The GAO (The Daily Caveat loves the GAO) has been asked by members of Congress to take a look at the use of outside compliance monitors by the Justice Department in criminal investigations - specifically, the way in which contracts have been awarded and overseen.

Take, for example, the $50 million dollar contract offered to The Ashcroft Group (that would be former Attorney General, John Ashcroft for those of you playing at home) by U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie in New Jersey.

Congress is considering a bill that would allow it oversight of the deferred prosecution agreements (controversial in their own right) that often result in this type of, potentially lucrative government monitoring. See this lengthy piece from The Washington Post for more details.

-- MDT

Labels: Ashcroft Group, attorney client privilege, GAO, monitorships

Electronic Ephemera has a link to the Beta release of LOUIS - the Library Of Unified Information Sources. LOUIS offers free full text searches of federal documents, which are returned in an easily printable format and combines: congressional reports, hearings, bills and resolutions, the congressional record, the federal register, presidential documents and GAO Reports. For anyone who has used the myriad access points for these types of govt. docs this sounds like a welcome upgrade.

Check out LOUIS right here.

-- MDT

Labels: Electronic Ephemera, GAO, Louis Freeh, research tools

You don't mess with the GAO. I love those guys.

As The Daily Caveat discussed earlier this week, whether or not the SEC gave preferential treatment to Pequot's Samberg and Morgan Stanley's Mack is quite the touchy subject. Fired SEC eforcement officer, Gary Aguirre certainly thought so and so does Senator Charles Grassley, whose requests prompted the GAO investigation. More details here.

-- MDT

Labels: Arthur Samberg, GAO, Gary Aguirre, Morgan Stanley, Pequot Capital

Regular readers of this space will already be aware that I am, in general, a big fan of the GAO, the former General Accounting Office, recently given the un-sexy new backronym Government Accountability Office. Normally it is the GAO that lays down the law on government waste, fraud or incompentence, but this week it was their turn to take the credibility hit. Apparently the agency has inadvertently exposed personal information for some 1,000 people via its website, GAO.gov. The personal details were included on 1970s-era defense department travel vouchers. While there has been no indication that data (which included the identity theft rosetta stone, social security numbers) has been misused, the GAO has made a point of removing it from their website.

The Daily Caveat still loves ya guys.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO, identity theft

The GAO has taken the SEC to task over what it sees as lax security and inadequate responses to recommendations made over the last few years about how and where to the tighten up. Reuters has more:

SEC must fix data security weaknesses

Reuters
April 29, 200

It's a nightmare scenario: A hacker accesses e-mails in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission computers and splashes them across the Internet, revealing an inquiry into a company that shakes investor confidence before the probe is complete.
Such an attack has never happened at the SEC, but computer experts say it could if the agency fails to tighten security.

The SEC, an investor protection agency that demands tight internal controls from the companies it oversees, was recently criticized by congressional investigators for not having its own house in order when it comes to cyber security.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said last month the SEC had failed to limit remote access to its servers, establish controls over passwords, securely configure all network devices, and adopt security monitoring procedures.

A successful hacker could use nonpublic information to make trouble for a targeted company or rival. "It wouldn't necessarily be manipulation" of data by a hacker that would do the most harm, said Paul Kurtz, a former White House cyber security official. "It would be to expose information to damage another firm."

Not exactly a comment headed towards the earth kind of nightmare scenario, but still enough that it should give the business community shudders.

Read the full article here.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

The GAO raised the issue of SEC data security about a year ago and made a series of recommendations to our nation's top securities regulator about how the agency might shore up potential gaps. A year later and the GAO is whacking the SEC again for failing to follow through on the necessary changes:

Via Government Computer News:

SEC has failed to fix security gaps, GAO says

April 3, 2006
Government Computer News
By Mary Mosquera, GCN Staff

Information security weaknesses persist at the Securities Exchange Commission because the agency has not followed through on recommendations the Government Accountability Office made last year for comprehensive, agencywide information security. SEC has implemented just a few of its recommendations, GAO said in a report...

...SEC’s information security weaknesses remain in large part because the agency has not put in place and documented key elements of a comprehensive information security program to ensure that effective controls are established, the report said. “Until SEC implements such a program, its facilities and computing resources and the information that is processed, stored and transmitted on its systems will remain vulnerable,” said Gregory Wilshusen, director of GAO’s information security issues, said in the report released Friday...

...“The remaining four major applications are on track to be accredited during the spring,” said SEC chairman Christopher Cox in a written response. By October, SEC plans to fix weaknesses that GAO highlighted, including directing the SEC CIO to fully implement an agencywide information security program, assessing systems risk, beginning testing and evaluation program for security controls and tracking remedial action to reduce risk, Cox said.

More from the article here. And click here to download a PDF copy of the new GAO report.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

The Daily Caveat loves the GAO. Time Magazine has details on one the government auditor's latest reports detailing rampant tax chicanery on the part of vovernment contractorys. A snippit:

" ...according to prepared testimony being given to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Tuesday by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the auditing arm of Congress...more than 3,800 contractors that do business with the General Services Administration have tax debts totaling about $1.4 billion...

The GAO review of Internal Revenue Service records and GSA contracts for 2004 and 2005 found that about 10% of the vendors under contract with the agency, or over 3,800, had cheated on their taxes. In most cases, the scofflaws didn't pay their corporate income tax or company owners lined their pockets with the IRS payroll taxes they'd collected from their employees for Social Security, Medicare and individual income taxes...

More here.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

Via the Epoch Times:

Former Bank Director Embezzled 400 Million Yuan

The Epoch Times
Mar 11, 2006

A financial scandal occurred again recently in Heilongjiang branch of the Bank of China, According to the latest issue of Finance (Caijing) magazine, Hu Weidong, former director of Simalu sub-branch, Heilongjiang branch, Bank of China, colluded with a local private enterprise, and wrote 96 bank drafts with a total amount of 914.6 million yuan (US$113.6 million) to the enterprise in two years. To date, 432.5 million yuan ($53.7 millon) has not yet been repaid. All the suspects have been caught.

This is the second scandal in China's banking system since 2005. In the previous one, Gao Shan, director of Hesong Street sub-branch, Bank of China in Harbin City of Heilongjiang Province, embezzled more than one billion yuan ($124 million) of enterprise deposits...

More here.

-- MDT

Labels: China, GAO

Via the Seattle Post Intelligencer:

GAO: Weak financial management plagues SEC

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
October 21, 2005

WASHINGTON -- The Securities and Exchange Commission has been plagued by weak financial management that caused budget overruns of nearly $50 million in two years, congressional auditors said in a report released Friday.

The report by Congress' Government Accountability Office found "ineffective management controls" at the SEC, the agency that enforces rules mandating strong internal controls for public companies. The report amplified a GAO study issued in May that cited weaknesses in the agency's preparation of financial statements and the security of its information.

In their budget planning for the two fiscal years ending next Oct. 1, SEC officials underestimated by $48.7 million the costs of building the agency's new Washington headquarters and upgrading its regional offices in New York City and Boston, the new GAO report found. As a result, the agency - whose budget was nearly doubled by the anti-fraud law enacted in 2002 at the height of the corporate scandals - had to freeze hiring and cut back on staff travel.

The SEC's overall budget for fiscal 2006 is $888 million, unchanged from the year before. Among other things, the GAO said, managers of the building projects were "not held accountable for providing accurate and complete (cost) estimates." "Personnel problems and staff vacancies were not addressed" in a timely manner, it said.

The problems were said to have occurred toward the end of former SEC chairman William Donaldson's tenure. The current chairman, Christopher Cox, who left Congress to assume the job in August, said in a letter to the GAO investigators that he has "devoted significant staff resources to completing these (building) projects in a timely manner and funding them appropriately."

"I am determined to put these budgeting errors and omissions behind us," Cox wrote in the Oct. 7 letter. He cited changes made to the projects to reduce their costs and an anticipated $4 million cost saving in connection with the Boston office. In its report, the GAO noted Cox's commitment to resolve the budget and management issues.

Another GAO report released this month found that since 2002, defrauded investors have received only about 1 percent of the billions of dollars collected for them by the SEC. The agency has taken in more than $4.8 billion in civil fines and restitution in settlements with companies and individuals during that period but has distributed to the entitled shareholders only about $60 million from three of the 75 cases in question, the report said.

The original article appears here and October 21 GAO SEC budget analysis report can be found here. The May GAO audit report cited in the article can be found here.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

And speaking of the GAO...

Via Reuters:

Congress' Arm says SEC Slow in Disbursing Fines

Oct 3, 2005
Reuters

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has returned to investors only a small fraction of the $4.8 billion collected under a post-Enron program for penalizing violators of securities laws and returning the money to those harmed, said a congressional watchdog on Monday. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress' investigative arm, also criticized the SEC for shortcomings in efforts to track collections of fines imposed on violators, as well as for its management of stepped-up collection efforts.

The GAO said in a draft report that the SEC has vigorously exploited the Fair Fund program adopted by Congress as part of a reaction to the corporate scandals that started in 2001. The program gave the SEC new power to return to investors money paid out as punishment by corporate wrongdoers. "However, to date, only a small amount of the funds have been distributed. According to SEC, distribution is often a lengthy process … We also found that SEC lacked a reliable method by which to identify and collect data on Fair Fund cases," the GAO said in the draft report's findings.

The GAO said the SEC estimated that as of April 2005 it had designated $4.8 billion in penalties and disgorgements to be returned to harmed investors. But only about $60 million had been distributed and another $25 million was being readied for disbursement at the time of the GAO's review, the GAO said.

Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Paul Kanjorski said he was pleased the GAO found that the SEC had made some progress on collecting fines, and that some Fair Funds had been disbursed. But he said, "I am deeply troubled by the difficulties the agency has encountered in expeditiously returning these funds to American investors." He and Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank called for congressional hearings to be held on the issue. Both lawmakers sit on the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, which oversees the SEC.

The original article appears here, courtesy ABC news.

The GAO has also recently chided the SEC for insufficient regulation of mutual funds as well as poor database security.

-- MDT

Labels: database, Enron, GAO

Regular readers of The Daily Caveat are probably aware of my fandom of the GAO, the congressional oversite body for government spending and program implementation. GAO reports provide some of the most interesting reading to come out of the federal bureaucracy and often point the way to problems that don't filter their way into the mass consciousness until much later. One recent report may garner some attention, given the Bagdad on the Bayou theme that has started to emerge on editorial pages in the wake of Iraq-style no-bid contracts being awared for hurricane disaster relief projects.

The GAO recently published a paper [PDF required] highlighting the poor performace of the federal government's database of excluded constractors. The database is designed to prevent the rehiring of contractors who have been found guilty of past abuses of their government contracts. Federal agencies are obligated to check potential contractors against the database, in order to, in the GAO's own words,

"...help ensure excluded contractors do not unintentionally receive new contracts during the period of exclusion, the Federal Acquisition Regulation requires contracting officers to consult the Excluded Parties List System --a government-wide database on exclusions--and identify any competing contractors that have been suspended or debarred."

According to the Washington Business Journal, the GAO found that due to problems with the database, "Some government contractors that have been suspended or debarred because of past problems may be getting new contracts..." The GAO also found that, "Nearly 99 percent of the records in the database do not include contractor identification numbers, a GAO sampling found. Without that number, agencies have to search the database by the contractor's name. Some contractors may slip through the cracks if their name has changed, according to GAO."

The GAO describes the problems a bit further in their report summary:

"...as of November 2004, about 99 percent of records in EPLS for the 6 agencies we reviewed in depth did not have contractor identification numbers--a unique identifier that enables agencies to conclude confidently whether a contractor has been excluded. In the absence of these numbers, agencies use the company's name to search EPLS, which may not identify an excluded contractor if the contractor's name has changed. Further, information on administrative agreements and compelling reason determinations is not routinely shared among agencies. Such information could help agencies in their exclusion decisions and promote greater transparency and accountability."

Check out the full Washington Business Journal article here. The GAO report summary is located here and the full report can be found here. Warts and all, the Federal Contractors Abuse Database is searchable here.

-- MDT

Labels: database, GAO

SEC's new triage-style mutual fund regulatory policy will apparently mean increased scrutiny for some funds considered by the SEC to be high risk and toga-party time for other funds though to be the shy, wallflower types.

Doesn't the SEC realize that it's always the quiet ones you've got to watch out for?

According to a recent GAO report, (PDF required) some funds may only get a look once every decade. The GAO, apparently unimpressed with SEC fancy-talk about "seeking to maximize the efficiencies and benefits of our examination oversight" also warned that the SEC's resources are only going to be stretched further as that agency's responsibilities for hedge fund regulation increase in the future.

All the more reason to retain the services of your friendly neighborhoods investigators at Caveat Research. Due diligence, a speciality.

Via the SeattleTimes.com:

SEC hard-pressed to examine funds

By Laurence Arnold
Bloomberg News

The Securities and Exchange Commission's expansion of mutual-fund oversight may leave some funds unexamined for a decade due to limited agency resources, a government report issued yesterday said.

The SEC, which used to conduct routine examinations of all funds over a roughly five-year period, is now targeting specific practices, including market timing, based on tips or other information, a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said. Only funds considered at "higher risk" will still receive routine SEC inspections, according to the report.

The new focus raises "significant challenges," said the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress. "The tradeoffs may limit SEC's capacity to examine funds considered lower risk within a 10-year period," the report said. "This outcome could limit SEC's capacity to accurately identify which mutual funds pose relatively higher or lower risk and effectively target higher-risk funds."

The SEC revised its system of examinations in response to mutual-fund abuses, such as market timing, that came to light in 2003. While market timing isn't illegal, regulators say many fund companies allowed favored investors to trade in and out of their funds, reaping quick profits at the expense of other shareholders...

...SEC spokesman John Nester said yesterday that the agency is "seeking to maximize the efficiencies and benefits of our examination oversight." The SEC has about 495 staffers set aside for examination oversight of mutual funds and investment advisers.

...In a written response included in the report, SEC Director of Compliance Inspections and Examinations Lori Richards defended the shift away from random examinations of all mutual funds.

"Given the size and growth of the industry, it is not possible for the SEC to conduct comprehensive, timely, routine examinations of every registrant," Richards wrote. She said the agency developed a risk-mapping program and opened its Office of Risk Assessment to focus limited resources "on the highest-risk activities and firms, and on identifying emerging compliance risks."

The GAO warned in its report that the agency may become even more overtaxed in the near future as a result of its increased responsibilities in supervising hedge funds.

The full article appears here.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

The Daily Caveat loves, loves, loves...the GAO. Formely the General Accounting Officer (the GAO acronym now stands for the slightly more cuddly title of Government Accountability Office) the GAO's stated goal is to eliminate from fraud, waste and abuse from the federal government. In doing so, the "congressional watchdog" claims to generate an annual savings of $44 billion for the American public. That represents a $95 return on every dollar invested in GAO (which has an annual budget of a little less than $500 million.

A bit about how they work:

The GAO gathers information to help Congress determine how well executive branch agencies are doing their jobs. GAO’s work routinely answers such basic questions as whether government programs are meeting their objectives or providing good service to the public. Ultimately, GAO ensures that government is accountable to the American people. To that end, GAO provides Senators and Representatives with the best information available to help them arrive at informed policy decisions--information that is accurate, timely, and balanced...

...With virtually the entire federal government subject to its review, GAO issues a steady stream of products--more than 1,000 reports and hundreds of testimonies by GAO officials each year. GAO's familiar "blue book" reports meet short-term immediate needs for information on a wide range of government operations. These reports also help Congress better understand issues that are newly emerging, long-term in nature, and with more far-reaching impacts. GAO's work translates into a wide variety of legislative actions, improvements in government operations, and billions of dollars in financial benefits for the American people.

While they aren't a particularly sexy agency and they don't generate tons of press coverage, the GAO does send down the occasional whallop to the more wasteful, recalcitrant and deceptive organs of the federal government, usually in the form of research reports critical of an agency's activities. Take, for example, the recent GAO excoriation of the Environmental Protection Agency for it's failure to ensure enforcement the Superfund program:

Via The News Tribune:

GAO blasts Superfund enforcement

Les Blumenthal
The News Tribune
August 17, 2005

A week after Asarco filed for bankruptcy, congressional investigators are warning that other companies might take similar action to shed environmental responsibilities and leave taxpayers liable for billions in cleanup costs. In a report highly critical of the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Congress’ Government Accountability Office said the agency has failed to ensure that financially ailing companies meet their obligations under the Superfund program.

The report, due for release today, also said some companies have transferred their most lucrative assets to parent corporations or subsidiaries to limit their exposure in bankruptcy proceedings. While such transfers are generally legal, it is unlawful to transfer assets with the intent to hinder or defraud creditors. Such cases, however, are difficult to prove, especially when foreign ownership is involved, according to a draft copy of the report obtained by The News Tribune.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Edmonds) plans to discuss the GAO report during a news conference today in a Ruston yard that was abandoned by an Asarco contractor after last week’s bankruptcy filing. “This report confirmed what I feared – corporate polluters are using bankruptcy and other corporate gimmicks to get out of their environmental cleanup obligations,” Cantwell, one of three senators who requested the study, said in a statement issued Tuesday. “Corporate polluters are contaminating our backyards and water, and then sticking us with the mess and the cleanup bill. I’m tired of this abuse. EPA officials had no immediate comment.

Asarco could be liable for more than $1 billion in cleanup costs at more than 30 sites nationwide, including the former copper smelter on the border between Ruston and Tacoma. Grupo Mexico bought Asarco in 1999. Four years later, Grupo Mexico took control of Asarco’s most lucrative assets – two Peruvian mines in the foothills of the Andes and a smelter along the Peruvian coast.

The EPA initially sought to block the deal, but after weeks of negotiations allowed it to proceed. Asarco received an infusion of $765 million at a time it was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. The company also agreed to set up a $100 million trust fund that would be used to pay some environmental cleanup costs over three years.

The GAO report does not mention Asarco or Grupo Mexico by name. But the report said the complicated financial relationships between a parent company and a subsidiary can be difficult to unravel. “Those who seek to pierce the corporate veil, such as the Department of Justice on behalf of EPA, face a task that has been likened to peeling back the layers of an onion,” the report said.

In addition, parent companies are often stockholders in their subsidiaries, and stockholders can’t be held accountable for environmental liabilities, the report said. Grupo Mexico owns Asarco’s stock. “Federal bankruptcy law, like corporate law, presents a number of significant challenges to EPA’s efforts to hold bankrupt and other financially distressed businesses responsible for their cleanup obligations,” the report said.

Asarco filed a petition for Chapter 11 reorganization in a Texas bankruptcy court. Asarco officials said the company was overwhelmed with financial problems, including cleanup and asbestos liabilities, pension and health costs, downgraded credit ratings and a strike by production workers in Arizona and Texas.

EPA officials have said privately that they were not surprised by Asarco’s decision to file for bankruptcy, but they thought the company would hold on until next year before taking the step. The agency’s lawyers are trying to determine the company’s liabilities site by site and are expected to pursue EPA’s claims in federal bankruptcy court. Cantwell said it shouldn’t stop there.

“Corporate polluters who try to pull this kind of disappearing act after they’ve contaminated our neighborhoods and put our health at risk need to be held accountable. There’s more this administration could be doing to hold Asarco and other companies like it responsible for the harm they’ve done,” she said.

The Superfund, created in 1980, is the nation’s top federal program to clean up dangerously polluted sites. When a “responsible party” for a cleanup could not be found, money from the Superfund was used. The cash came from a special tax on oil and chemical producers and an environmental tax on corporations.

But the tax was allowed to lapse in 1995 and the trust fund used to pay for the cleanup is almost empty. Every year, Congress has provided about $1 billion in general tax funds to continue the work. There are now more than 1,230 sites listed for cleanup under the Superfund program. It is estimated that the 142 largest toxic sites could cost $20 billion to clean. The EPA is already wholly or partially funding cleanup of 60 of these large sites, the GAO report said.

Sen. Maria Cantwell and others will discuss the GAO report during a news conference at 11 a.m. today at a home in Ruston.

The original article appears here. A selection of their recent reports can be found here.

-- MDT

Labels: Department of Justice, GAO

Move over plastics, there's a new phrase for the future - total information awareness.

Or so argues Victor Rozek over at ITJungle.com's The Four Hundred online newsletter. Due to continuing concerns regarding national security, he contends that Choicepoint and it's competing data aggregators will be on the look-out for more than a few good men (and women) over the next few years:

"Total Information Awareness" was the concept suggested by former admiral, national security advisor, and five-count felon John Poindexter, (conviction later overturned on a technicality). The idea was to fuse information resident in intelligence databases with the data from public and commercial databases. Add pattern recognition software, stir, and voila, everyone suddenly has an "information signature" that will supposedly allow astute analysts to differentiate the bad guys from the good. Well, apparently too many good guys objected to federal intrusion into their private business, so "Total Information Awareness" morphed into "Terrorist Information Awareness," and the project proceeded much as it had before.

The government, however, soon realized that even with its formidable spying capability, there was a great deal of information it did not possess, nor could it legally gather. Data-massing efforts were historically focused on foreign targets. Domestic surveillance was regulated by the courts and therefore required the annoying preamble of probable cause.

But no such restrictions existed in the private sector. Corporations could gather whatever information they wished about their clients or prospective clients. And those who didn't have the in-house capability to collect their own data could purchase it from firms whose sole function was trafficking in personal information. After 9/11, the government became another customer, trading in its court-sanctioned one-rod fishing expeditions for drift nets.

One of the companies the government turned to is ChoicePoint, an unauthorized collector of private information. It boasts a database of over 10 billion records and sells information to some 35 government agencies and about 400 of the nation's Fortune 1000. Senator Paul Sarbanes of Maryland called ChoicePoint "the world's largest private intelligence operation." Intelligence, in this instance, is a relative term since the company recently announced it was socially-engineered out of personal records belonging to 145,000 unsuspecting Americans.

But in terms of job opportunity, companies like ChoicePoint may be the future of the domestic IT industry.

Click on over to read the rest if you want to feel good about job security in the investigative world. If you want to feel good about personal privacy, best just point your browser elsewhere. Rozek cites a GAO report that lists some 200 or so data mining projects planned or proceeding within the federal government alone.

To take a gander at that report, click here (PDF).

-- MDT

Labels: database, GAO

Government Computer News has a link over to a newly released General Accounting Office report stating that the SEC needs to increase security measures to protect its internal data. The GAO review that spawned the was conducted from April to November 2004 both at the SEC's Washington, DC headquarters and at the commission's computer facility in Alexandria, VA.

According to the GAO report, the SEC:

"did not effectively implement information system controls to protect the intergrity, confidentiality and availability of its financial and senstive information. Specifically, the commission had not consistently implemented effective electronic access controls, including user accounts and passwords, access rights and permissions, network security, or audit and monitoring of security-related events to prevent, limit and detect acccess to its ciritical financial and sensitive systems. In addition weaknesses in other information system controls, including physical security, segregation of computer functions, application change controls and service continuity further increase the risk to SEC's information systems. As a result, senstitive data - including payroll and financial transactions, personnel data, regulatory and other mission critical information - were at risk of unauthorized disclosure, modification, or loss, possibly without being detected."

Umm. Ouch.

So what's the over/under on when we'll br running an SEC data theft story in this space?

To check out the rest of the GNC.com article, click here.

To read the full GAO report, creatively entitled "Securities and Exchange Commission Needs to Address Weak Controls over Financial and Sensitive Data" click here.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO

According to a recent New York Times article, "a new report by the Government Accountability Office concludes that from 1998 to 2003, 114 companies in the Fortune 500 bought shelters from accounting firms, with 61 of them buying from their own auditor. Some shelters were legitimate, the Internal Revenue Service says, but many were not."

Of 61 Fortune 500 companies who used their external auditor for tax shelter services from 1998-2003, the GAO report estimates a loss to the government of $3.4 billion on these shelters. Also of interest is that, according to the GAO, in 17 of the 61 companies individual executives or directors used the firm's auditor to provide them with personal tax shelter servies.

A bill curently being considered before the Financial Accounting Standards Board would require companies to report new liabilities for the taxes they would have to pay if tax authorities figure out what games were played in the past and opt to send them a bill. The external auditors, who in some cased were ther ones who help orchestrate the shelters, would be the ones to say whether a company had reported correctly.

-- MDT

Labels: GAO