Report 2009-118 Recommendations
When an audit is completed and a report is issued, auditees must provide the State Auditor with information regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year. Additionally, Senate Bill 1452 (Chapter 452, Statutes of 2006), requires auditees who have not implemented recommendations after one year, to report to us and to the Legislature why they have not implemented them or to state when they intend to implement them. Below, is a listing of each recommendation the State Auditor made in the report referenced and a link to the most recent response from the auditee addressing their progress in implementing the recommendation and the State Auditor's assessment of auditee's response based on our review of the supporting documentation.
Recommendations in Report 2009-118: Department of Developmental Services: A More Uniform and Transparent Procurement and Rate-Setting Process Would Improve the Cost-Effectiveness of Regional Centers (Release Date: August 2010)
|Recommendations to Developmental Services, Department of|
To ensure that consumers receive high-quality, cost-effective services that meet the goals of their individual development plans (IPPs) consistent with state law, Developmental Services should require the regional centers to document the basis of any IPP-related vendor selection and specify which comparable vendors (when available) were evaluated.
|Will Not Implement|
To ensure that consumers receive high-quality, cost-effective services that meet the goals of their IPPs consistent with state law, Developmental Services should review a representative sample of this documentation as part of its biennial waiver reviews or fiscal audits to ensure that regional centers are complying with state law—and particularly with the July 2009 amendment requiring selection of the least costly available provider of comparable service.
|Will Not Implement|
To ensure that it is providing oversight in accordance with state law and Medicaid Waiver requirements, Developmental Services should ensure that it performs audits of each regional center every two years as required.
Developmental Services should require that the regional centers prepare and follow written procedures for their purchase of services that detail what documents will be retained for payment of invoices. Additionally, if regional centers move to an electronic authorization process, Developmental Services should determine whether it needs to revise its regulations.
Developmental Services should ensure that the system Valley Mountain implements to correct its transportation invoicing process collects individual consumer data as necessary to ensure compliance with Medicaid Waiver requirements.
To ensure that negotiated rates are cost effective, Developmental Services should require regional centers to document how they determine that the rates they negotiate or otherwise establish are reasonable for the services to be provided.
To ensure that negotiated rates are cost effective, Developmental Services should encourage regional centers to use, when applicable, the cost statement approach exemplified by Far Northern.
To ensure that negotiated rates are cost effective, Developmental Services should Follow and refine, as necessary, its newly established fiscal audit procedures requiring a review of a representative sample of negotiated rates as part of its biennial fiscal audit of each regional center.
If Developmental Services believes it needs statutory or regulatory changes to provide effective oversight of the regional centers’ rate setting practices, the department should seek these changes.
Unless rescinded by the Legislature, Developmental Services should carry out its newly developed fiscal audit procedures for ensuring compliance with provisions of the Legislature’s July 2008 rate freeze. If Developmental Services needs to streamline its current fiscal audit program to enable it to incorporate this review of rate freeze compliance and still adhere to mandated deadlines, we encourage it to do so.
Developmental Services should review the five instances of noncompliance with the rate freeze that we identified and require corrective action by the respective regional centers. This corrective action should include remedies for future rate payments to these vendors as well as repayment by the regional centers of any state funds awarded in a manner not in compliance with state law.
To ensure that the regional centers achieve the greatest level of cost effectiveness and avoid the appearance of favoritism when they award purchase of service contracts, Developmental Services should require regional centers to adopt a written procurement process that specifies the situations and dollar thresholds for which contracts, RFPs, and evaluation of competing proposals will be implemented.
To ensure that the regional centers achieve the greatest level of cost effectiveness and avoid the appearance of favoritism when they award purchase of service contracts, Developmental Services should require regional centers to adopt a written procurement process that, when applicable, requires the regional centers to notify the vendor community of contracting opportunities and to document the competitive evaluation of vendor proposals, including the reasons for the final vendor selection decision
To ensure that the regional centers adhere to their procurement process, Developmental Services should review the documentation for a representative sample of purchase of service contracts during its biennial fiscal audits.
To deter unsupported and potentially wasteful spending of state resources by the regional centers, Developmental Services should determine the extent to which Inland needs to repay state funds it provided to a transportation vendor for an assessment of Inland’s transportation conditions.
To ensure that regional center employees have a safe avenue for reporting suspected improprieties at the regional centers, Developmental Services should follow its newly documented process for receiving and investigating these types of allegations it put into writing in July 2010 and should continue to notify all regional centers that such an alternative is available.
To ensure that appropriate action is taken in response to allegations submitted by regional center employees, Developmental Services should centrally log these allegations and track follow up actions and the ultimate resolution of allegations, as required by its new procedures.