Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01281997 - SD6 SD 6 To: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: SCOTT TANDY, DIRECTOR ! Costa COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ` CO n �} u `y DATE: January 28, 1997 a SUBJECT: APPROVE RESPONSE TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT. SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKOROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE report from the Community Services Director and Economic Opportunity Council (EOC) recommending adoption of a plan of action to the California Department of Community Services and Development's program audit finding report dated October 28, 1996. II. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS/BACKGROUND: On August 28, 1996 through August 30, 1996 the California Department of Community Services and Development (State) conducted a monitoring visit to review the Department's administrative and programmatic activities for 1995/96 Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP), Department of Energy (DOE), Community Services Block Grant (CSBG), and Emergency Homeless Program (EHP) contracts with the State. On October 28, 1996, the State issued to the County a report noting ten separate findings. In addition, the State sent in on December 2, 1996, an audit team to review the Department's fiscal documents and records for the period of 1994 through 1996. According to the auditors, their preliminary findings not only support those cited in the October 28, 1996 monitoring report, but additional findings will be forthcoming. The Department is expected to respond to the State's desk review report findings by January 30, 1997. On January 23, 1997 the Economic Opportunity Council (EOC) reviewed and approved the Department's response report. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIONATURE(S)• ACTION OF BOARD ON January 28, 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS JS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT --------- AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BAARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. WACT: Scott Tandy 313-7369 January 28, 1997 CC. CAO ATTESTED -- - CSD PHIL BAT ELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF S RV AND COUNTY ADM INIS ATO M382 (10/88) ...... ......... ....... ............ ........ ...... ............... ................ ............ .... ..... ...............- ...... .............. ....... ............ ......... ....... ................ ......- ....­..........'.."­. ... :.::::.. ... ....................... ....... . ..... ..........................._­.......... ..............I--........ .......... ... ............. ............ XXX .... ........ ...... ....... .............. ...................... .......... ............. XX ............. ................... ........... ...... ............ ............ ................ .. ........... .......... .........­...........". ............. ............ ............... ......... ........................_.­ ...... ........ ..........-....... .......... ............. ............. .................................... ....... .............. ............ ......... ...... ......... ......... ..................11 11­­....... ....... ..........................-......................................................X.................:. .... .....:.. ... ....-.. .......... Proposed County Response and Plarr o....................... f A.... ct*ora to Dep.. artment of Community Services and Development Monitoring Letter of October : 1!996 Finding 1 : "it is not clear to the State if the EOC (Economic Opportunity Council) was involved in the selection process and/or decision making to appoint a new Executive Director at CCCSD (Contra Costa County Community Services Department)." Recommendation: "The State recommends that the current By-Laws be reviewed by the EOC Board and the County Board of Supervisors to determine if the current articles are applicable, and if so, provide the State with a written plan describing the action taken to correct this deficiency." County Res onset The Economic Opportunity Council and County staff reviewed this matter at the EOC meeting held in December, and agreed that no breach of the current By-Laws occurred. Since the EOC By-Laws require that the EOC participate and advise the Board of Supervisors regarding the selection of an Executive Director, and the current Executive Director of the Community Services Department, while on administrative leave, remains an employee of the County, EOC By-Laws were not ignored. The EOC realizes that Scott Tandy, Chief Assistant County Administrator, while on assignment is only functioning in an interim capacity. Finding 2: "A review of the latest EOC Board Roster on file with the State shows the following vacancies: • Four of the five Low-Income seats are vacant and have been vacant since 1995. • Three of the five Private Sector seats are vacant and have been vacant since January of 1996. • One of five Public Sector seats is vacant due to health problems." Recommendation: "The State recommends that extensive recruitment be done by the current members with the assistance of County staff and the Governing Board. Please submit to the State a written plan of action describing the action taken by the County to comply with this requirement." County Response: The Economic Opportunity Council, at its December meeting, agreed that in conjunction with the County Board of Supervisors and staff from the Community Services Department, a comprehensive EOC outreach and recruitment process shall be initiated during the month of February to fill vacancies in both the Public and Private Sectors. The process is expected to work as follows: • Beginning February 3, 1997, a letter will be sent to all community based organizations in Contra Costa County notifying them of any outstanding vacancies on the EOC. It will ask them to submit applications of potential candidates to the attention of the Chair of the EOC by February 21 , 1997. • A Selection Committee, chaired by the Chairman of the EOC, will begin to review applications beginning March 3, 1997 and will schedule interviews thereafter. • After interviews have been completed, the Selection Committee will prepare and forward to the full EOC a list of recommended candidates 2 s�,b for consideration at its scheduled meeting on Thursday, March 13, 1997, at 6:00 p.m. Finding 3: "The State was unable to verify that the EOC has been reviewing and evaluating the CSBG fiscal and program performance/activities conducted by the County and its Delegate Agencies." Recommendation: "The State recommends that the EOC Board Members comply with this requirement and become more involved in the evaluation/approval process of the CSBG program and fiscal activities at the County. In addition, the EOC Board should provide ongoing information to the Board of Supervisors regarding the status of programs and fiscal operations at the County." County Response: Both the EOC and County are in agreement with this recommendation. The Department has been scheduling monthly EOC meetings since June of 1996 which were not being held on a periodic basis prior to that month. With quorums not present, the EOC has functioned as an Executive Committee. Both executive and fiscal reports on EOC related contract activities are being provided to the EOC on a monthly basis. Several of the current CSBG Delegate Agencies have made program presentations to the EOC on contract related issues during the past six months, and additional presentations are being considered for future meetings. Both the EOC and County staff continue to work in a collaborative effort to improve communication and reporting functions as well as work on scheduling a possible joint meeting between the EOC and the County Board of Supervisors. Finding 4: "The State was unable to obtain information regarding the EOC Board Standing Committees as required in Section VI., E, F and G of the EOC By-Laws." Recommendation: "The State recommends that the County prepare a written plan of action to work more closely with the EOC to ensure that the following Standing Committees are established as required in Section VI, of the EOC By-Laws: E. Selection of Officers and Executive Committee. F. Make Recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on all programs. proposals and budgets related to CSBG. G. To maintain, through the Executive Director, proper records of all business transactions." County Response.- The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation. The Department, working with the EOC, will first concentrate on the applicability of the current EOC By-Laws with respect to the direction and focus of the current EOC, and both update and amend the By-Laws where the EOC deems it necessary. For example, Article IV. B. of the current By-Laws with respect to recruitment of Low-Income members is out of date with the current structure of the County's Head Start program, and cannot be followed as stated. This factor, combined with low EOC membership (eight of 15 positions are currently filled), and, until June, 1996, a sporadic meeting schedule has made it extremely difficult for the EOC to conduct business in accordance with its established By-Laws. Once the EOC membership is at or near the required level of 15 individuals, and once the By-Laws have been updated and amended, the Department can proceed with the successful resolution of Section E 4 (Selection of Officers and Executive Committee) and Section F (Make Recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on all programs, proposals .and budgets related to CSBG). Section G (Maintain, through the Executive Director, proper records of all business transactions) has been in compliance since mid-April of 1996. Finding 5: "1995 CSBG contracts with its Delegate Agents that were supposed to begin on January 1 , 1995, were not started by the Department until November 1 , 1995. The late start-up of the program resulted in unexpended 1995 CSBG funds of approximately $57,908 that will have to be returned to the State." Recommendation: "The State requests that 1995 CSBG funds in the amount of $57,908 J be returned to the State no later than January 30, 1997." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation, and will instruct the Auditor-Controller's Office to issue a warrant in the amount of $57,908 to the State. Finding 6: "The State was unable to verify expenditures reported to the State of approximately $24,598. This amount was again reported in the 1994 EHP close-out report submitted to the State." Recommendation: "The State recommends that the full amount of $24,598 EHP funds be returned to the State by January 30, 1997." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation, and will ask the Auditor-Controller's Office to issue a warrant in the amount of $24,598 to the State. Finding 7: "A review of 1995 EHP activities indicates that 48% of program activities have been accomplished with $11 ,748.92 (48%) of funds. The State was unable to confirm direct program services during the monitoring visit. Therefore, funds claimed against the 1995/1996 contract ($11 ,748.92) are being questioned at this time and may be allowed by State Auditors." Recommendation: "The State recommends that the balance of unexpended EHP funds be returned to the State by January 30, 1997." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation, and will instruct the Auditor-Controller's Office to issue a warrant for the unexpended EHP funds to the State. Finding 8: "State records indicate that the County has been late in submitting the required EHP, CSBG, DOE, and LIHEAP contracts. Due to these deficiencies, the State has temporarily suspended CSBG, DOE and LIHEAP payments pending corrected reports and documents." Recommendation: "Provide the State with a written corrective action plan that contains the following elements: 1 . The County review and improve current procedures for preparing and submitting required reports to the State. 2. County staff coordinate the information needed to complete reports. 3. County staff assigned to prepare and submit reports to the State be trained on the State's contract reporting requirements. 4. Data contained in the reports be verified by the appropriate Supervisor/Manager prior to submitting the reports to the State." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation. While significant process has been made by the Department regarding this matter, which has resulted in the State lifting the suspension of CSBG, DOE and LIHEAP payments to the County, the Department has yet to completely resolve this issue to the satisfaction of both the EOC and management. To resolve this matter, the following additional steps are being implemented to ensure full contract compliance: • The Interim Director has discussed with both program and fiscal staff the necessity of accurate and timely reports to be prepared completed and filed with the State in accordance with contracts and established a written schedule of due dates and types of reports needed. • Effective January 24, 1997, the Interim Director has assigned the Administrative Services Officer to coordinate fiscal and programmatic component reports with program and fiscal staff. • All reports are initialed by program and fiscal staff and are signed by either the Executive Director or Administrative Services Officer to ensure accuracy and completeness. 7 50 Finding 9: "The County entered into a sole source contract with Paradigm Innovations Inc. that was not submitted by the County as required for either the 1995 or 1996 Community Action Plan (CAP) as required by the State." Recommendation: "All payments billed to the State for services rendered by Paradigm Innovations be disallowed and returned to the State. Further, the County will prepare a written report describing the action taken by the County with respect to this matter." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation. All claims charged to both the 1995 and 1996 CSBG contracts for Paradigm Innovations have either been reversed or are in the process of being corrected. The County's General Fund will cover the full cost of this unallowable expense. Finding 10: "The County does not have a policy/procedure to assist its own employees and the officers of the EOC and Board of Supervisors with program services in accordance with State contract requirements." Recommendation: "The County shall develop a draft written policy and procedure for assisting its own employees and the officers of the EOC and Board of Supervisors with program services in accordance with State contract requirements. This document should be submitted to the EOC, Board of Supervisors and the State for review, comments and approval." County Response: The County is in agreement with the State's recommendation and shall develop written policies and procedures for assisting County employees and officers of the EOC and Board of Supervisors in providing program services in accordance with State contract requirements. This document shall be submitted to the EOC, Board of Supervisors and the State for review, comments and approval, and, upon completion, will become part of the County Administrative Bulletins. 9