On February 16, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held a hearing on the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) at the Department of Justice.
“I have been a strong supporter of the [Violence Against Women] Act [(VAWA) P.L. 103-322] from the time of its initial passage and continuing through its two reauthorizations in 2000 [P.L. 106-386] and 2005 [P.L. 109-162],” said Chair James Sensenbrenner (R-WI). He continued, “Since its inception, OVW has awarded over $4.7 billion in grants and cooperative agreements to fund and support programs established by the 1994 law and its subsequent reauthorizations. Although there exists bipartisan support for OVW’s mission, in these very difficult economic times where the federal government must drastically reduce its spending, we simply cannot continue to allocate resources without verifying that they are being used as effectively and efficiently as possible. It is in this context that today we examine OVW’s grant programs and the office’s performance. I am interested to learn what the office is doing to address possible duplication among the different OVW grant programs, and between other Justice programs. I am also interested to learn more about OVW’s grant oversight efforts. Both the Justice Department’s Inspector General (IG) and the General Accounting Office (GAO) have identified what I consider to be significant problems with respect to OVW’s grant management.”
Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) said, “Despite its successes and efforts, OVW’s critics say that its grants programs are wasteful and inefficient. Yet, in July 2010, as part of an audit report, the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General [OIG] concluded that OVW ‘worked quickly to make Recovery Act [P.L. 111-5] grants to support a broad range of initiatives,’ and that the grant selection process was ‘transparent and objective.’ The OIG’s report cited five areas for improvement that included adjustments in the peer review process, tighter internal controls to reduce human errors, more effective maintenance and retrieval of applicant documents, increased documentation of grant decision making, and finalization of plans to award remaining funds. OVW concurred and made the recommended changes. OVW’s commitment to effectively managing its grant programs is demonstrated by the adoption of OIG’s recommendations and the establishment of OVW’s Grants Financial Management Division. This unit enables OVW to be much more proactive, scrutinize budgets more closely, and identify other issues before they become problems.”
Detailing the breadth and scope of the OVW, Director Susan Carbon noted that the “services that OVW funds under VAWA are available to a wide range of individuals. Grants help victims who are women, men, teenagers, children, elderly living in rural areas, college students, middle or high school students, persons with disabilities, and persons from many different culturally and linguistically specific populations. VAWA programs fund states, territories, local governments, tribal governments, courts, police, prosecutors, nonprofit victim services organizations, colleges and universities, state, territorial, and tribal sexual assault and domestic violence coalitions, homeless service providers, and community-based programs, including faith-based organizations.” She continued, “It is imperative that our grants administration activities inspire public confidence in our ability to carry out our mission. In my tenure with the office, I have instituted changes to our policies and practices which reflect my commitment to implementing strong financial management of grants. One major example of this commitment is the creation of an OVW Grants Financial Management Division (GFMD)…This division is a crucial part of our response to grants challenges which the OIG has highlighted in the past. Unlike the state and local governments and agencies that receive a large portion of the department’s grant dollars, many OVW grantees are small nongovernmental community and faith-based organizations, often in rural communities. While these grantees share our commitment to ending violence against women, they are often first-time federal grant recipients without sophisticated financial systems to manage their awards. Having our own grants financial management division allows us to focus on the unique needs of our grantees. For example, some grantees are unfamiliar with the federal grant requirements and may unknowingly violate federal administrative and cost principles. GFMD has identified some of the issues that grantees are facing and provides one-on-one guidance to ensure they have a better understanding of and are aware of the applicable rules and regulations.”
Ms. Carbon added, “Another inherent challenge in administering grant programs is ensuring the effective monitoring of grant awards for both financial and programmatic compliance and to avoid fraud, waste, and abuse. In order to strengthen our monitoring policies and procedures, we developed a new OVW Monitoring Manual for Grants Program Specialists. Program staff have all been trained on the procedures addressed in the manual. Additionally, we have developed a grants management risk assessment tool. The OVW Grant Assessment Tool (GAT) is an automated system through which staff can carefully and impartially assess grant activities. Using this tool, OVW program specialists identify and set monitoring priorities for all grantees based on a standard set of criteria…The many steps OVW has taken to improve grant management have reduced the likelihood that grantees will violate grant requirements either inadvertently or intentionally. Many violations of grant requirements are minor, accidental, and easily cured. Most OIG audit findings regarding OVW grants are not about waste, fraud, or abuse, but rather concern inadequate accounting and insufficient documentation. Once a finding is identified, the OIG issues a recommendation. These recommendations are remedied when grantees provide appropriate documentation and work with OVW and the OIG to improve their accounting practices. The OIG closes the recommendation when it verifies that the problem has been solved or sufficient documentation demonstrates that no problem existed. Findings that may initially seem significant are often fully addressed or dollar amounts greatly reduced once the appropriate documents are provided. In the overwhelming majority of cases, grantees have spent their funds appropriately and benefit from the lessons learned in the audit process. However, if OVW believes that a grantee has intentionally misspent funds, they are promptly reported to the OIG and may be prosecuted.”
