GAO employees indicted, accused of stealing lunch money from needy kids

Five employees of the U.S. Government Accountability Office were indicted Tuesday after prosecutors said they fraudulently obtained reduced-price school lunches for their children.

Prosecutors said the employees falsely reported their incomes in order to qualify for discounted government meals, even though their salaries ranged from $55,000 to $78,000. Children who are eligible for reduced-price lunches must come from households with incomes at or below $44,863 for a family of four, The Associated Press reported.

“There is no excuse for stealing funds intended to go to children whose parents cannot afford the school lunches,” Maryland’s Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Angela Alsobrooks said in a statement. “Their actions are made even worse by the fact that some of them claimed to have not just low income, but no income at all, even though they were working full-time jobs at the GAO.”

Among those indicted is Lynette Mundey, a Prince George’s County school board member. Ms. Mundey, along with Barbara Rowley, Jamilah Reid, Tracy Williams, Charlene Savoy and James Pinkney, the spouse of a GAO employee, were indicted on charges of theft, fraud and filing false applications, Fox News reported.

Federal officials say the group bilked the program designed to benefit needy children out of $13,000 over the course of five years, Fox reported.

“This is a program for people who can’t afford it, but these are people who can,” John Erzen, a spokesman for the Prince George’s County State’s Attorney’s Office told The Washington Post in a statement.

The investigation into the six accused emerged from a May 2014 audit conducted by the GAO that revealed about 300 federal employees may have been abusing the lunch system, The Post reported.

“We were both disappointed and surprised during the course of our investigation into school lunch fraud to discover some of our own employees might be involved,” GAO spokesman Chuck Young said in a statement. “We will now be monitoring the judicial process and then determine what personnel actions might be appropriate.”