HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobadxxe0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCUMENT RESUME
04811 - (80455355]
Internal Auditing in the Departments of the Air Force and Navy.
February 7, 1978. 11-pp,
Testimony betore the House Committee on Government Operations:
Leqislation and National Security Subcommittee; by Donald L.
Scantlebury, Director, Financial and General management Studies
Div.
Contact: Financial and General Management Studies Div.
OrqanizatioL Concernia.f Department of Defense; Department of the
Air Force; Air Force Audit Agency; Department of the Navy:
Naval Audit Service.-
conqressional Reievand4{ House Committee on Government
Operations: Leislition and National Security Subcommittee.
A review of the Air Force Audit Agenc.y indicated that
the benefits of the a&e'icy' service outveigheC the costs.
During fiscal year 1976, the agency issued over 5,400 aueit
reports which identified $242 million in potential savins and
contained recommendat16ns for loweL.ng costs and increasing
efficiency. Improvements are still needed to keep mauiPgement
better informed. Recoiiendations were maue to: raise the audit
functicn to a higher 1eVl in the Aix Force's organization,
rcmove restrictions onte scope of its audit work, appoint
civilians to t'e positior of Auditor Gneral and most internal
alidit staff positions, and use the audit staff more effectively.
The Naval Audit Service has also bei,,n cost effective, with
reported potential savfi*'s of $177 million and an operating cost
of about $13 million. Most. of the problems identified in the
Naval Aud't Service and recommendations to correct them were
similar to those for the Air Force Audit Agency. An additional
problem noted was that the Naval J.dit Servicefs followup system
does not insure that all deiicienciez identified by internal
audits are promptly corrected. The Secr'etary of Defense should
direct the Secretary of the Navy to make aore fcliowk- reviews
on audit findings and periodially to provide Danagjem*nt with
summaries of evaluat q. (FTW)
,t -~-](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadxxe0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)