The second development occurred in 1984. That was the Federal shift to combined audits of each state on a five year cycle. This meant that one "team" of Federal auditors visited each state to audit all the Federal programs at once. Highways, welfare, sewers and anything else that got Federal funds were audited at one time. In practice, fish and wildlife agencies and their funding were always both small potatoes and complex matters for auditors. Judgments about the appropriateness (under the definitions of the Acts) of uses of the funds required familiarity with both state fish and wildlife operations and wildlife management. Sadly, such knowledge was lacking in the combined audit teams. This led to growing abuses in various states as the audits were seen to be less than thorough.

Governors and state legislatures have a wide range of needs to meet. Fish and wildlife are never among their highest priorities. State fish and wildlife directors work for their governor and either do what they are told or look elsewhere for work. When the audits became irrelevant and FWS overseers were perceived to be ineffective, diversions began and slowly increased. One state bought large numbers of vehicles and put them in the state motor pool for every other agency to use. Another state paid state park employees through the winter and paved state roads into the parks where no hunting or fishing was allowed. Yet another put a prison on wildlife lands. Other diversions became routine as state directors were forced to respond to state priorities once state politicians and bureaucrats realized they could get away with using the money without being penalized. Exposure of these shenanigans generally only came when an ethical state employee, usually near retirement, told an auditor or someone they trusted in FWS.

By the mid 1990’s pressure had built up to change the way "audits" were conducted. The Defense Contracting Audit Agency (DCAA) was hired by FWS to conduct comprehensive audits of each state (Ohio, Kansas, and Guam were excluded) on a five year cycle. The first year was a learning experience for FWS who hadn’t audited for years and for DCAA who began to learn the business and what to look for when auditing.

The DCAA contract was a bargain. Defense contracting audit responsibilities were decreasing and the FWS contract offered a steady work load. Consequently, DCAA charged no overhead and only $65 to $85 per hour plus travel expenses. By the time they had completed the first cycle in 2001, they had developed the expertise that FWS had lost and which existed nowhere else. As of the summer of 2001, 28 audit reports were being drafted and 20 others had been completed. DCAA had been paid roughly $8 million dollars to audit all but two states and Guam over the previous six years.