An Audit Report on Performance Measures at the Texas Facilities Commission
June 2013
Report Number 13-039
Overall Conclusion
The Texas Facilities Commission (Commission) reported unreliable results for 4 (67 percent) of 6 key performance measures tested for fiscal year 2012. A result is considered reliable if it is certified or certified with qualification.
Of the six key performance measures tested for fiscal year 2012, two performance measures were determined to be inaccurate and factors prevented certification of two performance measures. The remaining two key performance measures were determined to be certified with qualification.
Two key performance measures were determined to be inaccurate because (1) the error rate for the samples of documentation tested was more than 5 percent or (2) the Commission's calculation deviated from the performance measure definition, resulting in a more than 5 percent difference between the number that the Commission reported to the Automated Budget and Evaluation System of Texas (ABEST) and the correct performance measure result calculated by auditors based on Commission-provided information.
The following two key performance measures tested were inaccurate for fiscal year 2012:
- Total Number of Leases Awarded, Negotiated, or Renewed.
- Average Cost Per Square Foot of All Building Maintenance.
Factors prevented the certification of two key performance measures. The reported results for those two performance measures were considered unreliable. A factors prevented certification designation is used if documentation is unavailable and controls are not adequate to ensure accuracy. This designation also will be used when there is a deviation from the performance measure definition and auditors cannot determine the correct performance measure result.
Factors prevented certification of the following two key performance measures tested for fiscal year 2012:
- Percentage of Completed Construction Projects on Schedule within Budget.
- Percent Reduction of Leased Square Footage of Office and Warehouse Space.
For the Percentage of Completed Construction Projects on Schedule within Budget performance measure, the Commission did not have adequate source documentation to support key factors in its calculation, including budget amounts, planned start dates, and planned end dates.
For both performance measures, the Commission did not calculate the results according to the performance measures' definitions. The Commission could not provide auditors reliable data for recalculating the Percent Reduction of Leased Square Footage of Office and Warehouse Space performance measure. In addition, auditors noted inconsistencies among the performance measure's title, definition, and methodology in ABEST.
Two key performance measures were determined to be certified with qualification and were, therefore, reliable. A performance measure is certified with qualification when reported performance appears accurate but the controls over data collection and reporting are not adequate to ensure continued accuracy. A performance measure also is certified with qualification when controls are strong but source documentation is unavailable for testing. A performance measure also is certified with qualification if Commission calculation of performance deviated from the performance measure definition and caused more than a 5 percent difference between the number reported to ABEST and the correct performance measure result calculated by auditors based on Commission-provided information.
Two key performance measures tested were certified with qualification for fiscal year 2012 because, while the reported results were reliable, the controls over data collection and reporting were not adequate to ensure continued accuracy:
- Total Square Footage of Office and Warehouse Space Leased.
- Cost per Square Foot of Privatized Custodial Services.