GSA spent over $268K to entertain--for one day--employees who got performance awards.

[No Elephants]

GSA spent more than $268,000 to entertain employees who got performance awards
By Lisa Rein

our weeks after its $823,000 spending spree at a Las Vegas hotel, the General Services Administration spent more than $268,732 on a one-day, taxpayer-funded ceremony to reward good performers, flying in 49 of the 200 employees it honored, officials said Thursday.

Expenses for the awards November 2010 event for the agency’s Federal Acquisition Service included $34,073.38 for space at the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington; $20,578.24 for 4,000 drumsticks for a team-building event; and $140,464.06 to a logistical support company. Travel for the 49 employees flown in from around the country came to $49,734.

The new round of lavish spending was uncovered by acting GSA Administrator Dan Tangherlini, whom President Obama appointed in April to turn around the agency. Tangherlini, who is conducting an extensive review of day-to-day operations, became alarmed by the cost of the Nov. 17, 2010, event and referred it to Inspector General Brian Miller for review.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/gsa-spent-more-than-268000-to-entertain-employees-who-got-performance-awards/2012/07/19/gJQANc9JwW_blog.html







The job of the GSA? Managing other federal agencies, including developing cost-minimizing policies for all federal agencies and handling purchasing. It has about 12,000 employees and an annual operating budget of roughly $26.3 billion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Services_Administration

You just cannot make up this stuff.

[Paulie]

1. Looks like the Drumsticks are the only reasonable expense.

(US$ 20 578.24) / 4000 = 5.14456 U.S. dollars

:)

[No Elephants]

2. Yes, if you believe that using drumsticks are in fact a team builder that improves job performance.

Otherwise, it is just another $20+K of tax money thrown down the hopper.

I understand that the entire $268K is small potatoes in the scheme of govt spending, but this agency was a habitual offender. And we know that only because certain things about that particular agency came to light (possibly a "news source" with an ax to grind). Yet, they were probably wasting a hell of a lot less than, say, the Department of Defense.

The general culture seems to be that taxpayer money is easy money and nothing is too good for the federal government, be it unreasonably expensive, yet ordinary, hammers for the military or patting themselves on the back for a job well done--even if their job is managing and minimizing government spending!