board. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.303, requires investigative reports and findings become part of the survey report. (During our assessment, the Board Chairperson addressed this issue with the Security Officer.)

The Security Officer must forward a copy of investigative reports, with findings, to the Board. (The Security Officer agreed to implement this recommendation during the assessment.)

Out of 153 items in our sample, 55 were for items valued at or under $1,000. The Board investigated all of these losses. NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.319, requires the Board to investigate and make recommendations on losses for property exceeding $1,000 in acquisition value. (The Officer may also refer survey reports the Board for action for property valued at $1,000 or less.)
The Board should investigate losses for property less than or equal to $1,000 only at the request of the Officer.

APPENDIX D
Recommendations for Improvements to Current Practices
at Goddard Space Flight Center

Practice Recommendation

A property management employee prepares the statement of findings on the survey reports before the Officer reviews them or the Board meets to discuss them. This activity results in an inadequate separation of duties.

The Officer and Board should, after conducting an investigation on the loss, compose the statement of findings and make recommendations.

Survey reports are incomplete or unavailable. Information, such as date of discovery or Division Director/Chief recommendations, was missing on some reports in our sample. Some pages for reports in our sample were unavailable.
The Officer and Board should ensure all parties properly complete survey reports. The Supply and Equipment Management Officer should ensure survey reports are properly filed and maintained.

For 35 out of 83 (42%) reports in our sample, the Officer or Board did not complete action in a timely manner. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.306, requires action on the survey be completed within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief submittal. (We note that GSFC did not have an Officer or Board in 1995).
The Officer and Board should complete action on the survey reports within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief's submittal.

The Officer and Board Chairperson did not prepare a written annual report for 1995 and 1996. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.313, prescribes the report data.
The Officer and Board Chairperson should ensure written annual reports are prepared.

The Board did not prepare adequate minutes to document meetings. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires the minutes include (1) the facts surrounding the loss, damage, or destruction of the property; (2) the extent or absence of personal responsibility; and (3) all evidence, testimony, and other information considered during the investigation.
The Board should prepare minutes of each meeting that include the information prescribed in the handbook.

APPENDIX E

REPORT END NOTES

Note 1. These recommendations included:

Hold employees and contractor personnel that are loaned property personally liable for the security of the equipment.
Strengthen the Survey Reporting System by the following:
- Require that survey reports be submitted within 30 work days of the discovery that an item of property is lost, damaged, or stolen by the user or individual who last had possession of the equipment, not the property custodian.
- Require Survey Boards to return survey reports that are incomplete and untimely for more information.
- Require Survey Boards to report all incidents where loss is unexplained, or theft is suspected, directly to the Security Office and the OIG for investigative or other action.
- Ensure that an analysis of survey reports is performed to identify any patterns of repeat submissions by the same individual, or from the same area to identify specific deficiencies to be addressed.

Note 2. We make specific recommendations to current practices at each field location we reviewed. See Appendix B (Headquarters), Appendix C (LaRC), and Appendix D (GSFC).

Note 3. Each NASA Installation Director appoints a Property Survey Board, composed of at least two members and a chairperson. Members perform their Board duties as a collateral duty.

Note 4. Each NASA Installation Director appoints a senior management official as the Installation Property Survey Officer. The Officer has the authority to approve all survey reports and investigate situations not handled by the Property Survey Board. The designated official serves as Officer as a collateral duty.

Note 5. LaRC's Survey Board investigates all survey reports.

Note 6. Although out review indicates limited or no investigative activity on the part of the Property Survey Officers at the centers we reviewed, requiring a senior management official to fully investigate these losses may be an inefficient internal control. Alternatives may include raising the cost threshold and/or ensuring that the designated senior official receives adequate staff support in fulfilling investigative responsibilities.

Note 7. Since the issuance of our draft report, the NASA Headquarters Survey Board has completed action on one of the referenced cases and has the other under review.

Sample Field Location	Board's Level of Investigative Activity
HQ	limited; investigates on a case-by-case basis
LaRC	extensive; investigates every property survey report
GSFC	none; investigates no property survey reports

Field Location	Officer's Level of Investigative Activity
HQ	limited; investigates on a case-by-case basis
LaRC	none; investigates no property survey reports [Note 5]
GSFC	none; investigates no property survey reports

Field Location	Survey Report Number/Circumstances
HQ [Note 7]	97005. A laptop computer ($4,556) was stolen from an employee's residence. The employee had also previously lost another laptop computer. 97006. A laptop computer ($6,300) was stolen while an employee was on travel. When the employee returned to her residence, the computer was not in the leather carrying case. The computer was stolen either from the hotel or on the airplane flight home. Security's Incident Report concluded the employee was negligent by not properly safeguarding the computer and did not take appropriate steps to try to recover the property. The employee made no effort to notify the hotel or police and displayed "an indifferent attitude concerning the alleged theft."
LaRC	95-35. A printer ($3,175) disappeared after being delivered to a hotel shipping department after use at an Agency conference being held there. The property custodian spoke with LaRC's Office of Chief Counsel (OCC) regarding whether the hotel could be held accountable for the loss. The Board was unaware of any recommendation made by the OCC.
GSFC	S.46.95. A summer student did not return a computer ($3,677 original cost). The student advised a GSFC Security Investigator that he would pay for the lost computer. The GSFC Chief Counsel concluded a claim should be filed since the computer was not returned to GSFC because of the student's negligence. The GSFC Comptroller issued a demand letter to the student for $125, the fair market value of the computer at that time. However, NASA has not received payment. S.52.97. A computer ($2,299) was stored on the floor of a Government vehicle parked at an employee's residence. The employee reported, "I locked both doors on my side. The other sides [sic] appeared to be locked." The employee did not immediately report the incident to the local police.

Field Location	Survey Report Number/Circumstances
HQ	97-016. The Division Director reported that personnel were "being made more inventory conscious via inventories, signing 1602 forms, and posting procedures." 97-003. The Division Director reported that he would implement a procedure whereby individuals would verify every piece of equipment assigned to them.
LaRC	96-43. The Board recommended that the Division Director initiate a policy that sensitive equipment not be placed on pick-up tables. An employee should maintain control of the equipment until picked up by transportation personnel. 96-18. The Board recommended "that organizational management follow through with the implementation of the card-key system."
GSFC	S.40.97. The Division Director reported, in part, formal loan agreements would be established. S.7.96. The Division Director recommended that (1) the contractor perform periodic spot checks of equipment; (2) the 20-4 shipping document be used for all shipments leaving the site; and (3) all material, incoming and outgoing, be coordinated with Logistics.

Practice	Recommendation
The Officer is also the Board Chairperson. NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.319, prohibits the Officer from serving on the Board.	The Associate Administrator for Headquarters Operations should appoint a senior management official as the Officer.
For 30 out of 76 (39%) reports in our sample, the Officer or Board did not complete action in a timely manner. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.306, requires action on the survey be completed within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief submittal. (We note that HQ had a backlog of more than 200 reports in 1996.)	The Officer and Board should complete action on the survey reports within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief's submittal.
For 16 of 76 (21%) reports in our sample, where theft was suspected, the Officer or Board did not investigate and approve reports. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires each survey report be fully investigated, and Paragraph 3.311 requires the Officer approve all reports.	The Officer and Board should investigate and approve reports as prescribed in the handbook.
The Officer and Board Chairperson did not prepare a written annual report for 1996. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.313, prescribes the report data.	The Officer and Board Chairperson should ensure written annual reports are prepared.
The Board did not prepare adequate minutes to document meetings. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires the minutes include (1) the facts surrounding the loss, damage, or destruction of the property; (2) the extent or absence of personal responsibility; and (3) all evidence, testimony, and other information considered during the investigation.	The Board should prepare minutes of each meeting that include the information prescribed in the handbook.
Survey reports are incomplete. Information, such as date of discovery or Division Director/Chief recommendations, was missing on some reports in our sample. Some pages for reports in our sample were unavailable.	The Officer and Board should ensure all parties properly complete survey reports. The Supply and Equipment Management Officer should ensure survey reports are properly filed and maintained.

Practice	Recommendation
The Security Officer is not providing copies of investigative reports to the Board. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.303, requires investigative reports and findings become part of the survey report. (During our assessment, the Board Chairperson addressed this issue with the Security Officer.)	The Security Officer must forward a copy of investigative reports, with findings, to the Board. (The Security Officer agreed to implement this recommendation during the assessment.)
Out of 153 items in our sample, 55 were for items valued at or under $1,000. The Board investigated all of these losses. NHB 4200.1D, Section I, Part 3, Paragraph 1.319, requires the Board to investigate and make recommendations on losses for property exceeding $1,000 in acquisition value. (The Officer may also refer survey reports the Board for action for property valued at $1,000 or less.)	The Board should investigate losses for property less than or equal to $1,000 only at the request of the Officer.

Practice	Recommendation
A property management employee prepares the statement of findings on the survey reports before the Officer reviews them or the Board meets to discuss them. This activity results in an inadequate separation of duties.	The Officer and Board should, after conducting an investigation on the loss, compose the statement of findings and make recommendations.
Survey reports are incomplete or unavailable. Information, such as date of discovery or Division Director/Chief recommendations, was missing on some reports in our sample. Some pages for reports in our sample were unavailable.	The Officer and Board should ensure all parties properly complete survey reports. The Supply and Equipment Management Officer should ensure survey reports are properly filed and maintained.
For 35 out of 83 (42%) reports in our sample, the Officer or Board did not complete action in a timely manner. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.306, requires action on the survey be completed within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief submittal. (We note that GSFC did not have an Officer or Board in 1995).	The Officer and Board should complete action on the survey reports within 90 working days of the Division Director/Chief's submittal.
The Officer and Board Chairperson did not prepare a written annual report for 1995 and 1996. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.313, prescribes the report data.	The Officer and Board Chairperson should ensure written annual reports are prepared.
The Board did not prepare adequate minutes to document meetings. NHB 4200.1D, Section III, Part 3, Paragraph 3.309, requires the minutes include (1) the facts surrounding the loss, damage, or destruction of the property; (2) the extent or absence of personal responsibility; and (3) all evidence, testimony, and other information considered during the investigation.	The Board should prepare minutes of each meeting that include the information prescribed in the handbook.