Board Takes Steps to Ensure Taxpayer Dollars are being spent Efficiently and with Transparency
ARPA Audit and County Program Cost Analysis
The Ottawa County Board of Commissioners (OCBOC) are taking significant steps to ensure county taxpayer money is being spent efficiently and with transparency. In order to do this, the board and public must first be able to see where and how money is being spent. During the February 6, 2024, Ottawa County Finance and Administration meeting, the board passed a motion to complete an internal audit of ARPA Funds received by Ottawa County, and to perform a high-level cost analysis of all county programs.
According to the board packet, “The [ARPA] audit should encompass: use and amount of those funds dispersed, who these funds were given to, and the amount of dollars returned from each account.” For the analysis of county programs, administration should “work with department heads to create and report cost of service metrics for each department program, including number of FTEs [full-time employees], program purpose, number of FTEs budgeted/hired, and program volumes.” Both the internal ARPA audit and the program cost analysis should be presented to the Finance and Administration Committee at the March 5, 2024, committee meeting.
In March of 2021, Ottawa County was informed it was receiving $56.6 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding. Additionally, $2.75 million was transferred into board initiatives for ARPA project funding. The money was intended to provide an infusion of resources to help communities lay the foundation for a strong and equitable recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The previous board sprang into action and nearly all of the money was allocated by November 22, 2022. Today, there are questions regarding the eligibility of some projects, the status of those projects, and project funding requirements.
Commissioner Gretchen Cosby explained the reason for the internal ARPA audit.
“To ensure the effectiveness and transparent utilization of the American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds received by Ottawa County, it’s really important that we conduct a comprehensive internal audit. [] This audit, directed by financial services, [] aims to scrutinize the use, distribution, and the return of ARPA funds allocated to our county.”
Cosby explained that the audit should provide
A better understanding of project eligibility requirements
The status of the projects that were previously approved
A list of projects that were deemed unnecessary or did not qualify
Cosby mentioned ensuring transparency, accountability, and resolving questions of eligibility. She continued,
“A comprehensive review and future planning by accounting for all ARPA funds, including those allocated to the county employees versus the community projects, and clarifying categories like revenue replacement, the audit will offer a clear picture of the funds impact. This enables strategic planning to maximize the benefit for the county, aligning ARPA’s overarching goals of assisting individuals, families, and the broader community in the wake of the pandemic.”
Several other commissioners spoke in favor of the audit. Commissioner Joe Moss stated, “Thanks for putting this on the agenda. I think it’s a great item to really make sure we are providing any oversight if needed for these funds. There definitely is going to be good information coming out of this summary report.”
Commissioner Roger Belknap added, “It’s a unique time in history where there were considerable expenses at one time, so I’m anxious to learn and see what is presented.”
The board also discussed a cost analysis review of county programs. Administrator Gibbs spoke in favor of a cost analysis review, noted it would be an ongoing process, and will become part of the strategic plan. By March 5th he plans to work with the department heads to determine desired metrics, which data is required for those metrics, where that data is currently tracked, and begin putting it together.
He provided two examples of why this will be a significant effort. He first stated, “Public health for example, has 17 different programs. They have about 27 different pieces of software required by the state or Federal government that they have to use in order to track their data. They are not necessarily tracking and recording data according to cost-of-service delivery right now, but we can get there, and we will get there.”
He also provided a Community Mental Health (CMH) example. “A lot of the numbers are there, but they haven’t been crunched in the way that we’re wanting to look at them. For example, a Community Mental Health program could say that we served 155 adults with mental illness; what we’re trying to look at is, how much did it cost per person you served, and how much staff hours, for example, did it cost per person you served. Which is something that simply hasn’t been tracked or looked at. In order to get that, it requires information from fiscal, and information from HR as well; who also have historically not been involved in looking at things this way. That’s why this involves a lot of coordination to take the numbers that we do have and to re-crunch them to be able to look at what we want to see.”
Commissioner Belknap understood it would be an ongoing process and stated, “It would seem that as we deploy the budgeting software, this is a critical step. There is some time required to calibrate information. If the exports come out of one system that is used for Federal/state reporting, might have to be massaged a bit to fit the new application.”
Rather than providing funding and assuming it is spent as intended, this board is providing oversight. They are asking for progress reports and status of ongoing projects, as well as data that will ensure programs are operating efficiently. As a taxpayer, I appreciate this effort.
18:49 – ARPA Audit motion