[Nfbf-l] {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Fw:comprehensive reportof AG withregards to theDivision ofBlindServices

Elizabeth Bowden elizabeth at bowdenscomputers.com
Wed Jun 27 21:36:47 UTC 2012


I don't know where you could get that, the attachment was in .txt format. 
I'll try to look around for one.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "RJ Sandefur" <joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com>
To: "NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List" <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:24 PM
Subject: [Nfbf-l] {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} 
Fw:comprehensive reportof AG withregards to theDivision ofBlindServices


I'm looking for a link, PDF, or word verson of this report!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elizabeth Bowden" <elizabeth at bowdenscomputers.com>
To: "NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List" <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:07 PM
Subject: [Nfbf-l] {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Fw: comprehensive reportof
AG withregards to theDivision ofBlind Services


I agree also, if we don't make noise, we can't effect change.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "RJ Sandefur" <joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com>
To: "NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List" <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:54 PM
Subject: [Nfbf-l] {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Fw: comprehensive report of AG
withregards to theDivision ofBlind Services


Gloria, I totaly disagree with you! Joyce needs to be questioned concerning
this! RJ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "RJ Sandefur" <joltingjacksandefur at gmail.com>
To: "NFB of Florida Internet Mailing List" <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:41 PM
Subject: [Nfbf-l] {Spam?} Fw: comprehensive report of AG with regards to
theDivision ofBlind Services


The report did go through
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elizabeth Bowden" <elizabeth at bowdenscomputers.com>
To: <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:19 AM
Subject: [Nfbf-l] comprehensive report of AG with regards to the Division
ofBlind Services


Now is the time to advocate to have this situation resolved.
Below is the report.  We should get the word out to change this unhappy
state of events.


a COMMISSION'S BRIEFING

PACKAGE

DIVISION OF BLIND SERVICES

MANAGEMENT REVIEW



PREPARED BY THE DOE

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

MAY 7, 2012



Commission's Briefing Package

Division of Blind Services

Management Review

Briefing Package

CONTENTS

1) DBS Management Review - High Level Issues



2) Climate Survey

a. Survey instrument used

b. Selected survey results (graphs)

c. Sample responses to climate survey

d. DVR climate survey - final report (excerpt)



3) Staff interviews (selected sample)



4) Contracting

a. Review results

b. DFS preliminary findings from recent contract

audit

c. OIG 2008 audit report entitled "Contracted and

Purchased Client Services"

d. Additional issues for OIG audit/ investigation



5) Personnel actions review



DBS Management Review - High Level Issues

What we did:

Developed and administered an on-line anonymous employee climate survey. The

climate survey contained 40+ opinion statements (questions) regarding job
satisfaction,

communications, supervision, and management practices, including contracting

practices. The survey resulted in an 83% (224/270) response rate, with
roughly onethird of respondents providing supplemental written comments.

Approximately 45 current and former employees were interviewed either in
person or

telephonically (about half were HQ staff and half were field office staff).
We also

interviewed Florida Department of Financial Services (DFS) auditors who
recently

performed an audit of DBS contracts. We reviewed procedures and practices
for DBS

client services contracts. Finally, we reviewed DBS human resources records

supporting personnel actions.

Working Environment ­ Roughly speaking, 40% of DBS staff interviewed support

Division management, 40% do not (often passionately), and 20% are on the
sidelines.

Compared to results of a recent Florida Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation climate

survey, DBS climate survey results were much more negative. DBS climate
survey

comments expounded on issues such as:

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

Too much micro-management from senior management

Punitive, not positive atmosphere

Many DBS staff fear making a decision/statement that is not favorably
received ­

retaliation likely

More training needed

Fear trickles down to all employee levels

Dissatisfaction over pay ­ DVR gave raises to counselors because the
director

was willing to fight for raises.

DBS has become more accountable with more written policies/procedures.



Communications

· Better communication needed from the top down.

· Executive management should communicate more with field supervisors and

employees (not just managers).

· Continually changing policies and procedures confuses employees.

Staff Turnover

· Employee turnover has been perceived as rampant.

· Jobs not filled but simply assumed by those employees remaining.

· Staff fear for their jobs daily and try to keep off the radar.



·



Some view changes as necessary and positive.



Hiring Process

· Education and experience should be dominant factors in the hiring process.

· Not all vacancies are made public/advertised on People First.

· Employees hired/promoted to manage others need the correct skills to do
the

job.

· Concerns about staff pay equity.

Client Services Contracts ­ The intent of chapter 413, F.S. may be to
provide the

maximum amount of funding to the community rehabilitation providers (CRPs),

however, the Division could be going too far in practice. CRP funding has
increased

and services provided by DBS employees have decreased.

DFS found that contract performance was not aligned with payments, financial
remedies

are assessed after the full contract payment (when it may be more difficult
to collect),

and monitoring is not adequate ­ vendor reports are just accepted and not
verified.

Overall, the DFS auditors commented that the division is too "cozy" with
contractors.

·

·

·

·

Lack of competition with the same 15-20 providers used each year.

Fixed rate contracts with monthly payments. Liberal terms for payment.

Contract terms not always enforced.

Lack of effective negotiation of contracts. Lack of monitoring. Lack of
close out

reports.

CRPs are favored when other alternatives may provide better client service;
in

effect, CPRs have a monopoly.



Conclusion ­ We identified a number of indicators that change needs to take
place in

DBS. Contract administration should be strengthened, communications
improved,

personnel management should be improved and made more transparent. There is
a

need to reach out more to help make staff feel that they are included. We
have

identified a number of issues from interviews with DBS current and former
staff that are

either under current investigation or are subject to future investigation.



Greg White

May 4, 2012



Division of Blind Services ­ Employee Climate Survey

Thank you for participating in the Division of Blind Services Employee
Climate Survey conducted by the

Department of Education's Office of Inspector General. The purpose of the
survey is to provide feedback to

Department of Education management regarding your workplace environment.

Responses are anonymous and computer addresses will not be stored by the
survey administrator.

The survey is approximately 50 statements about your work environment and
should take about 15 minutes to

complete. The survey will be available until March 8, 2012.

Rate each statement using Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
or No Opinion.

If you have any questions about this survey or need assistance, please
contact us by phone at (850) 245-0403 or

by email at oig at fldoe.org.

Definitions:

DBS stands for the Division of Blind Services.

Management refers to the division director, deputy directors, bureau chiefs
and district directors.

Office refers to the office or district in which you work.

Supervisor refers to the person who approves your timesheet.



*All statements require a response. There is a "No Opinion" option for each.

Job Satisfaction:

1. *I am satisfied with my involvement in decisions that affect my work.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

2.*Work is assigned fairly in my office.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



3. *My workload allows me to do my job effectively.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

4. *I receive a fair evaluation of my job performance.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

5. *I have the information and training I need to effectively do my job.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

6. *Overall, I have positive working relationships with employees in my
office.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

7. *I feel physically safe and secure at work.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



8. *Overall, I am satisfied with DBS as a place to work.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

9. *I am proud to say that I work for DBS.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

10. Please provide suggestions in the input box below that you think would
improve your office or district.

(Optional)



Communications:

11. *There is a way for me to discuss my concerns with my management.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

12.*I am kept informed about matters that affect my job.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



13.*My office staff communicates with each other as needed.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

14.*Communication from management is clear.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

15.*Employees are free to speak up and say what they think.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

16.* I rarely receive conflicting instructions from different levels of
management on how to do my job.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

17.* My office has effective communications.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



18. Please provide suggestions in the input box below you think would
improve communications. (Optional)



Supervision:

19. *My supervisor is responsive to my needs and concerns.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

20.*My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters productivity.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

21.*My supervisor treats me with dignity and respect.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

22.*My supervisor frequently acts as a positive role model for employees to
follow.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



23.*My supervisor is supportive of staff and provides assistance as needed.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

24.*My supervisor periodically provides constructive feedback on my job
performance.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

25.*If I have a conflict with my supervisor, I can take it to the next level
without fear of retaliation.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

26.*My supervisor is effective in his/her job.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

27. Please provide suggestions in the input box below that you think would
improve supervision. (Optional)



Management Practices:



28. *My management provides effective leadership.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

29.*Ethical behavior is promoted by management.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

30.*I understand the goals and objectives of my office.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

31.*The policies and procedures provided to me are sufficient to help me do
the best job I can.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

32.*Contracting for services with outside entities is conducted in a cost
effective manner.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



33.*Contracts are adequately monitored to ensure deliverables are provided.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

34.*Contractors provide high quality services to clients.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

35.*My office's positions are generally filled in a timely manner.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

36.*Positions are filled with qualified people.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

37.*The hiring process for vacancies is conducted fairly.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion



38.*DBS employees who perform well are provided opportunities for
advancement.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

39.*I am not aware of discrimination (race, gender, or age) in my office.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

40.*I am not subjected to inappropriate conversations that may cause me to
feel uncomfortable.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

41.*Management practices in my office promote organizational success.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

No Opinion

42. Please provide suggestions in the input box below that you think would
improve management practices.

(Optional)



General Information:



43. If there are any other comments that you would like to share or issues
that you would like to raise,

please do so here: (Optional)



44. I have been employed at DBS for: (Optional)

Less than 1 year

1-2 years

2-5 years

5-10 years

More than 10 years

45. I am a: (Optional)

Staff Member

Supervisor

Manager

Other

46. I am located in: (Optional)

Tallahassee Headquarters

District

Other



Your feedback is important. Thank you for participating!



DBS Climate Survey - selected graph results

224 responses



Job Satisfaction

Statement 1: I am satisfied with my

involvement in decisions that affect my work.



Job Satisfaction

Statement 4: I receive a fair evaluation of my

job performance.



Job Satisfaction

Statement 8: Overall, I am satisfied with

DBS as a place to work.



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



49%

33%

2%

17%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



37%

13%

4%



46%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



55%

12%

30%

3%



Communications

Statement 14: Communication from

management is clear.



Communications

Statement 15: Employees are free to speak

up and say what they think.



Supervision

Statement 19: My supervisor is responsive

to my needs and concerns.



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



41%

31%

3%

25%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



40%

19%

3%



38%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



65%

19%

3%

13%



"Agree" and "Strongly Agree" responses were consolidated to "Agree" for
reporting purposes. The same for "Disagree" and "Strongly Disagree".

Page 1 of 2



DBS Climate Survey - selected graph results

224 responses



Supervision

Statement 25: If I have a conflict with my

supervisor, I can take it to the next level

without fear of retaliation.

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



Management Practices

Statement 28: My management provides

effective leadership.



Management Practices

Statement 32: Contracting for services with

outside entities is conducted in a cost

effective manner.

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



47%

26%

8%

19%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



47%

35%

4%

14%



26%



26%



17%



30%



Management Practices

Statement 33: Contracts are adequately

monitored to ensure deliverables are

provided.

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



Management Practices

Statement 36: Positions are filled with

qualified people.



Management Practices

Statement 37: The hiring process for

vacancies is conducted fairly.



38%

26%

17%

20%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



43%

30%

8%

19%



100%

75%

50%

25%

0%



38%

16%

30%

16%



"Agree" and "Strongly Agree" responses were consolidated to "Agree" for
reporting purposes. The same for "Disagree" and "Strongly Disagree".

Page 2 of 2



Responses to DBS Employee Climate Survey

Question 43. If there are any other comments that you would like to share or
issues

that you would like to raise, please do so here:

Note: First 50 responses are included here (from total responses of 77)

1. State office verbalizes open door policy for communication; but sometimes
I

wonder about it in practice.

2. We have not had a raise in over 6 years, but Division of Voc. Rehab has
and

they are in the same DOE

3. Work hours are to be kept for that and not to have any additional work
after hours

or to take home without you being able to disagree with the request from
your

superior.

4. I feel when you do a good job and go over and above, that should count on
your

evaluations.

5. At the facility where I work, a person was promoted who did not have as
much

experience as others with similar skills. This person had not had real
leadership

experience as well. She was known through her family for years to the person

who wished to hire her. The person doing the hiring also had told someone
who

should have been a candidate, that he wanted someone who would be around

longer. This to me is age discrimination.

6. It seems like a few years back I heard that there will be less paperwork
involved

and more electronic options. The electronic options are there, but more

paperwork is being generated and files are becoming larger and unmanageable.

7. I have spent many years with this agency and until the last couple of
years was

extremely proud of the work we did, the work I did, and always felt very
gratified

in my job. I felt I was a part of the agency and even when I disagreed with

management's decisions, I could voice that, without fear. In the last few
years I

have feared that I would be fired every day I come to work. I meet and
exceed

every deadline given, my work quality is extremely good, I follow
directions, and

have always had a strong work ethic.

To have my job threatened because one person at a CRP thinks I'm too stern,
or

due to a personality clash is unfair, but has happened. I have had my
supervisor

call me into a meeting with other staff to recite a list of things those in
the room

have heard about me, an inquisition of sorts. It was the most humiliating

experience of my life. During this `meeting' I asked for facts, none could
be

provided. In the end it was determined that the accusations were unfounded

because staff admitted they were just `assuming' things with no real fact.
The



supervisor should have done her homework before hand, but instead I was put

on the chopping block. At the end of the meeting the supervisor stated that
all

was settled, told those that had brought this information to her that in the
future

they need to have facts not hearsay or rumor and wanted to `hug' everyone.

Over the years, I have always excelled in my job, moved ahead, had
outstanding

evaluations, however in the last few years my professionalism has been

questioned, my work, and more and I find it extremely offensive. I have done

everything asked of me and yet it never seems to be enough for management.
It

is my feeling that once management decides a person is a `problem' nothing
will

change that view. It also seems that a person is only considered a `problem'

when they question a process, when they question anything indicating it is
not in

line with agency policy, or regulations. The environment for many (probably
more

supervisor and management positions) is thick with fear.

We have seen more turn over in the last 2 years then we have seen in 10, 20
or

more. There have been several re-orgs that move staff into positions they
may

not want but have no choice in as it's that or termination. It's been a very

unhealthy working environment and a confusing one, as it does seem we are

being dismantled and the CRP's are taking over our jobs, controlling our
money

and client's are no longer given a choice when it comes to services. They
are told

we contract with CRP's and if they want services they get them through the
CRP

or nothing. We don't put bids out for services, so no other provider is
allowed to

work with our client's, only our current CRP's. Money often seems to be
given to

a few certain CRP's while it continues to be cut from our client services
budgets

reducing what we are able to do for our clients.

It's just become a very frustrating, stressful, fearful place to work, which
is very

sad. Until these last few years, I loved my job and wouldn't hesitate to
tell people

how much I loved it, how I never wanted to leave it and really encourage
folks to

come to DBS. Unfortunately I can't say that any longer. I feel deflated,

unnecessary, and unappreciated. I would love to feel excited and really good

about DBS again!!

8. It feels like we are always working in fear of losing our jobs and not
because we

did something wrong.

9. In our workplace there is discrimination, favoritism, and harassment
going on but

no one wants to speak up because we all need our jobs. I have seen employees

leave crying because they were treated so badly they felt forced to resign
or

forced to go to EAP...I wish some changes could be made to make this a
positive

workplace. I think sometimes power takes the place of what our mission
really is

here...which is the customer.

10. We are no longer a 'team'. Segregation (not in race, but in professional
status) is

the number one rule. If you are not `a Senior Professional Team Member' you
are



no-one that matters. Knowledge no longer matters, it's who you know and
who's

friend it is for promotional opportunities or hiring. I have worked at this
agency

over 15 years and have received many Letters of Accommodation and Awards

for my work and abilities; but because I helped someone else who was not in
my

`unit' but was a Blind Services employee here at headquarters, I was written
up

and told not to help anyone again unless the `Senior Management Team'

approved it.

Now I feel that if I make one of `their kind' of mistakes I will be fired. I
come to

work each day not knowing if I'm next in line to be let go or who will it be
today.

When they forced a co-worker to resign, I was called into that office and
was told

to my face that I would never survive. A few months passed and I was called
into

the office again and was asked when I was going to retire? I am 58 years old
and

a widow and they want me to retire. They told me I could sell my crafts that
I

make in order to survive. I am unable to do so. I now know that it won't be
long

before they build a case on me in order to force me to resign as well. I
have

received all fours and fives on all my evaluations for years accept for this
last one

where I received a 3.5; that was the lowest score I have ever received on
any of

my evaluations. We have lost many good employees because they have been

forced to resign; then you actually hear them say well, I've fired 18 people
this

year and I don't think I'm finished yet. People ask why you're paranoid! I
need my

job no matter.

11. In hiring new Staff at any level, management or clerical, there is a
constant

pattern first, most of the new hires- are not qualified, get higher
salaries, and staff

that is internally qualified get demotions, or forced to downgrade their job

descriptions, changing their job titles, in part due to their own buddy
system.

12. I am willing to be contacted to verbally discuss my responses.

Big differences in local office team and management.

.



13. I think as part of the evaluations for supervisors and management, there
should

be a section that is rated by those they immediately supervise and/or
manage.

This would allow for a capturing of employee's opinions on the effectiveness
of

their leadership.

14. At one time I could see myself working for DBS 30 years and retiring,
not

anymore that has changed the last couple of years. I like my job, I love
what I do;

but the management has made my job very challenging.

15. The first and foremost responsibility of authorities is the well being
welfare over

those to whom you have authority. The State of Florida Department of
Education

has failed in that responsibility. If the State's idea is to drive away good

employees, ruin morale, and downgrade the value of workers, then it has

accomplished much. As part of the DOE, DBS is an inappropriate fit, and it's

employees cannot be evaluated by a broken gauge of expectations and



standards of teachers.

The recent downgrading of employee evaluation levels by forcing them into a

curve of mediocrity only adds an additional sword to the arsenal of
nonmotivational weaponry aimed at workers. To be told that the downgrade was
a

good and respectable grade is insulting. Nobody congratulates someone on
their

mediocre accomplishment of a solid C! To then be told we should avoid any

negativity in the workplace, and constantly reinforce that we are
sacrificing for the

good of the many, and that money isn't everything, makes one wonder where we

are really working.

The State DOE hires at below market salaries sending a poor message that

public servants are less valuable. To offer hollow hopes of future
opportunities,

provide no raises for six years, no bonuses; not even a cost of living
increase,

raise the cost of employee benefit premiums, cut the pension in half, and
force

employees to contribute without even an opt out is shameful and
dishonorable.

Employees who stay have no morale and just go through the motions as the

DOE doesn't reward good work.

Morale is non-existent. Long term employees are biding their time just
waiting to

retire. Newer employees are biding their time till a better job comes along.
Even

a dog is given a treat occasionally just for being good. The State DOE's

behavior toward its employees only succeeds in nailing the coffin of
disrespect

and distrust that many feel for their employer. Respect given is respect
earned.

If the State DOE really values its employees --- Prove it! DOEDBS --- you
have a

failing grade. What a sad way to be.

16. My District Administrator is ethical, effective, empathetic and
professional. My D

A deserves high marks and high praise. My supervisor, on the other hand,
plays

favorites, is often heavy-handed and disrespectful to staff, and is neither

effective, ethical or professional. My supervisor does not have the
training,

experience, judgment, ethics or temperament to be effective in this
position.

17. I have been employed 35 years and some of my co-workers who have been

employed for about 5 years, jobs were ungraded but not mine, I think that
was

discrimination.

18. I have ethical concerns about what I have been asked to do as it relates
to

evaluating staff.

19. Most of the inadequacies noted are directly related to the management
style and

practices of the director. Most employees fear for their jobs if they do not
go

along with what the director wants or what certain agents of the director
want

such as a few staff that are held very close to the director.



20. My Supervisor always promotes the best interest of the Division and our
clients.

She is always provides clear direction to staff and is always available to
provide

clarification of further details as needed. She is a strong role model for
District

employees.

21. We all know that we need raises, although we are very thankful for our
jobs and

insurance premiums that remain reasonable. However, we also know that there

is no money for raises at this time. As soon as there is, that would be a
huge

morale booster. However, it would be nice to reward employees who do their

jobs well in other ways. This is done in our office with positive
reinforcement, but

I wish there was a way to do this within the agency. Many feel that those
who do

not do their jobs well get the same congrats as those who do. That is very

frustrating.

22. DBS needs to consider cost sharing with clients so they have enough
money to

compensate the employees appropriately. Employees have lost so much in

changes to pension that without raises there is not a lot of incentive to
stay

around once the economy gets better for new employees.

23. I hope this is truly confidential, because at this time I have no
confidence in DOE

and its ability improve or identify the issues that have embraced this
organization.

There is a climate of distrust and confidence in our mission. Real or not I
feel a

toxic atmosphere, in that I sense my peers are more concern about their
backs

than executing a professional program of rehabilitation.

24. DVR counselors received a raise a year or two ago while DBS VR
counselors did

not. The jobs have the same duties and educational requirements. Several DBS

state office people received large raises in 2011. Some individuals that do
not

meet minimum education requirements have been hired in above minimum of the

range, while others with years of experience that meet educational
requirements

are started at minimum.

25. Unfortunately, in the past few years, an atmosphere of uncertainty about
our jobs

has arisen as a result of some of the changes that have been seen. Vast

amounts of funding has gone to the Community Rehabilitation Programs (CRP)

for service provision, in the form of contracts, that had been paid
previously, on a

cost for service basis, within which the client and VR counselor had some
input.

It is now mandated that services go through the CRP, at the expense of
client

choice. These include virtually all VR services with the exception of
determining

eligibility, creating Individual Plans for Employment and some counseling.
It is my

opinion that if RSA did not require that VR counselors do these tasks, they
would

also be given to the CRP and our jobs would be considered irrelevant. I
would

actually be more comfortable discussing this as opposed to writing about it,
if you

wish. My cell is

26. The more I think about what I've already said it's not going to matter
anyway!



27. I very happy to work for the Division of Blind Services

28. I have a concern with the mold which exists in our building, is there
someone

responsible for us being checked and treated for any related issues, or is
this

something that we as employees are responsible for?

29. My district office works well as a team and we work very hard to carry
out the

agency mission. I believe that our current leadership has made some
decisions

that have made our job a lot harder. It is unclear if these decisions were
made on

lack of knowledge of what the people lower than them do. For a few years now

people from outside the agency were hired in the District Administrator
position.

Some have done a good job and some (mainly due to lack of knowledge or the

rehab process and DBS) have struggled. Several would probably be much better

in a different role in the agency. Also our state office has been growing
steadily

over the last few years. Yet the counselors have not had a raise or even a
bonus

in 5 years. Please make sure these are anonymous because it will not be good

on anyone who said anything that is not so good.

30. The work climate in my office and throughout many offices in this agency
is very

poor. People are afraid to speak up and contribute for rear of losing their
jobs.

Many will not complete this survey, because they are afraid that it is not
truly

anonymous and that they will be punished if they say anything negative. All
of

this fear and negativity has taken place with our current director. She has
fired

good people just because they fought for what is right. Also, she eliminates

people with direct blindness experience from taking supervisory positions in
the

field because she does not want such people looking at contracts and service

provision. She does not want any contractors questioned about the quality of

services they provide.

31. I believe the director was sent as the hatchet person. So now we will
see, again,

what you surveyors do.

32. More training in practical aspects of case management; such as effective
time

management, case recordings and documentation and effective decision making

would be positive for our agency in providing better services to our clients
in a

more timely and successful manner.

33. It would be helpful if the supervisor in this office got a lot of
training on

management.

34. Having a great team to work with makes my job enjoyable and working
toward a

common goal helps motivate me to do my job well.

35. The Division is managed and run much better now than it was under the
previous

leadership, where personal agenda's were priority and key positions were
filled



with staff who were not suited for the positions, which had a huge negative

impact on how the Division did business. Accountability measures have been

put in place, employees who do not meet the minimum standards are dealt with

accordingly. Some sections have been restructured to promote more efficient

and effective services are being provided.

36. I have worked in government services for many, many years and without a
doubt

this is the finest organization with which I have ever been associated. The
old

adage, good enough for government work is one that turns my stomach and is a

standard in other states and probably other areas of this state, but it is
certainly

not a mantra in this Division. This Division is a shining star and is doing
an

incredible job for the visually impaired of Florida.

37. My immediate supervisor is strongly supportive of her staff, but does
not get the

same support from her supervisor. When doing surveys like this terms such as

management should be defined. Who is management versus who is a

supervisor.

38. It is a high time of change and staff fear for their jobs.

39. The morale has steadily declined over the last two years. There have
been

issues with ethics violations regarding how the students and staff have been

treated.

40. Staff and upper management do not feel free to speak up when they have a

differing opinion. This results in low morale and discourages thoughtful

discussions on how to develop contracts with providers and provide oversight
to

ensure our clients are being served in the best way possible. This also
results in

an environment that is fraught with fear which discourages staff from taking

ownership because a mistake can be detrimental to your job. The amount of

turnover at the upper management level has been quite high and is often done

as a knee jerk reaction after an incident. The type of quick and unexpected

change causes too much instability in an already fragile environment. The

actions appear emotionally and personally based rather that a result of a

thoughtful decision. Opinions on individuals are based on personal feelings

rather than that individual's value to the Division. The Division could
flourish from

strong leadership and someone that truly leads rather than someone who
thinks

she is leading because no one speaks up. We need a leader who will make

decisions, not someone who often says I don't care how we do it and once a
path

is taken, then decides it should be done another way.

41. Manager spends too much time just chatting with people in their offices.

42. Sharing of best practices statewide, and success stories of clients and
their

employers.



43. The Director is not a good leader she set people up to fail.

44. I think that IG should look at hiring practicing and management styles
from the

state office which filters down to each of the offices in the field.

45. We all need our jobs. I hope that this survey sheds some light on the
problems at

hand.

46. Provide raises and promotions based on honest to goodness merit. Do not
create

positions and pay acquaintances and friends high salaries, and then say that

dollars aren't there to pay actual working staff more money. A boss, a
Director

should make agency wide decisions, and allow the experts who are in position
to

do what they are there for. Learn your work environment and where staff work

and just say good morning to them instead of only to management and those

who are in offices. If you have to constantly go to a staff member to learn
how to

do your job, acknowledge them and if possible pay them for their actual
worth.

47. The improvement made in this division the last three years is
phenomenal!

48. I believe the Governor Scott is the worst we have had and he needs to
resign. A

good look needs to taken into the use of personnel in DBS and questions
asked

about why we don't provide technical support for clients in the work place.
Why

is there not a position for a Rehab Engineer? Why are we allowing Private

Facilities to provide so much service to clients when we have a facility
that the

state has paid for?

49. Policies from Tallahassee discourage any job performance that would
remotely

assume that the people whom they have hired are actually competent

professionals who are interested in excellence. The whole approach seems

been designed to corral a few bad apples while insisting that everyone else

SHOULD be thrilled with just doing the bare minimum in their jobs to get by.

Why not just fire the people who aren't doing what they are supposed to be
doing

and re-instating the idea that counselors are professionals and capable of
writing

a program plan?

50. When asked above about being proud to work for DBS, if you are asking am
I

proud of working with the blind community, my answer is a very proud YES. Am

I proud to be a part of the positive encouragement given to the blind
community

that the only part of themselves that has changed is their vision but they
still

possess the abilities to be successful, they just have to learn through the
Rehab

Center, new methods to transfer those abilities to their current physical

challenge. I believe all blind persons can be employed if they truly want to
be

employed. There are jobs to be created. There are employment needs in

Florida yet to be discovered and filled and I believe if equipped, the Rehab

Center can train the blind population to fill those jobs. What I am not
proud of in

working with DBS are the restrictions Tallahassee Management and our current



Bureau Chief puts on the Rehab Center through outdated equipment teaching

materials, and encouragement to our exceptional staff who have ideas of how
to

bring the blind community into the future needs of Florida but current

management lacks any comprehension or desire to hear these ideas so our
staff

have smothered their creativity in response to the current management's

attitudes.



Management Practices

Responses to Question 42. Please provide suggestions in the input box below
that you

think would improve management practices.



1. Recognize that the agency's biggest asset is employees. Establish an
inclusive

workplace that energizes the people who fuel our agency's success. It is

essential to recognize that the relationship between people and leaders is
based

upon mutual benefit. It is not paternalistic, but instead is based on
individual

engagement and contribution.

2. Be Fair.

3. Make sure that a position is offered to all qualified personnel within
the facility.

Perhaps be sure that the position is also advertised outside of the facility
to

hopefully prevent hiring based on the one deciding on hiring having known
the

person and their family. Also avoiding hiring only because the person is
younger

and should therefore be around longer than other more qualified staff.

4. Sometimes it seems the hiring process takes long, but that may be because
the

qualifications are not met.

5. Change for change's sake causes low morale and anxiety. We are put on an

important project for a week or 2, then priorities change and it is dropped,
and

another is dropped in our laps. All the while regular routine duties are
neglected.

6. Accept people for who they are; tolerate their individualism. Supervisors
could

not perform to the best of their abilities if DAs have the monopoly of every

decision and allow Supervisors to only sign where indicated.

7. There has been excessive turnover in DBS over the last couple of years.
Many

staff fear for their jobs daily. I have been told on several occasions by my

superior that I need to keep off the radar, that any of us could be gone in
a

second depending on the mood of management. Over the last few years more

and more money has gone into contracts with CRP's and more and more of the

job duties DBS staff did are going to the CRP. We can no longer provide the

training devices, low vision evaluations and more to our client's because
the

money we once had is going to the CRP's.

DBS cannot do anything, (create a form, develop a business process, etc)

without involving the CRP's in what we are doing. It's as if we work for the
CRP

not for DBS. The unwritten understanding in the agency is that the only way
to

keep your job is to make sure your CRP likes you as management has given

every impression that their support is with the CRP, not DBS staff.
Management

needs to be much more supportive of DBS staff and help DBS grow and develop,

not continue to dismantle the agency, or at least that is how it feels.



8. It feels that contract providers are running DBS at times. It also seems
like we

don't value our employees and/or hire people that are familiar with the
business

of rehab.

9. Positions are filled without our knowledge and just between Management
and the

person being hired. We see new people and don't even know their

names...friends are being hired from outside...a lot of favoritism going on
that is

not very fair.

10. I think that mid management has its hands tied by statewide policies,
such as

hiring freezes that won't permit replacement of employees who leave or not

permitting to pay a reasonable wage, so to attract appropriate workers. How
can

we expect to hire qualified people, when anyone pays better than us?

11. Management practices shouldn't promote an office environment, nor
reflect an

image that if you do not belong to their group, very clickish, you are not
going

anywhere?

12. Sensitivity training.

13. DA does not know everything, especially when he only been on the job
less than

2 years.

14. Do not be dismissive of employees input or concerns.

15. With such low salaries for state employees, especially for those of us
in human

services, our job performance and professionalism are better than could be,
or

should be, expected. The clients we serve, and those of us who serve them,
are

not valued enough by those who govern us.

16. Hire competent management; supervisors should be firm, but yet flexible,
fair and

understanding. Must be good communicators.

17. New director

18. The State needs to consider raises for the employees.

19. It may be time for senior management to move on and be replaced with

individuals who can restore confidence in the agency mission. Senior

management can focus more on administrative, planning, motivational and

political issues of the organization. Let trained staff be responsible for
the

programmatic functions of the agency.

20. This section is difficult to respond to because I need to consider the
specific

entity with which my office contracts, which does a good job, as well as
another



entity in my district, which I know does a poor job. The contract monitoring
for

deliverables does not take into consideration how many clients may not have

received services even though the deliverables may technically have been
met.

Additionally, there has been a huge shift in money from DBS to contracting

entities, as well as a shift in responsibility from DBS to those entities.
This has

caused a significant change in work flow and responsibilities for some DBS

employees. And, in some cases, contracting entities do not appear to have

geared up for those new responsibilities, but rather have seen them as
simply

new cash flow streams, without providing sufficient staffing to do the work

involved.

21. Director Joyce Hildreth has always been extremely courteous and helpful
to me.

I find her to be very knowledgeable and compassionate about her job and the

DBS mission. She has taken the time to ensure I have the knowledge to
succeed

in the organization. Our Deputy Director is knowledgeable about contracts
and

different programs.

Unfortunately, she is very critical and on a number of occasions has openly

criticized me and other employees in meetings and on conference calls. She
has

made negative comments re. the Director and other personnel that have made

me feel uncomfortable. She is not receptive to change or ideas from others.
I

would encourage her to be a better listener and not make faces, rolling of
eyes,

and waving hands when she is not in agreement. I would like to see her trust
the

employees she has working for her. My immediate supervisor is knowledgeable

on the contracts side. She is a very positive, supportive, appreciative
person. I

would only recommend she be more receptive to change and not be stuck on

business as usual. Finally, the Bureau Chief of Client Services manager
should

share her management style with the team. She is an active listener and a

pleasure to work with.

22. I have not experienced anything in my current office. But for several
years I was

forced to work in an extremely hostile work environment. Even though it was

reported little to no action was taken to stop it. Also in the process of
being

promoted. My former DA was allowed to say lies and slanderous things against

me with no repercussions.

23. Whenever individuals in the agency speak up about poor performance from

contractors, they are severely reprimanded and often they are threatened
that

they will lose their job. This has personally happened to me on more than
one

occasion.

24. Good God man we only fire or take resignations here. Positions are
frozen and

never coming back. We will be down to half of the employees here by the end
of

the year.



25. Hire qualified people. There are a lot of hard working people in the
ranks that no

one ever hears about who do a lot of work for little pay, no glory for them
either.

26. Very well organized with effective results.

27. The only time I have ever felt I was subjected to an inappropriate
conversation

was with someone outside of the Division of Blind Services who gave the

appearance of pulling rank and micro-managing where he really had no
authority.

28. If staff are asked to complete a task, which is then approved by the
supervisor,

management needs to discuss changes instead of making them without

consulting the people who did the work. We are made to feel that our work
has

little or no merit. Management needs to communicate clearly with staff and
not

make changes arbitrarily. Changes need to be well thought out, discussed
with

concerned employees before being put into practice.

29. People do not know what is going on or to expect. Probably no one higher
does

either so why burden staff with supposition.

30. Hire competent management. Take courses in leadership management. Take

lessons in communication. Respect staff. Be consistent

31. An environment where staff can openly express differing opinions and not
fear

loss of job.

32. It has taken up to two months to get approval to go ahead and input
purchase

orders for goods and services that we need. A more timely response would
help

greatly in meeting our needs.

33. Better leadership.

34. The CRP does not always provided services in a timely manner or cost
effective.

35. Hiring should be done on ability, skills and not on favoritism. Such as
hiring from

A CRP just because.

36. Let employees do their jobs and do not be so critical. We are all
experiencing

tough times and should be lifting each other up and not throwing some people

down.

37. Director has freely admitted in front of staff that she holds grudges
and acts on

them. Personnel management speaks about firing staff with her door open.

Personnel Management tells staff that she has fired eighteen people this
year

and doesn't mind terminating more. Statement made early December of 2011. I

well understand the role of the state office or central office, but based on
actions

and words, the goals and objectives of current upper management confuses and



distorts this role as well as the spirit of positive and effective
leadership.

For the most part policies and procedures are up to date and sensible given
the

agency's mandate; however, some policies are ambiguous at best and harmful
to

the agency and client at worst. Because such a large amount of funds are

allocated to outside contracts by way of CRPs, there are fewer funds to
follow

through with other needed services. This is also hurtful because these
contracts

cover a bulk number instead of individuals. Contracts are loosely monitored
but

not the actual CRPs. and if staff complains about CRPs or otherwise find
them in

wrong doing, CRP director calls DB Director and corrective actions are
brought

against staff. This could be and has been anything from a taking away of
duties,

to demotion, to termination. Investigate demotions and terminations of pass
two

years.

Some contractors are outstanding, but others are not. This is why the
blanket

contract to CRPs in every district without much recourse is a serious
problem.

When its 6 months after a person is hired and other staff is still doing
their job

that they were supposedly hired for, this is a concern, most especially when
new

staff was hired at an exceedingly high pay grade. Check the last ten new
hires in

the state office, in particular under the directors office.

Memos and bulletins go out, but upper management knows who the new hire is

before the closing date for submission of applications. Also office staff
who

would be a great filler of said position is completely ignored while the new
hire

makes anywhere from $10,000 to $15,000 more than staff who fills that same
or

similar position. Not true unless upper management sees you as one of
theirs.

Sorry, but this is how things are in the state office.

It is clear that minorities do not generally receive raises or get hired in
high

paying positions or management, rather or not he or she manages staff

unofficially. That I can remember, The only time I was subjected to
conversation

that made me feel uncomfortable was when a member of management, a bureau

Chief stated that he didnt like particular client and so wanted him out of
the BEP

Program.

Upper management practices do not promote, perpetuate, or maintain good

organizational success because it is extremely divisive. Staff are asked not
to

communicate with colleagues of other sections unless work directly demands
it,

and when staff who everyone knows does a great job at what they are hired
for

receives an average evaluation and others most especially management

receives high marks, morale is understandably low.

38. I am not aware of any inappropriate hiring but one should really look at
the

turnover of positions and constant moving around of positions and ask what
is

going on. As far as chances for promotion within I don't think that is
promoted at



all. I definitely feel I was cheated out of a promotion and the private
facilities

gained while services to clients in the employment sector have suffered
greatly.

39. Yes, positions are filled with qualified people who are then immediately

discouraged from seeking to do the excellent work of which they are capable
by

taking away their independent status and having someone looking over their

shoulders every second. If DBS is so concerned about improving their RSA

reviews, why not tie independent status into things like how many times

deadlines for eligibility decisions or plans have been missed? Wouldn't how

many times a plan has been returned to the counselor because of errors be a

better way of approaching the issue of the supervisor approval issue than a

blanket no one can make decisions about a plan, no matter how good a

particular counselors' plans actually are?

The way it is now, good counselors don't even have a means by which they

could be rewarded for good work by re-gaining independent status. With
regards

to the question related to cost effectiveness earlier in this survey it is
not only

extremely time consuming for the counselor to have to wait for supervisory

approval on every plan, it is also hard on the clients to have to meet again
with

the counselor to sign off on plans that could have been done in one session.
I

often wonder how it must look to our clients to have to get supervisory
approval

for decisions that he/she and his/her counselor have made.

40. When giving performance appraisals supervisors are limited on how high a
grade

they give staff. This is wrong. We just had our performance appraisals and
we

were told Supervisors were told by our DBS Director to limit giving staff a
4 on

their job responsibility as this could involve money given the staff person.
Some

of us were given a total that was under a 4 for that reason even though we

exceed our standards. On paper, you won't see the reason we were only given

3's is because the supervisor was hindered in giving staff 4's but it makes
us

appear as average. This is not always the case. I expect my performance

appraisal to reflect my efforts. I expect the best of myself as some others
do of

themselves at the Center and it is a slap in the face to be required to
accept less

because it could involve money. Staff moral plummeted and some refused to

sign their performance appraisals.

41. Honesty about goals for the office; a more straightforward manner; less
secrecy

42. Replace Joyce Hildreth as the director of DBS!! We need a change and an

individual that truly cares about blind Floridians and their well being!!

43. I have been in some conversations with management that make me

uncomfortable. They typically involve reviewing data for reports DBS
supplies to

Legislature, State, and Federal government. Not often, but occasionally, our

management will gloss over some inaccuracies in reporting because it's the
most

expedient or easiest thing to do rather than do the hard work it takes to
ensure



integrity in reporting. Management seems concerned that correcting an issue
in

reporting in the current year will be significantly different than the
previous year's

submission and draw attention to the agency. I prefer to employ sound and

honest management practices, own up to mistakes and be able to explain the

differences if necessary. As for contracting, I believe we need to be more
diligent

in monitoring and managing our contractors. We could be more prudent and

responsible in how we measure our contractors' performance and how we

reward them.

44. My direct supervisor and Bureau Chief both exhibit a serious lack of
integrity, and

extremely poor management practices. They are often hostile, and publically

demean and belittle employees. Discrimination is rampant, and the
handicapped

and visually impaired are flagrantly discriminated against in two ways. (1)

Equipment needed for communication by the visually impaired (and provided by

a previous administration) has been confiscated as unnecessary toys. (2) The

incompetence and inefficiency of the head of production is supported by the
fact

that audio recordings are more than a year behind, sporadic at best, yet he
is

praised and rewarded by the Bureau Chief as a brilliant shining star. What
this

means is that patrons of the library do not receive audio recordings of
serial

magazines, which is also discriminatory.

45. Incentives for job placement for our clients are provided to CRP's
instead of DBS

employees. A $100.00 bonus would be a great incentive for Counselor's to
place

their client's in job....instead DBS will pay a CRP $4000.00 per job
placement.

46. We need a manager who knows how to manage

47. Change in management from the top down. Anything has to be better than
what

we have now.

48. Management needs to be open, honest and reflect the mission of DBS to be
a

strong leader. Imposing fear on staff does not a good Manager Make. 2. The

Entire Management Team should be accessible, and staff should not fear

retaliation for any problem, opinion, or issues brought to their attention.
3. Staff

needs to be told the true Goals and Objectives of their agency. 4.
Management

must model the behavior expected of staff. 5. Policies and procedures are
clear

as written, but Management needs to use them as a guide, as they are written

and not a weapon for intimidation. 6. All vacancies should be made public,

advertised through People First, and all current staff given the opportunity
to

apply. 7. Bureau Chiefs that handpick individuals outside of the agency give
the

appearance of misconduct. Who are these people? How did they come to be

employed in a State Agency without the position being advertised? Why is
this

permitted to happen over and over again. The Director is allowing this to
happen

and is giving staff the appearance of approval for this type of action. This
is not in

the States policies and procedures. If staff must adhere to these, shouldn't

Management also? 8. Management practices do not promote organizational



success, they shed no light on the true mission and success that could be.

49. Personally I feel that anyone who is a DA must have knowledge of the
clients

who are served by the agency, must have a direct idea of what the agency

stands for as well as an active job history of vocational rehabilitation.

50. If the HR person does not like you - you will not have an opportunity
for

advancement nor for raises.











Florida Department of Education





Division of Vocational

Rehabilitation

Climate Survey:  Final Report

February 18, 2011





2010

















2010 Employee Climate Survey Results

Final Report





TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations
..................................................................................................................................................................................
4

Executive Summary
...................................................................................................................................................................................
5

.

Comparison of Current Climate Items with Previous Climate Items
.........................................................................................................
6

Quadrant Analysis
..................................................................................................................................................................................
8

Factor Analysis
...........................................................................................................................................................................................
9

General Findings and Recommendations
................................................................................................................................................
10

Interpretation of Statistical Comparisons
............................................................................................................................................
11

Demographics
..........................................................................................................................................................................................
12

"Average Satisfaction" Score and "Percent Agree" Across Select VR SubUnits
.....................................................................................
18

Overall Satisfaction: Level of Agreement
.................................................................................................................................................
21

Interpretation of Charts
.......................................................................................................................................................................
21

Entire VR
..............................................................................................................................................................................................
22

DVR Headquarters
...............................................................................................................................................................................
24

Bureau of Administrative Services
.......................................................................................................................................................
26

Bureau of Field Services
.......................................................................................................................................................................
28

Bureau of Partnerships & Communications
........................................................................................................................................
30

.

Office of the Director
...........................................................................................................................................................................
32



2





Bureau of Rehabilitation and Reemployment Services (BRRS)  All
.........................................................................................................
34

BRRS  District
2....................................................................................................................................................................................
36

BRRS  District
4....................................................................................................................................................................................
38

BRRS  District
6....................................................................................................................................................................................
40

Bureau of Field Services
...........................................................................................................................................................................
42

Field Services (HQ and Area Offices)
....................................................................................................................................................
42

Field Services (All Areas)
......................................................................................................................................................................
44

Area 1
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
46

Units 01A/ 01B/ 01C/ 01D/ 02A
...........................................................................................................................................................
48

Units 03A/ 04A/ 5A/ 05B/ 05C
.............................................................................................................................................................
49

Area 2
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
50

Units 07A/ 07S/ 08A/ 08B/ 08C/ 08D/ 08F/ 08G
.................................................................................................................................
52

Units 08E/ 09A/ 09S/ 10A/ 10B/ 11A/ 11B
..........................................................................................................................................
53

Area 3
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
54

Units 12A/ 12B/ 12C/ 12E/ 12G/ 13A/ 13B
..........................................................................................................................................
56

Units 12D/ 12F/ 17A/ 19A/ 20A
...........................................................................................................................................................
57

Area 4
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
58

Units 14A/ 14B/ 14C/ 14D/ 18A/ 18B
..................................................................................................................................................
60

Units 15A/ 15B/ 15C/ 15D/ 15E/ 16A/ 16B
..........................................................................................................................................
61

Area 5
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
62

Units 21A/ 21B/ 21C/ 24B/ 24D
...........................................................................................................................................................
64

Units 22A/ 22B/ 22C/ 22D/ 24A/ 24C
..................................................................................................................................................
65

Area 6
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
66

Units 23A/ 23B/ 23C/ 23E/ 23F/ 23H/ 23M
.........................................................................................................................................
68

Units 23D/ 23G/ 23J/ 23K/ 23L/ 23N
...................................................................................................................................................
69

Content Analysis
......................................................................................................................................................................................
70

Notes Page
...............................................................................................................................................................................................
78





3









LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS





Bureau of Administrative Services

Bureau of Compliance and Oversight

Bureau of Field Services

Bureau of Partnerships and Communications

Bureau of Rehabilitation and Reemployment Services

Division of Vocational Rehabilitation

Headquarters

Office of the Director























BAS

BCO

BFS

BPC

BRRS

DVR

HQ

OD





4









EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During November and December of 2010, the Florida Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation (DVR) conducted a division

wide employee survey of factors that affect employee satisfaction and work
climate.  DVR used online survey software

designed to ensure confidentiality of employee responses.  The VR Employee
newsletter and emails were used to notify

DVR employees of survey information and distribute a secure link to the
survey.  The survey was available to all DVR

employees, and a response rate of 67.4% was achieved.

The survey consisted of 35 climate items, which respondents rated on scales
of agreement and importance.

Respondents had the opportunity to provide written feedback regarding
climate items.  The survey also included 2

openended questions requesting feedback on DVR climate factors that most
satisfied, and most dissatisfied,

respondents.

A total of 86.12% of DVR employees indicated that they strongly agree or
somewhat agree with the statement "Overall, I

am satisfied with DVR as a place to work."  Preliminary analysis indicated
the highest percentages of agreement

(strongly agree plus somewhat agree) include the following climate items.
Table 1 in this report includes the results of

all items.









I am held accountable for the quality of my work. (97.84%)

I can identify what I must do to be successful at my job. (96.81%)

I know what it takes for me to meet the expectations of my customers.
(96.81%)

I have the education and training necessary to effectively do my job.
(96.28%)



Additional analysis indicated that the following items have the greatest
potential to improve overall employee

satisfaction.  Additional information is available on Table 2 of this
report.









Managers, supervisors, and other leaders encourage innovative or new
approaches to do things at work.

Work in my immediate unit is organized to promote cooperation.

My opinions seem to count when I provide them at work.

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters trustworthy
relationships.



The climate survey team is conducting further analyses that will provide
better insight into DVR employee satisfaction

and assist managers to make informed decisions on actions to take for
further improvements. If you have any questions

regarding the climate survey, please feel free to contact a member of the
Continuous Improvement Unit.

Steve Collins

Libby Moody

Joshua Durden

Russell Hellein

Carmen Dupoint









5



850.245.3429

850.245.3281

850.245.3331

850.245.3300

850.245.3299



steven.collins at vr.fldoe.org

libby.moody at vr.fldoe.org

joshua.durden at vr.fldoe.org

russell.hellein at vr.fldoe.org

carmen.dupoint at vr.fldoe.org





COMPARISON OF CURRENT CLIMATE ITEMS WITH PREVIOUS CLIMATE ITEMS

Table 1 below shows the results for all survey items in comparison with
climate surveys conducted since 2003.  The far

right column indicates percentage point changes from 2007 to the current
survey.  It should be noted that 22 of 27

survey items (81.5%) show improvement from the 2007 survey.  Also of note is
that 4 of the 5 items that did not show

improvement had negligible drops in performance from the 2007 survey.  More
detailed analysis of all survey items and

factors is currently underway.

Table 1: Comparison of Current Climate Items with Previous Climate Items

Item

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Statement

DVR Headquarters leadership has set high performance expectations.

DVR's strategic plan goals and initiatives have been communicated to me.

I understand how my individual performance contributes to DVR's success.

DVR's organizational values are promoted by Headquarters Leadership.

Overall, decisions by DVR Headquarters Leadership are based on that which

most likely advances our mission and goals.

My supervisor provides clear and consistent expectations regarding my work.

I am able to get the information, questions answered, decisions, etc.
necessary

to effectively do my job.

DVR communications, such as the DVR Employee Newsletter and VR-Inet,

enables me to stay informed of strategies and events within DVR.

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters productivity.

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters trustworthy

relationships.

Managers, supervisors, and other leaders encourage innovative or new

approaches to do things at work.

I am able to use my skills and initiative to perform my work.

I know what it takes for me to meet the expectations of my customers.

In my immediate work unit, we regularly use data and information to improve

our work unit's performance.

I have the equipment and resources necessary to perform quality work.

I can identify what I must do to be successful at my job.

I am held accountable for the quality of my work.

I am comfortable being held accountable for the quality of my work.

In my immediate work unit, employees who perform well have opportunities for

recognition for their accomplishments.

In my immediate work unit, employees who perform well have opportunities for

increased pay.

New employees are given a helpful orientation to DVR.

I have the education and training necessary to effectively do my job.

Someone at work encourages my development.

There is a clear system to take advantage of opportunities for career

advancement.

Work in my immediate unit is organized to promote cooperation.

My workload enables me to balance my work and personal life.

Employees are involved in decisions which may affect how their work is

performed.

My opinions seem to count when I provide them at work.

VR provides employees who perform well opportunities for advancement.

I feel that I am part of a team at work.

My supervisor, or someone at work, seems to care about my success.

I feel physically safe and secure at work.

Ethical behavior is promoted by Headquarters Leadership.

The feedback I received from my most recent performance review was useful

(directed towards helping me improve and/or advance).

Overall, I am satisfied with DVR as a place to work.



2003



2005



2007



2010



Change

between

2007/2010

6.70%

3.56%

5.04%

2.11%

7.62%

0.54%

1.13%

6.13%

6.96%

2.32%

2.11%

0.89%

0.21%

NA

4.18%

2.78%

NA

2.90%

7.20%

11.71%

NA

3.03%

3.15%

NA

NA

NA

NA

1.11%

15.71%

3.86%

1.51%

NA

6.23%

0.67%

8.73%



76.30% 84.46% 91.16%

66.80% 80.20% 84.46% 88.02%

73.90% 82.00% 90.11% 95.15%

71.70% 82.57% 80.46%

62.70% 76.30% 83.92%

74.80% 79.90% 84.46% 83.92%

75.00% 81.32% 82.45%

59.30% 77.20% 83.99% 90.12%

69.70% 75.67% 82.63%

69.70% 75.67% 77.99%

49.60% 55.50% 67.50% 69.61%

90.11% 89.22%

89.20% 96.10% 97.02% 96.81%

83.46%

62.50% 61.40% 74.88% 79.06%

88.60% 91.50% 94.03% 96.81%

97.84%

84.40% 96.50% 93.09% 95.99%

18.00% 58.08% 65.28%

18.00% 25.75% 14.04%

69.50%

73.10% 92.10% 93.25% 96.28%

68.40% 67.80% 73.94% 77.09%

60.06%

78.16%

77.69%

64.74%

68.30% 68.00% 70.96% 72.07%

18.00% 36.73% 52.44%

75.20% 78.34% 82.20%

66.40% 72.20% 80.38% 81.89%

83.78%

71.70% 82.57% 88.80%

62.30% 68.80% 75.67% 76.34%

66.30% 66.50% 77.39% 86.12%





6











Comparison of Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Employee

Satisfaction to Other Public Agencies

Overall

Satisfaction

Rate

Survey

Organization

Year

State of Vermont

95%

2008

Florida Department of Transportation

93%

2010

Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation

86%

2010

Georgia Perimeter College

78%

2009

Federal Government (overall)

72%

2010

State of Georgia

71%

2009

Florida Department of Health

68%

2008



Items with Greatest Potential for Improving Overall Satisfaction

Item responses were analyzed using a quadrant analysis approach. This
approach is a standard best practice for

analyzing climate data. Table 2 below ranks the items that have the greatest
potential to improve overall employee

satisfaction. For example, Item 11 ("Managers, supervisors, and other
leaders encourage innovative or new approaches

to do things at work.") suggests that the DVR leadership team should
continue to deploy innovative and new approaches

for doing work. This may be addressed by expansion of performance
improvement projects such as Rapid Process

Improvement events. It should be noted that this is a preliminary finding
and that additional analyses will be necessary

prior to taking action on the results.

Comparison of Current Climate Items with Previous Climate Items

Items with the Greatest Opportunity for Impact

Item

Statement

Managers, supervisors, and other leaders encourage innovative or new

approaches to do things at work.

Work in my immediate unit is organized to promote cooperation.

My opinions seem to count when I provide them at work.

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters trustworthy

relationships.

In my immediate work unit, employees who perform well have opportunities for

recognition for their accomplishments.

Employees are involved in decisions which may affect how their work is

performed.

There is a clear system to take advantage of opportunities for career

advancement.

Someone at work encourages my development.

VR provides employees who perform well opportunities for advancement.

New employees are given a helpful orientation to DVR.



2003



2005



2007



2010



Change

between

2007/2010

2.11%

NA

1.11%

2.32%

7.20%

NA

NA

3.15%

15.71%

NA



11

25

28

10

19

27

24

23

29

21



49.60% 55.50% 67.50% 69.61%

78.16%

68.30% 68.00% 70.96% 72.07%

69.70% 75.67% 77.99%

18.00% 58.08% 65.28%

64.74%

60.06%

68.40% 67.80% 73.94% 77.09%

18.00% 36.73% 52.44%

69.50%









7





QUADRANT ANALYSIS

Quadrant Chart by Item Number Items that fall in the Northwest Quadrant are
most important to overall

satisfaction, but have the lowest scores.

0.60



Northwest Quadrant lower score/ higher

importance

11

28

25

10



Higher score/ higher

importance

30

7

9

31

23

34

6

21

4

5

12



0.50

27

24

29

19



24



29



Relative Importance to Overall Satisfaction



33



0.40

26



15

14

2

8

32

3



Lower score/ lower importance



0.30

16

20



17

18



20



1



13

22



0.20



0.10



Higher score/ lower

importance



0.00

0.00



0.25



0.50



0.75



1.00



1.25



1.50



1.75



2.00



2.25



2.50



2.75



3.00



3.25



3.50



3.75



4.00



Average Satisfaction Score









The further to the left ("West") boxes are, the less satisfied respondents
were with that item. The higher boxes go in the

chart ("North"), the more important that item is to overall satisfaction.
Boxes in the left upper corner ("Northwest")

have the most potential to improve overall satisfaction, because they have
relatively greater impact on it and people are

relatively less satisfied with that item (making improving it easier).



8







FACTOR ANALYSIS

A factor analysis was run to better understand what influences satisfaction
at VR. Factor Analysis generates factors ­

sets of related items that explain an individual's response to the survey
questions. Variables were listed on the factors in

their relative order of importance. Two factors were particularly important.
By far the most powerful factor was

associated exclusively with Supervisors' impact on their immediate work
environment. It was the key factor explaining

overall satisfaction and most of the elements of the quadrant analysis. This
suggests that efforts to improve satisfaction

in VR (either directly or indirectly through changes in the quadrant
analysis items) must have a significant impact on the

immediate work environment to be successful. A second factor was heavily
associated with leadership driving a positive

view of the agency. This suggests that efforts to improve satisfaction
should be geared in part to improving the image of

the agency in employees' eyes.



Factor

Supervisor Impact

on Immediate Work

Environment

#

*10

9

6

31

30

*28

*25

*23

7

*11

34

*19

*27

35

12

14

Leader's Impact on

Employee's View of

VR

1

3

4

33

5

2

Survey Item

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters trustworthy
relationships.

My supervisor promotes a work environment that fosters productivity.

My supervisor provides clear and consistent expectations regarding my work.

My supervisor, or someone at work, seems to care about my success.

I feel that I am part of a team at work.

My opinions seem to count when I provide them at work.

Work in my immediate unit is organized to promote cooperation

Someone at work encourages my development.

I am able to get the information, questions answered, decisions, etc.
necessary to

effectively do my job.

Managers, supervisors, and other leaders encourage innovative or new
approaches.

The feedback I received from my most recent performance review was useful
(directed

towards helping me improve and/or advance).

In my immediate work unit, employees who perform well have opportunities for

recognition for their accomplishments.

Employees are involved in decisions which may affect how their work is
performed.

Overall, I am satisfied with DVR as a place to work.

I am able to use my skills and initiative to perform my work.

In my immediate work unit, we regularly use data and information to improve
our work

unit's performance.

DVR Headquarters leadership has set high performance expectations.

I understand how my individual performance contributes to DVR's success.

DVR's organizational values are promoted by Headquarters Leadership.

Ethical behavior is promoted by Headquarters Leadership.

Overall, decisions by DVR Headquarters Leadership are based on that which
most likely

advances our mission and goals.

DVR's strategic plan goals and initiatives have been communicated to me.







*Items denoted in bold have the greatest opportunity for impact





9









GENERAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS





Finding

Significant differences in education, age, and length

of employment.



Recommendation

Focus on training, career development, and

succession planning.



HQ significantly more satisfied than Field.



Focus on open communication and behavioral

demonstration of values.



Supervisors have a major impact on work unit

climate.



Focus on behaviors that build trust.  Review content

analysis for ideas. Engage employees in identifying

solutions. Allow for autonomy, clear expectations,

and adequate information to do the job.



Comments indicate some offices lack adequate

basic work equipment, poor layouts, inadequate

privacy, etc.



Review physical office environment and equipment

needs; then align plans and budgets to meet needs.















10



Audit No.: M-11/12-20

Prepared By: ___KK _____

Date: ___5/3/12______



DBS Management Review Interviews



Reviewed By: __________

Date: __________



We have included interviewee names; however, we ask that you

keep names private due to the sensitive nature of this review and concerns
of

retaliation.



Twelve interview write-ups were judgmentally selected for your review. The
sample

consists of two former employees and ten current employees ­ five state
office and five

district office.

We feel the sampled interviews are representative of our results and show
the polarity of

interview responses. The interviews address topics such as:

· Working environment,

· Turnover concerns,

· Contracts and monitoring,

· Relationships with the Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRP),

· Hiring process, and

· Communication.

Approximately 35 additional write-ups are available, should you wish to see
them.



Management Review of the Division of Blind Services



Audit No.: M-11/12-20

Page 1 of 1



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/6/12

1)

DBS position/ role?



Interviewer: JM

Notes prepared by: KK



Senior Management Analyst II with the Bureau of Client Services.

Job duties: submit federal reports (quarterly and annually); budget
allocations to

Districts for program activities; and quality assurance activities.

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

Since September 2010, 1.5 years. Came from the Division of Vocational

Rehabilitation (DVR). Was an internal auditor with DVR.

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

1.5 years. Supervisor is

4)

(Bureau Chief for Client Services).



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Within his Bureau: Positive. Running as well as it can. Bureau Chief does a
very

good job, trying to keep up the best they can based on inherited activities.

Within Division: Lot of micro-managing. Division Director makes all
decisions. Staff

decisions can be overturned. Could be fear in making decisions
(retaliation),

especially when dealing with the CRP's. Division Director has a tight
relationship

with the CRP's ­ too tight. (He has heard this from others). Thinks one
could make

the argument that there is preferential treatment.

High turnover at high levels of management.

Questioned if that was

normal/reasonable. Thinks turnover is due to staff opposing the Division
Director.

Let go if they are seen as an "impediment" to what the Division Director
wants

done. He questioned who enabled turnover. Said Linda Champion and Sheila

White sign off on personnel actions, so should they also be held
responsible. He is

not sure about Sheila White's relationship in the Division.

No specific names regarding retaliation.



5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



-



Bureau of Client Services

Timely submittal of federal reports

Allocations to Districts / Budget allocation process

Better job oversight in District offices

Better job handling client appeals (not handled in Districts and moved up to

State office)



6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Too high given the size of the Division. Higher than at DVR. Some people
forced

out/to resign.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Doesn't have direct involvement in this area. Thinks contracts are a sore
point with

the Division and Division Director.

Possibility of State not getting what it is paying for. Lack of monitoring
and

oversight. Don't look too deep at CRP's. Don't want to apply sanctions. Gave
an

example of concerns with the number of clients served. Believes CRP's are
paid

the same if they serve 1 client vs 100. Staff in contract monitoring unit
doesn't feel

comfortable about staff turnover. Review docs/CRP invoices, but don't
question.

Just process it.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Could compare and contrast the money given to Districts vs. CRP's. Hard to

document qualitative aspects of reallocated money to CRP's from Districts.
Would

want to look at quality and number served.

Jim said someone else mentioned that more funds to contracts could mean less

funds for direct services by the districts. David agreed with this
statement.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

Not in accordance with DFS rules.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Issues with contracted services. Not sure the Division is getting the best
bang for



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



its buck. Not verifying numbers (served). Only desk reviews, not onsite
visits.

Afraid to ruffle the feathers of CRP's because it will get back to the
Division

Director.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Not exactly. People hired that don't have minimum credentials (college
degree)

because they are a friend of someone. Internal staff does not think they
have a fair

chance for advancement.

12)

Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

Not getting best/brightest people for positions. Questioned sign-offs by
Linda

Champion saying things don't happen in a vacuum.

When asked how to find favoritism, David suggested we look at salary

enhancements (more than one) and turnover over the last two years.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

No.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with executive management?

Operating in silos. Some staff are favorites of the Division Director and
feed her

information.

Would like more teamwork.

Not most positive environment compared to other work experience with DOE.

Fear of retaliation if list of interviewees gets back to Division Director.
No doubt of

retaliation of interviewees by executive management if the list gets out.
Requested

we not disclose names.

15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Client Services making an effort to improve policies and procedures. Not
sure

about contracts and other areas.

There was a period of 10 years where no one did almost anything. Policies
and



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



procedures are a work in progress....not where they need to be.

Not sure DBS follows DFS contracting rules.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Change leadership and reduce turnover of management ranks.

contributing to communication and organizational issues.

Lots of drama for the size of the Division.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

David mentioned that staff from the Governor's Office came over to meet with
the

contracting section. Rumor mill is flying between the OIG project and
Governor's

Office visit.

Concerns with staff that have received raises, staff credentials (college
degree?),

and how some positions are not advertised ­ just pop up.

Concerns with hiring process enablers ­ paperwork signed off by Linda
Champion

and Sheila White.

Turnover



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/9/12

1)

DBS position/ role?



Interviewer: JM

Notes prepared by: KK



Contracts Supervisor, over 3 contract managers and 1 administrative staff.

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

Since June 2011, approx 9 months. Came from DOE contract administration
(there

from 2006 to 6/11).

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

Same, approx 9 months. Reports to Ellen McCarron.

4)

How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Very different. Micro-managed a lot.

5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

Contracts and monitoring is doing well. Three really experienced staff and
one that

is getting there. Staff doesn't always use

's knowledge and expertise as they

should in other areas.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Very unusual so much turnover. Not used to it. Worries about it.

Broke her foot/leg and has been working from home. Doesn't want to lose job.
On

probation for one year as a new employee.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Different. Most are exempt (from the traditional procurement process). FAASB

(Florida Association of Agencies Serving the Blind) has a lot of control on
upper



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



management. FAASB represents the interests of the CRP's.

Negotiations ­ There are criteria. Joyce makes the decisions.

Doing a lot of price analysis.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

She is learning more about actual services supplied to clients, from
reporting.

Some reporting makes you wonder if the CRP's are doing everything to serve

clients. Example, time spent with a client and number of clients served.

There are remedy tables on some contracts, but not all. Not the same terms
on

different types of contracts.

QPIS and MIS reporting are getting better.

Have redone the monitoring procedures manual.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

In the past, contractors (CRP's) contacted Joyce if they weren't happy.
Joyce says

less of that is happening now. Districts have more contact with CRP's and
feel

comfortable working together.

Said that some issues arose when DBS moved from AWARE to AWARE 5.11.

Unreal the number of clients that should have been closed in 90 days, that
weren't.

Old cases that should have been closed (from 06/07). Doesn't affect payments
to

CRP's.

Concerns with invoices that bill for clients that are documented as absent
for the

day billed.

Auditor note:

invoices.

10)

did not seem to have confidence in the accuracy of the



Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

As far as she knows.



11)



Is the DBS hiring process fair?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Not sure. One contract manager without experience was hired for more money

than one's with experience. Same contract manager told

he could have had

her job.

Auditor Note: Believe

12)

was referring to

. ­ KEK 3/9/12



Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

Appears that way. See example above.



13)



Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

Doesn't feel free to say all her concerns. Doesn't want to be reprimanded or
lose

her job.



14)



How would you describe communication from and with executive management?

Has gotten better lately. Appears trying to get better ­ in last few weeks.
Good to

know what's going on and what you need to do next.



15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Thinks so.

Worked hard on her performance evaluations. Asked to change one performance

evaluation. Evaluation was on in December, but asked to change it in
January.

Asked to consider other things that happened before she took her position.
Made

her feel uncomfortable.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

No discrimination. Work as a team.

Was told to watch certain employees ­ told by HR person and Director.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

Different work environment. Partiality. Didn't expect environment to be the
way it

is. Others agree.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Gave an example of the CRP's unique relationship with DBS. Said

was wrung out by the CRP's about contracts/financial consequences.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Notes prepared by: J. Maxwell

1)

DBS position/ role?



Interviewer: J. Maxwell Date: 3/19/2012



Official title is program administrator. Before this, she was a program
consultant.

Before this, she was a DBS district administrator for eleven years - Saint

Petersburg district.

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

32 years

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

Three years. Report to

4)

How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Tense. Stressful. Very little support from upper management, if any.

Turnover significant-staff are wondering who is next.

Fear.



She has heard people say that they should be happy that they do not work in
the

State Office. She used to love her job. But during the last two-three years,
big

changes have made it difficult. She does not know who to trust. Best to stay
off of

the radar and keep your mouth shut.

5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

Quality assurance has been given more attention recently. This is the
section that

is in charge of. She said that she was never trained for this position, that

she learned on her own but gets little support for her initiatives.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Concerned. Don't recall this level of TO before in such a short term. Staff
that are

left do not understand why the TO has occurred. If this was a private
business, the

boss would be in trouble. Staff has been forced to resign or be terminated.
Staff

has been forced to move, reorganizations have taken place, terminations,
position



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



descriptions have been changed. Too much has happened too quickly.

Uncooperative staff is "marked" not wanted and need to get rid of.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Not at all. Employees of the CRP's are not involved in a healthy partnership
with

DBS staff. The DBS staff appear to need the permission of CRPs to do just
about

anything. Workgroups that are set up must include representatives from CRPs.

Often, DBS employees must sit back and simply say OK. If something is not

written into code or statute, it is "fine."

Much money is being sent to CRPs for new programs leaving less money
available

for clients (direct services). Much money is given to the Tampa Lighthouse
(job

placement). The Statler Institute for Food Service received much funding but

resulted in very few placements (1 or 2 still working).

Instead of looking for other vendors, money is always directed to
Lighthouses,

whether skilled or not. The Lighthouses have become the "experts" on
everything.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

In her current position, she is far removed from DBS clients. But she's
concerned

that clients are not being offered appropriate choices for services. Clients
are

asked to accept services from the lighthouses without being given any other

choices. Money sent to CRPs reduces money that can be spent on clients
through

direct services.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

No. Some CRPs have all over a hundred clients. Monitoring performed by the

State Office is 5 cases a month only. Only look at certain aspects of the
process.

Example-service hours make sense? ­Yes or no. The monitoring process
currently

used is not effective.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

No. More and more money is being sent to CRP contracts. Less money is being

given to the district service budget. Travel funding for workgroups has
increased.

CRPs provide job placement training but there are other potential providers
which

are not utilized. Example - DVR.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



11)



Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Not sure. Orlando district administrator retired. A CRP employee was placed
there

as a supervisor and later made DA. She felt that he does not have the

qualifications. The name is

.

Team performing interviews for DAs is questionable. Only one of the recently
hired

DAs has stayed on (hired from outside of DBS with people who don't have

rehabilitation backgrounds). Seems administration is getting back to people
with

appropriate experience recently.



12)



Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

Yes. Program Manager

- not qualify for a position that supervises all

district administrators. This does not seem appropriate.



13)



Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

No. DBS employees are now gone due to speaking up. Does not feel she can

voice thoughts/ opinions which out it being held against her. Fear of
retaliation.



14)



How would you describe communication from and with senior management?

Non-existent. Told "here is what I need you to do". Phone calls and emails
can go

for long times without being answered or not answered at all. Not a two way

communication that is useful.



15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

To a point. Updated to a degree. However, not enough training given to
staff.

Need more support, training. Especially need training for the districts in
the area of

personnel issues and processes.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

The working environment. Voicing thoughts and being recognized for
contributions.

Job not in peril if you do not agree with the executive director. Change how
we

work with clients. The current order of importance by the executive director
is first

the CRPs, then certain staff at the State Office, then clients and finally
DBS staff.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



It would be a good idea to have other vendors provide services and not limit
all

contracting with the existing CRP's. Best if you work in an environment
where you

do not have fear when you come to work. Too many reorganizations. DBS

counselors need to be respected for what they can contribute. They are
currently

not utilizing their skills. Instead they're pushing paper. They should be in
involved

more with clients.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

Do not get support from the executive director. Employees are required to
change

their views or get out. Too many changes. No one can breathe. If people
cannot

adjust to the executive director's methods, they're considered a liability.

Mentioned an episode involving a meeting with the client services Bureau
chief.

She was put through a list of questions from employees who "did not like
her". It

turns out that some of the employees had never worked for her. The process
was

a hoax. It appears to have been orchestrated to get a termination. No proof
to the

allegations.

agreed at the end, but said that she was directed

to do this (likely directed by her boss). This was very humiliating for

.

Many employees have been mistreated (ex.

). More money to CRPs

when it could be used for staff raises or direct services to clients.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/9/12

1)

DBS position/ role?



Interviewer: JM

Notes prepared by: KK



Contract manager for 24-26 contracts in the South Florida region (south of
highway

60).

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

Since 1985, 27 years.

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

1.5 years. Reports to

4)

.



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Hostile, uncomfortable, afraid to express yourself. Various people feel
picked on.

Seen a lot of turnover.



5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

Role models ­ no.

Contracts section has attempted to make improvements in the structure of

contracts.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Division has had a lot of turnover. People leaving frustrated and in
disgust. Leads

to hostile working environment. Staff replaced with people with little or no

experience with blind services. Experience in the field is not validated.
Need a mix

of new and experienced staff. Recruitment is a challenge.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Not negotiated. Based on number served, historical. Districts have little or
no



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



involvement in contracting/amount.

One deliverable - # served. Dollar amount based on figure done by an outside

group.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Doesn't know. Has yet to see any kind of satisfaction survey results.

Based on units of service, would say no. Should focus on units of service
per client

vs. number of clients served.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

Neutral. He's more aggressive and not concerned about negative feedback.

Us vs. them mentality. Districts encouraged not to interfere with CRP's ­

happening more recently. There is one point of entry, the Division Director.
CRP's

call Division Director, not contract managers or District Administrators if
they have a

problem. It has evolved to this over a period of time.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

No, in his personal opinion. Gave Palm Beach as an example. Palm Beach CRP

went bankrupt and they did not have another provider in that area. The
District

office took over the independent living services. Were able to do that due
to good

staff and networking. District office was able to provide services better
and for less.

Services should be a combination of CRP and district services.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Doesn't know. Doesn't know where they recruit from. A lot of people hired
without

blind experience.

12)

Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

Yes, couple of instances.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



No. Really uncomfortable feeling.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with executive management?

Tell them what they want to hear.

Hard to throw out new ideas or be philosophical.

Try not to engage in any kind of confrontation.

15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Weak, very general. With general it is hard to measure outcome. Independent

language should cite a specific goal.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Easy fix ­ new leadership.

Attitude issue with the staff. Hard to change.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

Perception of staff. A coworker has been unfairly harassed by other staff.

Uncomfortable with it. Cliques, groups. A lot of good people - don't like to
see

people picked on.

Focus group example: a CRP staff said "what is she doing here" to Joyce
Hildreth

in a focus group meeting. Joyce told the DBS staff member (the "she") to
leave.

Management doesn't stand up to CRP's for the staff.

He has been watching staff members being moved around based on (rumored)

comments from CRP's.

Seen results of what happens when people pursue thoughts contrary to

management.

Little interaction from the Districts. They won't express themselves. Should
want to

hear from the Districts to know when something is coming.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Not a lot of initiative or creative thought because everything is
micro-managed.

Said his supervisor was "neutered".

Haven't done any kind of monitoring in 2 years. Previous supervisor (

) was fired when he tried to monitor. Dialogue to do it, but nothing

happens.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M

Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/5/12 Notes prepared by: KK

1)

DBS position/ role?

MIS Manager. Manages IT computer support staff and DBS applications.

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

2 years in April.

3)

How long have you worked in your current position?

2 years in April. Reports to Director,

4)

.

Interviewer: JM



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

(Examples, reasons, further information....)

Overall, enjoys it. Especially working with customers.

Described the management team as working with a volcano. Some staff talk to

Joyce a lot and some do not. Information/views get distorted and you don't
always

get to defend yourself. Doesn't feel good. There are different "camps" in
the office.

Joyce tends to believe the information from the last person she talked to.
Hearsay

­ sometimes not objective.

Gave an example of working on federal reports. Some staff overreact to
little

issues and blame MIS.

feels MIS corrects their issues; however, incorrect

data from business areas is what causes the issues, not MIS.

looks at

improving the process rather than all the fixes.



5)



Can you name any positive role models within the Division?

No role models named, but he feels that everything has improved. They are
doing

a lot of good things, but doesn't always feel like it. Feels like there is a
time bomb

sitting out there. Feels like he can do 10 good things, but 1 instance of a
bad thing

and he could be gone. Decisions to terminate an employee are not always

objective. He referred to

. Feels that

helped turn

things around and his departure was unjustified. Some staff are very
sensitive and

have a hard time being challenged.

termination may be

questionable too.

*Feels that Joyce ties him to

and that could be seen as a strike



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M

against him.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Some good, more good than bad. A lot of good turnover at the District

Administrator level. Digging out from 20 years of bad management.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed (no
preferential

treatment)?

Not close enough to this area to have an opinion about it.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Not close enough to this area to have an opinion about it.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

Not close enough to this area to have an opinion about it.

10)

Do you have a sense that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Not always. Gave an example regarding the AWARE system and Alliance

(contracted support). Feels additional IT services from Alliance (requested
by DBS

staff) are not worth the expense.

Been called an "obstructionist" and told he doesn't get to make that
decision.

Said Joyce thinks he puts his hand in the business side of things too much.
Joyce

said MIS should be a servant to operations/ client services.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Doesn't know. Some people (not him at this time) don't think it is open
enough.

Happy with his two employee appointments.

12)

Do you have any sense of favoritism in hiring practices?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M

Said it is normal ­ used to people getting people they know.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without fear?

No (emphatic). Verbally promotes openness, but actions don't show that.

He has learned to pick his battles. Sit back and watch bad decisions being
made.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with executive management?

Effective?

Troubling. Good in some cases. For example, good when all senior managers
are

in a room together, but when they break up in "camps" it stirs up drama. He
is

busy, doesn't see too much of it, but gets wind of it. Communications are
not

clear/fair. He is concerned that he is not involved in some conversations
that

involve him.

Jim asked

if he would give the names of the "in-camp".

named

.

gives Joyce, but she is a confidant.



Doesn't know what kind of advice



15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Thinks so; For the most part

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Couple managers in over their heads, not strong enough to lead and not great

decision makers.

Staff issues should be dealt with at that level and not by running to the
Director.

Would like to be judged based on work performance rather than hearsay.

Have to get rid of the drama mode. Get executive management to work together
all

the time. Get rid of "camps".

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not touched
upon?

He is not the only one that feels this way. Not the only one that deserves
to be

here and shouldn't have to feel this way. On pins and needles. Feels
stronger



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M

leaders are put in "other camp". Joyce does not seek drama, but drawn into
it by

certain staff.

Not making sound decisions. Example, management wanted to be able to run a

report of how many authorizations are placed after the fact. Would be a
$12,000

system change through the software provider. Feels you still need to do spot

checks, don't need the system report. Already know where problems are.
Doesn't

need system change. Recommended process change ­ create an emergency

authorization process that would allow a one day turnaround (potential best

practice to consider).

Also expressed concern with

going to Joyce over issues she

has with him (

). They work together a lot. She doesn't like controversy.

Would rather she come to him with her problems about him.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/22/12

1)

DBS position/ role?



Interviewer: KK

Notes prepared by: KK



Rehabilitation supervisor, District 6 - Orlando

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

18-19 years

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

5.5-6 years total.

Reports to

4)

Took a year off to work as a counselor to help her district.

.



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

In her office ­ fine. Calm, pleasant environment. Recently moved offices so
all

staff are on the same floor.

Overall ­ A lot of stress. Caseloads large. Huge influx of newly blind in
the area.



5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

A lot has improved. For example, the case management system. Now they have

quarterly reviews with counselors to go over how things are going.

has made a huge difference in the office, for the good.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Stresses her terrifically. Lose continuity with turnover. Terrible turnover
in districts.

Need good people to come and stay. No senior counselors at this time. Most
staff

are kind of new.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Thinks so. A lot of tension with facilities. Not due to negotiations. A lot
of tension.

(LCF and Lake County)

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

As much as they are capable of. Experience a gap in service due to
turnover ­

vacant caseloads. Affects clients served. Affects speed of service.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

Yes.

10)

helps and is supportive.



Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Yes, at the district they do their best.

We discussed the pilot job placement program with LCF. Lighthouse received

$4,000 for a placement. Have 40 people in the program. Have placed 9, 6 of

which have been in a LCF facility. A little uncomfortable with the numbers.
Wants

to involve other businesses. Stress over authorizations. Money given for
training,

money given for placements, then put back in for training. Counselors have
their

own goals for placements. If the goals are not reached they will receive

unsatisfactory evaluations. Lighthouse ties up placements. Lighthouse
decides

when someone is ready for a placement. District has no control over their
numbers

and working on this pilot program causes them to lose time for their own job

placements (which have to be in by 3/30).



11)



Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Yes, in her office. Pick someone with the appropriate skills and education.



12)



Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

No.



13)



Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

Personally, she is free to speak. Doesn't know if all her staff would say
the same,

because they are new.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



She and

14)



have team meetings. Staff are encouraged to be open.



How would you describe communication from and with senior management?

Doesn't have much contact. Gets along fine when she sees them. Communication

is through

.



15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

has been working hard on policies.

policies/expanded on information.

Policies are the best they've been in a long time.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Give staff more positive feedback. There is a focus on what people are doing

wrong ­ auditing perspective.

Feels that she has lost a lot of people because they don't feel like they
were

appreciated.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

Worried about the LCF situation. It is a big program, lots of clients
involved, and

has grown dramatically. Grown so fast. Need to work to make it a team
effort.

Need teamwork.

Has cleared up gray areas in



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person Interviewed/Title:

Date: March 9, 2012



, former Deputy Director, DBS



Interviewer: Dean Goodson



1) Former DBS position/role?

Deputy Director, DBS.



2) How long did you work at DBS?

Under two years, August 2009 to April 2011.



3) How long did you work in your current position? Who was your supervisor?

One year and Joyce Hildreth, DBS Director was his supervisor.



4) When were you terminated or did you leave DBS?

stated that he was given the option to resign in lieu termination. He said

that Hildreth gave him this option in the presence of

in the Personnel

office.



5) Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are
they

followed and enforced?

explained that policies in about half of the areas are very good, but in
other

areas, policies are lacking, vague, or do not exist. He said this was in
areas of

strategic planning, projects with management, and priority setting by
management.

said the management information systems and contract management

were examples of this; and personnel and clients services had good policies
and

procedures.



6) How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

said in DBS, the intent was there, but including himself, other employees

were fearful of losing their positions. He said employees were afraid of
expressing

their thoughts or ideas.



7) Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within

the Division?

said the overall view of DBS by their stakeholder groups improved

because of more communication and more listening by DBS which created a

better relationships. He said he especially saw this with Business
Enterprise and

the management information systems.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



8) What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over
recent

years?

said he had a "mixed impression." He said the old leadership was

not strong with holding employees accountable. The new leadership, however,

holds employees accountable, and the solution is letting employees go when
they

find them not accountable, resulting in several employees losing their jobs.

said conflicts were dealt with through personnel actions such as

terminations rather than through more constructive approaches to solving an
issue

or problem.



9) Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

said there are "gaps" in the DBS contracts. Some are managed

consistently while other are not. He said there needs to be more competitive

bidding especially with client services, aids, or technology. There needs to

be more scrutiny with the administration of the contracts.



10) Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

said overall the needs were being met because the bulk of funding was

dedicated to vocational rehabilitation.



11) Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively

manage contracts with Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs)?

explained there was a lot of micromanaging of the contract decisions by

Hildreth, and contract managers tried to manage them, but were timid to
exercise

the terms and conditions of the contracts for fear of repercussions. They
did not

want to go against what Hildreth wanted, and what was written in the
contract was

not always enforced.

12)

Do you have a sense that DBS funding is being put to its best use (e.g.,

increased dollars in CRP contracts)?

said that the authorization process of the vocational rehabilitation

program, where a fourth to a third of the funding goes, should be reviewed
to

determine if it is a sound process. He said the process should be internal
to

DBS without going through upper management review or anyone outside of DBS.



13) Is the DBS hiring process fair?

said "yes overall" at the staff level. But, at the management level, hiring

became whatever route was expeditious instead of taking the time to acquire
the

best candidate for the position.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



14) Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring

practices?

responded that he did not have a sense of favoritism, but it was more of

filling a position too quickly with the management level positions. There
were no

value or consistency with placing someone in those positions. The attitude
was

"we'll just get another one," and not necessarily a qualified person.



15) Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without

concern?

said the intent was genuinely there, but in practice, it was not that way.



16) How would you describe communication from and with executive

management?

said communication was inconsistent. He said there would be "a load for

awhile then there would be none for awhile."



17) If you could, what would you change at DBS?

said top priorities are not clear or concise to employees, there are too

many snap decisions from management causing employees not to understand

what is important. He said if there was better direction from the top, the
turnover

at DBS would stop.



18) Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not touched

upon?

said just the way things change so quickly at DBS. He said two and a

half weeks before he was told to resign, Hildreth told him "we make a great
team

together."



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person Interviewed/Title:

Technology Consultant, DBS

Date: March 13, 2012



, former Rehabilitation Engineer and



Interviewer: Dean Goodson



1) Former DBS position/ role?

Several positions: Rehabilitation Engineer and Technology Consultant,
Program

Manager of Client Services, Bureau Chief of Client Services, and Bureau
Chief of

Business Enterprises.



2) How long did you work at DBS?

16 years.



3) How long did you work in your current position? Who was your supervisor?

March 2009 to November 30, 2011.



4) When were you terminated or did you leave DBS?

stated he was told he had to move to Daytona, FL or be terminated. He said

he elected to resign in lieu of termination because he did not want to make
the

move.

said he learned that after he resigned, the position he was to take in

Daytona was eliminated.



5) Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are
they

followed and enforced?

said he believed they are when they are followed. However, DBS staff did not

follow the policies in order "to keep the Director from coming down on
them." He

gave examples of two of the Lighthouses for the Blind where the
administrators

reported to the DBS Director, Joyce Hildreth, that these CRPs were not
servicing

the clients properly and not documenting the services correctly.

said Hildreth

got upset with the administrators and told them they should be "working with
them"

rather than providing the right services or documentation.



6) How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

said the environment was hostile and employees called Hildreth "Hitler"

because she ruled by intimidation. He said she would select an employee time

after time and give them a hard time.



7) Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



the Division?

said the relationship with the Community Rehabilitation Providers. But, he

said it was a "reverse type of relationship" because DBS worked for the CPRs

instead of the CPRs working for DBS.



8) What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over
recent

years?

said this was the highest turnover DBS ever had. He said several employees

left just to get away from DBS while several others were wrongfully
terminated.



9) Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

said not with the CRP contracts. He said funding was taken from direct

services and placed in CRP contracts especially with training, which meant
clients

had no other choice for training except through the CRPs. He said as more

money is transferred to the CRPs, there is less money dedicated for other
client

direct services. He added that the CRPs have now received the contracts for
job

placement and they do not have the proper training that the DBS counselors
have.

10) Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

said "no" based upon his previous answer and that clients cannot receive the

tools and devices they need from direct services because funding is going to
the

CRPs.

11) Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively

manage contracts with Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs)?

said "no." He gave the example of CRPs not wanting

as a

contract manager because he spoke out against CRPs receiving funds when they

did not meet their numbers and obligations to clients. Instead,

was

transferred out of his position to the Talking Book Library.



12) Do you have a sense that DBS funding is being put to its best use (e.g.,

increased dollars in CRP contracts)?

responded "no." He gave the example that two years ago, DBS received

stimulus funds, which was used for a grant to recruit blind students at
colleges for

a job opportunity, when in fact DBS already had knowledge of all of these
students.

He said they wasted these funds anyway for the grant. He added that DBS
spent

money for CRPs to update their equipment technology when they were supposed

to already have this equipment to perform under their contracts. Elliott
said this

money should have gone to client direct services.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



13) Is the DBS hiring process fair?

said "no," that employees who were more than qualified were not promoted

or selected for better positions because Hildreth or some other upper level

manager did not like them.



14) Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring

practices?

said "yes," that there were individuals selected for supervisory positions
that

lacked experience or were not qualified; but because they were liked by
Hildreth or

by someone in upper management, they were hired.



15) Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without

concern?

said "no, definitely not," that staff members are afraid to express their

opinions especially about the wrongful practices associated with the CRP

contracts. He added that probably around 80 percent of the DBS staff are

afraid to come to work.

16) How would you describe communication from and with executive

management?

explained that it was mostly monologues by Hildreth rather than dialogues

with DBS staff members. He said employees and upper management are afraid

of losing their jobs if they cross Hildreth in any way.



17) If you could, what would you change at DBS?

said he would change "the atmosphere" with the way employees are treated,

and change the way business is conducted with the CRP contracts by changing

the funding formulas and procedures.



18) Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not touched

upon?

recommended that someone needs to take a close look at all the DBS

contracts because their number continues to increase when utilizing other

competitive client services would be cheaper and beneficial to their
customers.

He further stated that the way

, DBS Personnel Liaison, conducts her

business is "not on the up and up." He described White as "Hildreth's
henchman."



OIG 11/12-20 M: DBS Management Review

Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

Date: 3/2/12 Notes prepared by: Kelly Kilker

Interviewer: Jim Maxwell



1)



DBS position/ role?

Bureau Chief of the Bureau of Business Enterprise



2)



How long have you worked at DBS?

7 years



3)



How long have you worked in your current position?

1.5 years. Supervisor is Joyce Hildreth (Division Director).



4)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff in core
functions?

And, are they following and enforced?

Yes and yes.

5)

How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

(Examples, reasons, further information....)

Extremely good. Climate has changed. Believes there has been an upgrade of

professionalism and accountability has changed. Joyce Hildreth wanted a year
to

evaluate staff. She said everyone would be held accountable for their
position

description (which

said was needed). Many people left due to being held

accountable.

said that before Joyce: 1) Providers had no respect for DBS; 2)

He only had respect for the Ft. Lauderdale district office; and 3) they had
to have

work groups to address the "wishy washy" contracts.

believes there is a greater

respect for DBS now.

6)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

named Joyce first.

He also proceeded to list several of the District

Administrators (DA) and other staff: Ivy Romero (Ft Lauderdale DA); Tony
Pileggi

(Pensacola DA); Michelle Levy (Miami DA); Brian Michaels (Orlando DA);
Jeffrey

Whitehead (Tampa DA); and Jim Woolyhand (Daytona Beach DA).

said that he

has respect for the DA's that he knows. He said he doesn't know if Ana St.
Fort



OIG 11/12-20 M: DBS Management Review



(Tallahassee DA) is fit for the job. The districts have received new
supervisors and

DA's. A lot have been brought from the outside.

The relationship between districts and the providers has improved.

Policies and procedures are followed more consistently regarding any issue ­
the

previous Director used to operate based on mood/feelings.

7)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Accountability thing ­ some couldn't adjust to the changes.

discussed the Bureau of Administrative Services. Lots of change. Probably

warranted.

left and

took the position.

couldn't

explain things (e.g. the budget). She is no longer in the position.

took over. He couldn't explain the budget either. Now

is in the

position.

believes she is a good fit.

also discussed the Deputy Director position.

was nice but

didn't do anything.

took over the position.

was a good guy,

but busy - trying to make up for the lack of work from his predecessor. Too
much.

was below

and they clashed.

was shocked when

was let go. It was sudden. Staff were interviewed and several felt
threatened by

. Ellen took over the position.

likes

in some ways. Said she is

smart, but gets confused. Doesn't think she was the right fit for the
position. Not

good people skills. Doesn't handle certain things well.

8)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed (no
preferential

treatment)?

has been away from contracts for the last 18 months. Contracts are far
better

than before Joyce came. Steve Ritacco would do what he wanted to do with

contracts. Now, things have been put in place to make contracting fairly
uniformed.

Amounts contracted based on historical data/trends.

Does not know of recent overpayments.

Could have been tougher on some of the smaller/struggling providers, but
didn't

want to lose provider (some providers depend on DBS funds to stay in
business).

Does not know or does not feel that there has been preferential treatment.
Larger

providers receive more funds because they see more clients. Money is tied to

people served.



OIG 11/12-20 M: DBS Management Review



*

pulled

aside one day to ask him about the contracts.

said the

Department of Financial Services wanted to know why DBS contracts have a

remedy asking a provider to pay back funds. Contracts used to have a remedy
that

the last payment would be withheld or reduced.

is not sure about new

language.

Follow up: Audit staff will review contracts to see if remedies language has

changed.

9)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Yes, but doesn't work closely with Client Services.

personnel are better.

Would think yes since



referenced Florida Statute that calls for services to be contracted as much
as

possible. Believe

was referring to: §413.014, F.S., which directs DBS to "as

rapidly as feasible, increase the amount of such services provided by
community

rehabilitation programs."

District's role has diminished, and they are not happy. Resentment. Less
people in

districts. Many district staff have been hired by the providers. DBS expects
more

from the providers and less from DBS staff.

Jim asked what

thought about a comment made that more contracted money

meant less for direct services.

initially had no comment, but referred to

resentment from district offices.

10)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

No idea at this point/no opinion.

11)

Do you have a sense that DBS funding is being put to its best use (e.g.,

increased dollars in CRP contracts)?

Yes, in his area (Bureau of Business Enterprise).

12)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Yes, as far as he knows.

13)

Do you have any sense of favoritism in hiring practices?



OIG 11/12-20 M: DBS Management Review



No, no evidence.

14)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without fear?

Yes.

15)

How would you describe communication from and with executive management?

Effective?

Yes. Meetings and emails all the time.

16)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not touched
upon?

Overall, Joyce has done an excellent job.

pointed to hiring concerns from Craig Kiser. He said Craig believed that a
blind

person can do any job a sighted person can do. Craig placed a lot of blind

individuals into jobs they weren't necessarily qualified for (e.g.
management

experience/skills).

17)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Discussed concerns/contention with DBS Fiscal staff on the 9th floor (

and

). DBS used to waste money, but they are more fiscally

responsible now and trying to do all the right things. Discussed concerns
with

communications issues between fiscal staff and other DBS staff. Gave an
example

of fiscal staff contacting Joyce and a meeting being held when the problem
could

have been resolved by a phone call.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

prepared by: GW

1)

DBS position/ role?

District 3 administrator

2)



Interviewer: GW Date: 3-12-2012 Notes



How long have you worked at DBS?

Since October 2011.



3)



How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

Since January 2012.



4)



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Supportive. As a new employee, I think I can go to my supervisor for answers
and

get good information. Very professional. Well managed.



5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

. She started as a counselor and moved up. Good model for me.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Has been turnover in the Jacksonville office. Reasons vary and are the same
as

other places I have been: Low pay, personal reasons, and leadership
challenges.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Yes, I review contracts monthly. Use a checklist. Don't see preferential
treatment,

the numbers are either there or they're not.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Yes. Appropriate policies and procedures are in place.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

Out of my purview. I know who to contact in Tallahassee.

relationship with my CRPs. Open and honest relationship.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Overall, yes. Funding is there for the VR program. Some other programs could

use additional funding: blind babies, older blind, and Adult Program.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

I believe so. Sometimes the decision to hire takes too long. Lot of hands
involved.

12)

Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

No.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

Yes. The way things are expressed needs to be constructive, professional.
Don't

have problems going to my supervisor. She is timely in responding.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with senior management?

Haven't had much communication. Just e-mail. I believe in the chain of
command.

My experience has been super.

15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Adequacy depends on which policy and procedure. Some policies are a little
too

free and favor the client too much. Most are good with good balance between
DBS

and the client. I'm still too new to the job to really respond.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

New counselor training would be helpful at the beginning of employment. We
have

continuing training but training specific to new counselors would be
helpful.

I have a positive



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



17)



Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

No.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title: Ana Saint-Fort Interviewer: GW Date: 3-12-12
Notes

prepared by: GW

1)

DBS position/ role?

District two administrator.

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

18 years.

3)

How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

6 years.

4)

How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

Average.

5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

Within the last two years communication has improved.

good role model.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

In the field, a lot of the turnover has to do with low salaries.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?

Need to look at how they are managed. I think it should be on a fee for
service

basis. Should depend on the number of clients served not lump sum. Can't

comment on preferential treatment (not in a position to know). More
competition

could be brought into the process if it were open to TBI (teachers of
visually

impaired) individuals.

is a



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



8)



Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

Overall, the Division is striving for that. There are pros and cons with
individual

CRPs ­ depends on the needs of the individual client.



9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

District administrators used to have a more management/monitoring role with

respect to the CRPs. Now that is more centralized. I do look at invoices
submitted

for payment.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Yes. We try to be good stewards ­ money goes to helping clients.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Yes, at the district level. Follow the People First protocol. Can't answer
at the

senior management level.

12)

Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

Not at the district.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

Think we are. The Division has been working on improving communications. I
feel

free to bring issues up the chain to

.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with senior management?

On a scale of 1(poor) to 5(great), I would say a 4. Pretty good. The
Division has

been striving to improve communications.

15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Policies and procedures are adequate at the field level and are enforced.

protocol is in place for changes and exceptions.

A



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



16)



If you could, what would you change at DBS?

Increasing the amount and quality of communications. Would like for senior
and

middle management to meet face to face to talk about trends and best
practices.



17)



Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

Pay is a big issue in order to retain staff.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



Person(s) Interviewed/Title:

prepared by: GW

1)

DBS position/ role?

District 7 administrator. Tampa

2)

How long have you worked at DBS?

Over 2.5 years.

3)



Interviewer: GW Date: 3/13/12 Notes



How long have you worked in your current position? Who is your supervisor?

Since July 2011.

.



4)



How would you describe the working environment within DBS/ your office?

DBS seems to be more structured then when I started in the St. Pete office.
More

down to business. More structured. More reports. More workload. Morale has

suffered due to more workload and no raises. We had to close the St. Pete
office

and moved the Lakeland office. Had lots of turnover and a rough transition
period

following some personnel/management problems. Things have improved. New

policies implemented. Procedures streamlined. Working with CRPs to improve

relations damaged by the previous district administration.



5)

Can you name any positive role models or areas that have improved within the

Division?

and the BEP program has improved.

are all good role models. The fiscal unit is good.

6)

What is your impression of the staff turnover that has occurred over recent

years?

Seems like a lot of staff turnover in the district. Takes a lot of time and
paperwork.

Turnover at state office has caused problems with changing roles and keeping
up

with the changes.

7)

Do you feel DBS contracts are properly negotiated and managed without

preferential treatment?



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



I am on the contract team. Contracts are not bid perhaps because providers
are

limited. Other agencies I've been with bid more.

8)

Do you feel the needs of DBS clients are being met effectively?

In most cases they are. The level of documentation is high. Maybe if we
reduced

the amount of documentation we could give better service. Some Lighthouses
are

better than others ­ working on that.

9)

Are DBS contract managers and staff allowed/ authorized to effectively
manage

contracts with CRPs?

I work with

. He seems to be effective. Does a good job. If we have a

question, we get an answer.

10)

Do you feel that DBS funding is being put to its best use?

Question the way allocations to districts are made. I don't know how the
dollars per

client compares to other states. Funding should be allocated per client not
a lump

sum to the CRP. I worked in DVR and they pay for services rendered.

11)

Is the DBS hiring process fair?

Yes for the district. Can't speak for the state office.

12)

Do you have any sense of the presence of favoritism in DBS hiring practices?

No for the district. Can't speak for the state office.

13)

Do you feel DBS employees are free to express themselves without concern?

I haven't had any problems but others have said they don't feel they can
speak up.

14)

How would you describe communication from and with senior management?

There are various levels of communication. Communication was good when I

started in 2009. In March 2010 communication seemed to slack off and that

continued to the fall of 2011. Now things have picked up and communications
have

improved.



DBS Management Review

OIG 11/12-20 M



15)

Are written policies and procedures adequate to guide staff? And, are they

followed and enforced?

Think they are adequate. Have gotten more. Need to absorb what we have ­ it

has been a bit overwhelming.

16)

If you could, what would you change at DBS?

DVR received across the board raises about two years ago. We need to do the

same. Put a hold on new policies for a while until what we have is solidly
in place.

Reduced staff turnover would be good.

17)

Are there any issues you would like to bring up that we have not discussed?

I'm new to the position. Trying to get the district back to where it was
before the

problems started. I feel I have the support to make needed changes.



Department of Education

Office of Inspector General

DBS Management Review

Contracting

Interim Results

Client Services Contract Procurement/ Contract Provisions

- Using statutory exemption to contract without competitive bidding (6.
Health

services. 7. Services provided to persons with mental or physical
disabilities by notfor-profit corporations)

- Using same 15-20 providers each year

- Fixed rate contracts with monthly fixed payment amount

- Primary deliverable/ payment trigger ­ Documented services to a minimum
number

of eligible individuals

- Contract award amounts ­ based largely on the actual deliverables of the
prior year

Contract Remedies - loosely written and not always enforced

Remedies (penalty or sanction for contract non-performance)

- Language has been softened over last 3 years

o Final numbers served reduced from 100% to 80%. Remedy payment

changed from being taken out during contract term to being billed.

- Per contract (Attachment A):

o No initial check until 6th month. 40% of deliverable (invoiced services)

o Only at 10th month is a potential monetary remedy addressed (Contractors

can serve only 52% of original requirement without penalty)

o Contract completion - 80%-100% clients served is expectation (but no

remedy in contracts)

Examples of non-enforcement of contract remedies:

-



Tampa Lighthouse (contract 11-522 for $336,000) did not meet deliverables.
No

remedy applied. Handwritten note on final payment documentation reads "Per

DBS director, contractor was advised they must meet deliverable by May
invoice

period."

Lighthouse of Central Florida (contract 10-976 for $700,000) applied remedy
by

reducing the last invoice. However, a payment was made from the G&D fund to

reimburse the provider in the exact amount of the remedy.



-



Contract Monitoring

- No monitoring reports issued in last 2 years (no formal monitoring).

- DFS - The monitoring process should include reconciling provider-generated

reports to source documentation such as case management notes, sign-in

sheets and client files.



Contract Close-out (final assessment of contract)

- No written procedures addressing close-out process. After 2008 IG audit, a
form

and process were in place (undone?).

- No close-out reports prepared for 2009-10

- Errors noted on 2010-11 close-out reports reviewed

- No reviewer approval on 2010-11 close-out reports

Responses from prior DBS employees on contracting

Agree following have merit:

- Need for competitive bidding for client services contracts, aids and
technology.

- Use of limited number of providers for most client services limits client
choice/

customer satisfaction.

- DBS staff should have more say about the purchasing of client services.

- More client services are being shifted from DBS to Lighthouses due to
current

management strategy.

- The executive director is said to be more involved with negotiations of
the

contracts than the actual contract managers.

- The DBS case management system can be more effectively utilized to monitor

services provided to clients.

Review steps

1) Reviewed procedures on contract administration/ contract monitoring

2) Analyzed trends in dollar amount and number of contracts awarded

3) Looked at changes in contract language and remedies for VR contracts over
the last

3 years.

4) Inspected contract closeout documentation for the last 2 years for
Vocational

Rehabilitation and Blind Babies contracts for a sample of 6 CRPs

- reviewed clients served vs. planned

- noted how numbers of clients served impacted subsequent years award
amounts

- determined that contract remedies were imposed and collected (as
applicable)

5) Obtained financial information on trends in Division disbursement for
contracting

versus authorizations.

6) Met with DFS staff on recent audit that included DBS contract agreements



Department of Financial Services (Preliminary findings)

Our review of twenty-five contracts and grant agreements disclosed that the
Department

had scope of work and/or deliverable issues for nineteen of these contracts.

Specifically, we noted the following:

 One grant agreement did not contain a scope of work that clearly
established the

tasks the recipient was required to perform. The Department provided an

explanation that the scope of work was provided for by statute. However, the

grant agreement did not include this statutory reference.

Contract #

372-96820-1S001

Service Provider

Tallahassee Community College

Contract Amount

$ 316,675



 Three service contracts provide for twelve monthly payments; however, there
is

not a required level of performance until the end of the sixth month. We

recommend that the Department align the performance with each of the monthly

payments.

Contract #

12-506

12-533

12-526

Service Provider

Conklin Centers for the Blind

Florida Centers for the Blind

Visually Impaired Persons of Southwest FL

Contract Amount

$ 110,331

$ 158,332

$ 233,100



 Fifteen grant agreements did not provide for a specific level of service or
criteria

to determine successful completion criteria for deliverables. For example,

o The agreement with the University of Central Florida provided for a

consultant to fill the position of Chancellor of public schools for a seven

month period. In turn, the University subcontracted with the consultant. A

general position description was included as an attachment to the grant

agreement. Payments were made to the university quarterly in advance

with no requirements in the grant agreement to provide for a minimum

level of service.

o The two agreements for the Failure Free Reading Program (Washington

County School District and Putnam County School District) did not specify

the minimum number of students to be served.

o Four agreements did require documentation to be submitted with the

invoice to demonstrate performance. However, there were no minimum

performance levels the provider was required to meet when submitting

monthly payments.



Contract #

380-2442A-2CCC1

206-2442A-20001

376-96100-2SB01

130-97260-2SL01

481-60010-1SC01

500-93720-2S001

670-96433-2S001

670-92400-2D001

480-2262A-2CA01

757-4052A-2PFJ1

522-95010-2S001

530-92860-1SA01

37D99650-2QG01

206-93650-1Q001

540-96443-2S001



Service Provider

Levy County School District

Investing In Our Youth

FAMU

Miami-Dade County District Schools

University of Central Florida

Palm Beach County School District

Washington County School District

Washington County School District

Orange County District Schools

Centro Campesino Farmworker, Inc

St. Petersburg College

Polk County School District

Volunteer USA Foundation

Investing In Our Youth

Putnam County School District



Contract Amount

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

89,337

172,998

114,701

175,750

130,000

300,000

375,000

578,156

635,751

94,222

132,995

65,770

200,000

156,402

375,000



Financial Consequences

Effective July 1, 2010, Section 287.058(1)(h), Florida Statutes, requires
services

contracts to contain provisions for financial consequences an agency must
apply if a

provider fails to perform in accordance with a contract.

 The financial consequences for three service agreements allow the vendor to

receive full payment for the contract. If it is determined that financial

consequences should be assessed, the Department will bill the vendor after
the

contract is completed. Although this may meet the statutory requirement, the

billing of a contractor for financial consequences after the final payment
is made

does not provide a viable solution to encourage contract compliance. In
addition,

it is possible the Department may have difficulty in collecting the amount
owed.

Contract #

12-506

12-533

12-526

Service Provider

Conklin Centers for the Blind

Florida Centers for the Blind

Visually Impaired Persons of Southwest FL

Contract Amount

$ 110,331

$ 158,332

$ 233,100



Other

The Department was unable to provide a written grant agreement for a
recipient of State

Funds. Instead, we were provided the award notification, the recipient's
budget of

expenditures and the Request for Award was reviewed. To date, the Department
has

disbursed $120,000.00 for this grant award.



Contract #

670-96441-2S001



Service Provider

Washington County School District



Contract Amount

$ 300,000



Contract/Grant Management

Contract/Grant managers must enforce performance of the contract terms and

conditions; review and document all deliverables for which payment is
requested by

vendors; and provide written certification of the Department's receipt of
goods and

services and ensure all payment requests are certified.

 Section 215.971(2), Florida Statute requires services to be accepted in
writing

before payment. The grant managers were not certifying receipt of
deliverables

for thirteen grant agreements as the payment terms allow the recipients to

receive payments in advance. Regardless of the timing of payments, we are

recommending that the Department maintain signed certification statements in

the management files to support payments on a post audit basis.

Contract #

380-2442A-2CCC1

372-96820-1S001

376-96100-2SB01

130-97260-2SL01

500-93720-2S001

670-96443-2S001

670-92400-2D001

480-2262A-2CA01

522-95010-2S001

530-92860-1SA01

37D99650-2QG01

540-96443-2S001

670-96441-2S001

Service Provider

Levy County School District

Tallahassee Community College

FAMU

Miami-Dade County District Schools

Palm Beach County School District

Washington County School District

Washington County School District

Orange County District Schools

St. Petersburg College

Polk County School District

Volunteer USA Foundation

Putnam County School District

Washington County School District

Contract Amount

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

89,337

316,675

114,701

175,750

300,000

375,000

578,156

635,751

132,995

65,770

200,000

375,000

300,000



 The required certification statement for one grant agreement is being
signed by

an employee who is not the designated grant manager.

Contract #

481-60010-1SC01

Service Provider

University of Central Florida

Contract Amount

$ 130,000



 Deliverables for four agreements were approved based on reconciling the

invoices with data input by the vendor/recipient on the department's
reporting

database. The monitoring process should include reconciling
provider-generated

reports to source documentation such as case management notes, sign-in

sheets and client files.



Contract #

12-506

12-533

12-526

757-4052A-2PFJ1



Service Provider

Conklin Centers for the Blind

Florida Centers for the Blind

Visually Impaired Persons of Southwest FL

Centro Campesino Farmworker Center, Inc



Contract Amount

$ 110,331

$ 158,332

$ 233,100

$ 94,222



 It was noted that monitoring has not been performed for one agreement.

Although by statute FILC is independent of the agency, they are still
responsible

for the proper expenditure of funds and use of resources. We recommend the

Department incorporate a monitoring process to include the review of
receipts.

Contract #

11-133

Service Provider

Florida Independent Living Council

Contract Amount

$ 395,820



 Section 287.057(14), Florida Statute, states that the contract manager

procedures must include monitoring and documenting contract performance,

reviewing and documenting all deliverables for which payment is requested by

vendors. The designated contract managers for two contracts have no contact

with the vendor as their only responsibility is to process the invoices for
payment.

The services are validated and approved by other Department staff members. A

similar situation arises with a third contract; however, the contract
manager does

have contact with the contractor on issues involving payment of the invoice,
but

relies on verbal conversations with another Department staff member for

validation of service. In these instances, these contract managers are
certifying

receipt of goods and services with no direct knowledge of the performance of
the

contractors.



Contract #

A43012

12-007

A4455E

Service Provider

Creative Consulting

Charles T. Whitelock

Technicsource, Inc

Contract Amount

$ 163,459

$ 160,000

$ 154,252



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL



INTERNAL AUDIT

Division of Blind Services

Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Final Report



Audit Number

07/08-01A



June 19, 2008



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Executive Summary

The Division of Blind Services (DBS) provides services to assist
individuals, whose primary

disability is visual, in achieving maximum levels of employment,
independence, and integration

into the community. These services are provided either directly through DBS
district field offices

or indirectly through contracts with community rehabilitation providers.
During fiscal year (FY)

2006-07, federal and state funding totaling $11.8 million was spent to
purchase products and

services for clients, while $11.1 million was paid for client services
provided through contract

providers. Products and services purchased for clients includes, but is not
limited to, computer

equipment, software, low vision aids and devices, physical and mental
restoration, and training.

Summary of Findings

This audit focused on evaluating the system of internal controls over DBS's
procurement and

management processes. This report has findings in each principal activity
related to contract

administration including procurement, award agreements, performance,
payments processing,

and monitoring. Other findings address the need to improve written
procedures to give DBS

employees better guidance when performing key activities, and issues
regarding non-client

purchases made using the Accessible Web-based Activity and Reporting
Environment

(AWARE) case management system.

Recommendations in the report are intended to assist management in
establishing a more

effective control environment that will better ensure procurement and
management processes

are performed effectively and in accordance with controlling laws, rules,
policies, and good

business practices.



1



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Background

This audit was identified in the Office of Inspector General's (OIG) annual
risk assessment and

included in the approved annual audit plan. It was performed in support of
the Department's

goal of quality efficient services with the purpose of promoting the
strategic imperative of

aligning financial resources with performance.

The purpose of the Division of Blind Services (DBS) is to work jointly with
individuals, whose

primary disability is visual, toward achieving maximum levels of employment,
independence,

and integration into the community.

During FY 2006-07, DBS served over 51,000 visually



impaired individuals. The program serves individuals either directly through
its district field

offices or indirectly through contracts with community rehabilitation
providers.

DBS programs and services are funded primarily from Federal grants. These
funds, along with

State general revenue monies, totaled $48.6 million in FY 2006-07; nearly
one-half (47 percent)

of this amount is spent on client services. In FY 2006-07, $11.8 million was
spent to purchase

products and services for clients, while $11.1 million was paid for client
services provided

through contracts with community rehabilitation providers. Products and
services purchased for

clients includes, but is not limited to, computer equipment, software, low
vision aids and

devices, physical and mental restoration, and training.

The majority of contracts are with community based rehabilitation providers
for services that

include Independent Living, Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services, VR
Transition Services,

Blind Babies, and Supported Employment Services.

Contracts provide for training and



counseling in various categories that include assistive technology,
communication skills,

orientation and mobility, adjustment to blindness, and home management
skills.

DBS has made advances in the administration of contracted and purchased
client services with

the October 2006 introduction of AWARE (Accessible Web-based Activity and
Reporting

Environment), a web-based case management system. The system covers the life
cycle of a

DBS client from referral and application through eligibility, plan
achievement, and case closure.

Designed to mirror the case management process, the system utilizes web
technology to

automate essential functions and provides the ability to produce extensive
reporting that can aid

in management decision-making.



2



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Audit Objectives and Scope

This audit focused on evaluating DBS's procurement and management processes.

The

objectives were to ensure that: 1) client services contracts and purchase
authorizations are

awarded and executed in accordance with controlling laws, rules, policies,
and good business

practices; 2) clients receive services required by contract and purchase
authorization terms;

3) payments are made in accordance with contract and purchase authorization
terms; and

4) delivery of services and purchased items is properly administered and
monitored. The scope

of the audit included contracts and purchase authorizations active between
July 2006 and

December 2007, but included records outside that period that affected the
review period's

transactions.



Methodology

To achieve the objectives, the audit team: 1) researched and reviewed
applicable statutes,

rules, and procedures; 2) interviewed appropriate staff; and 3) reviewed
selected contract and

authorization documentation active during the audit period.

Fourteen contracts and 69



purchase authorizations were reviewed based on a judgmental selection.
Extended review of

support for additional authorizations was performed based on procurement and
payment

processing issues noted during the field work phase.



Standards

This audit was conducted in accordance with the International Standards for
the Professional

Practice of Internal Auditing, published by the Institute of Internal
Auditors.



Audit Results

The findings below present the results of the audit as determined by: review
of applicable

statutes, procedures and processes; interviews of auditee staff; and
performance of tests and

other audit procedures. Each finding is organized into five segments, as
explained below:

·

·

·

·

Condition ­ The factual evidence found in the course of the examination.

Criteria ­ The standards, measures, or expectations used in making an
evaluation

and/or verification.

Cause ­ The reason for the difference between the expected and actual
conditions.

Effect ­ The risk or exposure the Department may encounter because the
condition is

not consistent with the criteria (the impact of the finding).



3



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



·

·



Recommendation ­ Suggested course of action.

Management's Response ­ Auditee opinion and statements regarding concurrence
or

non-concurrence with the finding and corrective action planned by
management.



Internal Controls

Improvements are needed in DBS contract and purchasing management. Internal
controls in

some areas are weak or absent. This has allowed contracting and purchasing
actions that may

have resulted in the Department purchasing unneeded equipment, and paying
more than fair

market value for products and services.

deficiencies noted by the audit.

Contract Procurement

DBS contracts were procured on a non-competitive basis pursuant to specific
exceptions

provided in statute.

During the 2006-07 contract period, 58 contracts were active with

Audit findings presented below discuss specific



approximately 20 different community rehabilitation providers. Two other
contracts were issued

to provide services for clients at the Orientation and Adjustment Center in
Daytona Beach. Our

audit noted areas where improvements can be made in DBS contract procurement
processes.

Finding 1 ­ Price analyses were not completed for contracts.

Condition: DBS has not performed and documented price analyses to ensure
that prices paid

to contractors are fair and reasonable.

This is especially important for DBS



contracts because they are not competitively solicited, a process that helps
ensure

price reasonableness.

We performed a unit price comparison of selected community rehabilitation

provider contracts by dividing the minimum number of clients to be served
per

contract into the annual contract price. There are significant variances
among

contractors in the computed cost per client served for three of the five
contract

types - Independent Living, VR Services, and Supported Employment Services

contracts.

Contract cost per client ranged from: $891 to $1,626 (82 percent



variance) for Independent Living contracts; $1,974 to $3,739 (89 percent
variance)

for VR Services contracts; and $4,500 to $30,938 (588 percent variance) for

Supported Employment Services contracts.

delivery of the same types of services.

The contracts compared involved



4



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Variances in the unit price comparison could not be explained by DBS

management who commented that past contract prices were established based on

demographics of the service areas, specific circumstances of the individual

contract providers, and impacts of past negotiations with providers.

Criteria:

Section 216.3475, Florida Statutes (F.S.), requires that a person or entity
awarded

funding on a non-competitive basis cannot be paid more than the competitive

market rate. Price and cost analyses are used to determine whether rates
paid

are fair and at or below market value.

Section 287.057(5)(f)(7), F.S., provides an exemption to normal competitive

solicitation requirements, but requires agencies acquiring services to
consider

reasonableness of prices charged by contractors.

Cause:

For two contract types, Blind Babies and VR Transition Services, a price
analysis

by a former DBS employee was said to have been performed; however, there was

no documentation to evidence this. Analyses on other contract types also
have

not been completed.

prioritized.

Effect:

Without price analyses, DBS has no assurance that prices paid to contractors
are

fair and reasonable.

Recommendation: Price analyses should be prepared for all contracts procured
on a noncompetitive basis.

reasonable.

contract files.

Management

Response:

Management is in agreement with the recommendation to develop a price

analysis prior to procuring all contracts. The Division of Blind Services
will

begin such an analysis using a workgroup comprised of community

rehabilitation service providers and DBS personnel. The analyses will be

documented and maintained in the contract files.

Milestone: Begin

This will help ensure that prices are fair and

The need for price and cost analyses had not been



Such analyses should be documented and retained in



workgroup during July 2008 and complete analyses by September 15,

2008.



5



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Finding 2 ­ State purchasing laws were not followed.

Condition: A contract awarded during FY 2006-07 in the amount of $151,348
for nursing

support at a DBS residential facility expired on September 30, 2007, without

issuance of another contract. Services provided by the contractor were
continued

after the September 30 expiration by using AWARE authorizations to pay
vendor

invoices. This practice was continuing at the conclusion of our audit field
work.

The Administrator of the residential facility was instructed to select
clients in

residence whose individual plans for employment included physical and mental

restoration services.

The amounts of periodic vendor invoices were then



apportioned equally to each of these clients through AWARE authorizations.

Criteria:

When the purchase price of contractual services exceeds $25,000, purchases
are

subject to competitive procurement practices per Section 287.057, F.S.

Procurement of such services should be evidenced by a written agreement

embodying all provisions and conditions of the procurement in accordance
with

Section 287.058(1), F.S.

Cause:

Planning was not adequate to ensure a new contract was awarded before the

original contract expired. The decision was made to pay for contractor costs
by

spreading costs over selected clients through the use of AWARE
authorizations.

Effect:

State procurement laws have not been observed. No contract exists to control
the

provision of services and the payment of fees. Use of AWARE authorizations
for

payment of contractual services costs in this manner is improper.

Recommendation: A contract for the nursing services should be obtained as
soon as

possible in accordance with the established procurement process. DBS

management

should

ensure

future

compliance

with

purchasing



procedures and laws.

Management

Response:

The intent of using AWARE authorizations was to capture costs at the

participant level for all service costs.

There is an exemption to



competitive procurement practices for health services in Section

287.057(5)(f)6, F.S. The DBS will comply with the recommendation and

is in the process of procuring a contract for nursing services effective



6



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



July 1, 2008. Management will ensure that future services are procured

with an executed contract versus using AWARE authorizations.



Contract Agreements

As a basis for their contract agreements, DBS utilized a standardized
contracting format

established by the Department of Education (DOE) to ensure contract
activities are executed in

accordance with Florida Statutes. Language specific to each DBS contract
type was included to

adapt the agreements to their intended purpose. Certain revisions are needed
to improve DBS

contracts.



Finding 3 ­ Contract agreements need revisions.

Condition: We noted the following from our review of selected community
rehabilitation

provider contracts:

·

Contracts do not reflect use of the AWARE case management system.

Introduction of this system changed important aspects of the contract

administration process that impacted client progress reporting, deliverable

reporting, and contract invoice processing.

·

Sanctions were not included in contract agreements.

Where practical,



contract agreements should contain monetary sanctions for nonperformance by
the contractor.

·

Contract performance standards had not been incorporated into most

contracts. Only Blind Babies contracts included an attachment (Standards

and Indicators) that addresses the core contractor activities of intake,

evaluation, assessment, service delivery, reporting, and personnel

development.

Criteria:

Contract provisions and requirements should accurately reflect use of the
AWARE

case management system including performance duties, deliverable reporting

methods, and contract invoice processing.

The Department of Financial Services' State Expenditures Guide, requires
that

contractual services contract agreements contain sanctions for contract
provider



7



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



non-performance.

Contracts should provide sufficient guidance to contract providers on what
the

Division expects of them (i.e., performance standards).

Cause:

DBS staff did not update language in the standard contract templates with
details

regarding use of the AWARE system.

Staff did not include provisions for



sanctions in the contract templates. Contract performance standards were not

completed in time to include them in contracts when they were originally
issued.

Effect:

Use of the AWARE system changed aspects of contract administration, making

the unrevised contract language obsolete as it does not accurately reflect

reporting and invoicing activities required of contract providers.

For example,



deliverable reporting on client progress is no longer based on hardcopy
reports,

but on electronic storage of case notes in the AWARE system.

The absence of penalties and sanctions in contracts reduces the Division's
options

when performance is below the expected level or service quality is poor.
Without

sanctions, there may be no mechanism in place to remedy the conditions
noted.

Use of the performance standards can guide contract providers and serve as

criteria for Division staff in evaluating contract compliance and measuring

performance.

Contract monitoring procedures can include steps to verify that



services are provided in accordance with the standards.

Recommendation: a) Future contracts should require use of the AWARE case
management

system.

b) DBS management should ensure that contract agreements include

specific

sanctions

for

non-performance

of

tasks

required

of



contractors.



Sanctions should include specific steps for prorating



contractor payments if minimum contract measures are not met.

c) Performance standards should be incorporated into all contract types

as soon as practical to provide guidance to providers and ensure

greater accountability over contractor performance.

Management

Response:

The Blind Babies contracts (these contracts are effective July 1 through

June 30) included language that mandated the use of AWARE for



8



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



entering client case notes and actual services provided to clients based

on their Individualized Plan. The service providers understood that actual

services and case notes were to be entered on all contracts. This contract

cycle, October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, all other DBS

contracts (Vocational Rehabilitation, Transition Services, Independent

Living and Supported Employment) will be revised to require use of the

AWARE Case Management System. Performance standards have been

developed for all contract types and will be incorporated into the contracts

in the next contracting cycle.

These standards were developed by



assigned workgroups composed of DBS and Service Provider employees

using an outside facilitator. Milestone: Include Standards and Indicators

Attachment in all contracts that do not have them (Vocational

Rehabilitation, VR-Transition Services and Independent Living) by

October 1, 2008.

Begin a workgroup for Supported Employment



contracts during July 2008 and complete a Standards and Indicators

Attachment by September 15, 2008.

There is no provision in the Florida Statutes to include contract language

that imposes remedies (sanctions or penalties) or rewards. The DBS has

cancelled several contracts over the last three years because of
nonperformance of the contractor. However, the DBS will craft language that

identifies remedies, rewards and monitoring procedures and ensure the

DOE Contracting Office approves the new contract language prior to

including it in the current contracts. Milestone: Begin workgroup during

July 2008 and complete new contract language by December 31, 2008.



Finding 4 ­ Contract requirements for client referrals need revision.

Condition: Community rehabilitation provider contracts (except for Supported
Employment

Services contracts) include a restrictive clause regarding client referrals
by DBS.

The contracts contain deliverable language that, in most instances,
identifies the

minimum number of clients to be served. Contracts state that deliverables
are

predicated on DBS referral of clients to the contract provider for various
services.

Contract language further states that contract providers "will not be held



9



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



accountable" if the number of service referrals made by DBS does not meet or

exceed the number of eligible individuals indicated in the contract.

We determined that for most contract types, this condition is not realistic.
For

example, during the 2006-07 contract term, DBS client referrals to providers
of

Independent Living services averaged only 16 percent of total referrals;
this is far

below the minimum number of client referrals stated in the Independent
Living

contract.

Most referrals for Independent Living services came from eye care

We further



providers, family members, friends, and through self-referrals.



determined that DBS referrals to contract providers are not being tracked
for

contract reporting purposes.

Criteria:

Contract agreements should contain reasonable terms and conditions to govern

the Division's relationship with contract providers.

Cause:

We were informed that the language was included in contracts when the
Division

first began including minimum numbers of clients to be served as it was
difficult to

predict the level of client referrals.

Effect:

Depending on the contract, the requirement represents an unreasonable

expectation on the Division's part. The language may weaken or prohibit DBS

from taking actions in response to underperforming contract providers (e.g.,

cancelling contracts, recovering contract funding, negotiating for lower
contract

prices).

Recommendation: The referenced language should be revised or deleted from
DBS

contracts where the provision is not reasonably attainable. Provisions

should be made to begin effectively tracking client referrals in the AWARE

system if DBS management determines this to be beneficial.

Management

Response:

The referral process will be further developed in concert with the

Community Rehabilitation Providers.

A likely solution will involve a



measure that reflects the Community Rehabilitation Providers requirement

to obtain referrals from their outreach activities and a DBS requirement to

have a referral measure. Milestone: Begin workgroup during July 2008

and complete new contract language by September 1, 2008.



10



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Contract Performance

Evaluating contract performance, at a minimum, involves determining whether
providers have

met or will meet the contract terms. In the absence of such an evaluation by
DBS staff, we

compared contract performance deliverables for selected contracts to actual
contract results

provided to us from DBS staff members.

Our review noted findings relating to contract



performance and the means used to report contract results.

Finding 5 ­ Contract closeout was not performed.

Condition: A formal contract closeout process was not employed by DBS to
evaluate the

performance of contractors and whether the Division obtained the services
paid

for.

Criteria:

A process should be in place to establish that specific contract performance

requirements and deliverables have been met. Since most DBS contracts
require

that a designated minimum number of clients be served, a comparison of
actual

clients served to the contracted minimum should be performed and evaluated.

Cause:

Effect:

Closeout evaluation of contracts was given limited prioritization.

Contractor performance cannot be objectively evaluated in the absence of a

process established to determine whether contractors performed their duties
and

provided deliverables per the contract terms.

If contractors are not held



accountable for their performance, there may be limited motivation for them
to

provide the required or higher levels of services.

Recommendation: A documented closeout process should be routinely performed
for all

contracts to determine whether the Division received services it paid for.

Results should be:

reported to executive management; used for



negotiations on future contracts; and, if applicable, used to assess

liquidated damages/sanctions for non-performance/non-compliance.

Management

Response:

The Division of Blind Services management will develop a checklist

document to assist in the closeout process of the contracting cycle and

include it in the DBS contract monitoring procedures manual. Milestone:

Develop a contract closeout checklist and revise the DBS contract



11



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



monitoring procedures manual to include a contract closeout checklist

during July 2008.

Finding 6 ­ Many contracts resulted in fewer clients served than required.

Condition: We evaluated the actual results of selected 2006-07 community
rehabilitation

provider contracts and found that most did not serve the minimum number of

clients required by the contracts. Based on our review of four to six
contracts per

contract type and contract results provided by DBS staff, we determined that

contract providers in three of the five contract types under performed
significantly:

Blind Babies ­ Three of the four contracts served more clients than planned.

Overall (combined) performance was 20 percent above the minimum number of

clients to be served.

Independent Living contracts ­ Each of the five contracts served fewer
clients

than planned. Overall performance was 28 percent under the minimum number of

clients to be served.

Vocational Rehabilitation Services ­ Four of the six contracts served fewer
new

clients than planned. Overall performance was 34 percent under the minimum

number of new clients to be served.

Supported Employment Services ­ Two of the five contracts resulted in fewer

job placements than planned.

Overall performance was 3 percent under the



minimum number of job placements planned.

VR Transition Services ­ Each of the five contracts served fewer new
students

than planned. Overall performance was 57 percent under the minimum number of

new students to be served.

Criteria:

Contract providers should serve at least the minimum number of clients
projected

in the contracts. If fewer clients are served, DBS should determine and
document

the cause(s) for the inadequate performance and take corrective action.

Cause:

Causes for contract under performance were not determined because a proper

closeout analysis was not performed (see Finding 5). Contract performance
could

be impacted by inaccurate reporting of results. Certain results were self
reported



12



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



by contract providers. Other results were based on data queries of the AWARE

case management system, performed by DBS technical staff.

Effect:

Though most contract providers under performed, fixed contract prices were
paid

to providers as required in the contracts.

Assuming the results reported are



accurate, the Division is not receiving the services paid for.

Recommendation: DBS management should further analyze contractor performance
for the

2006-07 contract period to determine why some contractor performance

was unsatisfactory.

Management should direct that more timely and



effective contract oversight be exercised to help ensure contract providers

serve clients in accordance with the contracts. Future contracts should

provide monetary sanctions for non-performance by contractors.

A



consideration for use of a contract type other than fixed price may be

prudent.

Management

Response:

The AWARE Case Management System was implemented on October 6,

2006. There were response time problems and issues involving the data

entry of Actual Services by service providers. This resulted in inaccurate

and incomplete reporting of results.

The design and response issues



were resolved during June 2008 when a new data entry module was

implemented. DBS management will ensure that an analysis of the 20062007
contract period is conducted to determine the trends in performance

for all contracts. New reports have been designed to identify contract

measures and results to assist in the contract analysis. Milestone: New

reports and analyses will be completed during July 2008.



Finding 7 ­ Reporting of actual contract results is not accurate.

Condition: Contract results obtained based on a query of data recorded in
the AWARE

system were reviewed and found to be inaccurate.

We compared AWARE



generated results for three of the five contract types to results that were
self

reported by contract providers and found significant variances among the

contracts reviewed. On an aggregate basis, AWARE generated results for the

selected contracts fell under the self reported results in each case (28
percent



13



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



under for Blind Babies contracts, 23 percent under for Independent Living

contracts, and 19 percent under for Supported Employment Services
contracts).

Criteria:

The AWARE case management system is established, in part, as a repository of

information on services provided to clients and progress observed. The
system

should be adequately maintained to reflect this information and report
aggregate

results in accordance with deliverables established in contract agreements.

Cause:

In reviewing the data with DBS staff, we noted instances where contract
providers

failed to input actual services to the AWARE system, thus making reported
results

inaccurate. Additionally, we found flaws in the reporting methodology used
to

report actual contract results in the AWARE system. We were informed by DBS

staff that efforts to automate AWARE reporting of contract results were
still in a

testing phase and that information reported was only as accurate as the

information input by contractor staff.

Effect:

Evaluation of contract performance is hindered without accurate information
on

actual results achieved by contract providers.

DBS plans to eventually begin



using AWARE generated information for all contract performance reporting

(including federal reporting). This heightens the need for accurate
reporting by the

system.

Recommendation: DBS management should provide guidance in the form of
written

procedures and training to contract provider staff to ensure that contract

results are accurately input to the AWARE system.

validation of reported results may be needed.

DBS review and



Corrections should be



made to the AWARE reporting methodologies to ensure accurate

reporting of contract results.

Management

Response:

DBS will continue to provide training and follow-up technical assistance to

ensure that provider staff has the tools and knowledge to accurately input

data into the AWARE system. Procedures for entering Actual Services

were developed by the AWARE vendor, Alliance Enterprises, Inc., and

were provided during training prior to implementation of the AWARE

system. New reports have been designed to identify contract measures

and results to assist in contract analyses. Milestone: New reports will be



14



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



completed during July 2008 and service providers that require additional

training will be identified and scheduled for training during July 2008.



Contract Payment Processing

The AWARE system is used to process payments for community rehabilitation
provider

contracts.

An electronic invoice is prepared based on services entered to the system by

Our review noted findings regarding support for contract payments,



contract providers.



expenditures to contractors for non-client costs, and overpayments for
client services.

Finding 8 ­ Contract payment processing can be improved.

Condition: Our review of 28 contract payments noted the following exceptions
related to

invoice approvals, invoice documentation, and recording of client case
notes:

·

·

·

Invoices for 7 of 28 (25 percent) payments were not approved by

designated contract managers.

Summary invoices for 8 of 21 (38 percent) AWARE generated payments

did not agree with the detailed support.

Invoices for 5 of 17 (29 percent) AWARE generated payments showed

prior month's service dates indicating that actual services were not being

input to AWARE on a timely basis by contract provider staff members.

·

Invoices for 4 of 21 (19 percent) AWARE generated payments did not have

invoice support as provider staff members failed to input any detail of

actual services provided.

·

In 5 of 9 invoices (56 percent) where AWARE was reviewed for the

preparation of client case notes, insufficient case note entries were found.

Criteria:

Contract managers designated in each contract should approve payments to

contract providers.

Invoice documentation should be sufficient to support all



payments. Community rehabilitation providers are required to input services
they

provide to clients into the AWARE system in an adequate and timely manner.

DBS management informed us that contracts require case notes for clients

receiving services be input a minimum of one time per month.

Cause:

DBS staff at the Division Office approved invoices in place of designated
contract

managers. Contract provider staff members did not input detail for actual
services

15



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



provided to clients in an accurate and timely manner. Provider staff members
also

did not sufficiently record AWARE case notes describing client progress as

required.

Effect:

Invoices not reviewed and approved by assigned contract managers may be

inaccurate.

Services provided to clients will be inaccurately reported unless



properly input to the AWARE system by contract provider staff members. DBS

staff cannot effectively monitor client progress unless case notes are input
to the

AWARE system in an accurate and timely manner.

Recommendation: DBS management should ensure that contract payments are
processed

properly. Efforts should be made to determine why AWARE generated

payments did not agree with the detailed support. Contract managers

should not approve contract provider invoices for payment unless they

have timely and complete support.

Operating procedures should be



prepared to direct both DBS and contract provider staff on how contract

payment processing should occur.

Additionally, written procedures



should be prepared to provide guidance in the preparation of AWARE

case notes.

Management

Response:

DBS management will ensure that contract payments are processed

properly. Additionally, DBS will provide guidance to assist DBS contract

manager staff as well as contract provider staff in processing payments

and invoices timely and accurately.

DBS will also provide written



guidance on preparing AWARE case notes and develop an invoice

activity report that will identify the number of days that have elapsed

between the DRAFT and SUBMIT cycle, between the SUBMIT and

APPROVE cycle and between the APPROVE and RELEASE for

PAYMENT cycle.

This report will assist all involved parties to track



invoice cycle time and adjust as needed. Milestone: Training, new reports

and written procedures will be completed by September 15, 2008.



16



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Finding 9 ­ Supplemental payments were made to contract providers.

Condition: AWARE authorizations were used to make supplemental payments to
12 contract

providers when a contract amendment should have been used.

Amounts



disbursed in these cases totaled $149,513 as of November 2007. Payments were

processed to look as though rehabilitation technology services were being

provided to clients, when they were actually payments to contracted
providers.

Criteria:

Payments to providers should be made in accordance with contract payment

terms. Use of a contract amendment would be needed to alter provisions of
the

contract.

Cause:

The payments at issue were processed to compensate providers for extra time

and costs they were said to have incurred based on problems encountered with

the AWARE case management system.

The decision was made to use



authorizations to facilitate the payments in place of amendments to the
contracts.

Effect:

Payments were for costs directly related to the provision of contracted
services,

but were not authorized by the contract agreement and caused the contract
award

amount to be exceeded. The established contracting process was circumvented,

thereby bypassing the controls over the process. The method used to process

payments to contact providers was inappropriate as additional services were
not

received by clients.

Recommendation: When necessary, contract amendments should be used to
authorize

expenditure of contract funds in excess of the established contract

amount.

AWARE authorizations should only be used when payments



benefit specific clients.

Management

Response:

DBS has prepared contract amendments on current contracts to include

all contracted services. Milestone: Contract amendments will be effective

during June 2008.



Finding 10 ­ Overpayments for client services occurred.

Condition: Training services provided to clients by a community
rehabilitation provider were

billed based on an hourly fee rather than the established contract rate.

The



17



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



services, however, should have been fully provided for under an existing
contract

established with another provider. As a result, the Division unnecessarily
made

payments totaling $26,909 for services that should have been provided at no

additional cost by the provider under contract.

This condition was not identified from planned audit tests of purchase

authorizations, but was noted when performing audit procedures in other
areas.

While this could have been an isolated occurrence, overpayments on other
client

services may have occurred and gone undetected by our audit testing.

Criteria:

Client services contracts identify counties in which specific services are
to be

provided. Contract providers should provide services in accordance with
contract

requirements.

Cause:

The DBS rehabilitation supervisor who approved payments for services said
she

was unaware that a contract was in place and should have been used.

Effect:

The payments charged to DBS on a fee for service basis represent
overpayments

as the costs should have been included under the existing contract.

Recommendation: DBS should ensure that contractors provide services in
accordance with

agreement terms.

Because this practice may be occurring in other



districts, management should communicate these requirements to all DBS

staff responsible for approving such payments.

Management

Response:

DBS will be reviewing the alignment of our current boundaries and

determine the most practical solution that will ensure that contractors are

adequately serving their designated districts.

Milestone: A review of



current contract boundaries will be completed during July 2008.



Contract Monitoring

Contract monitoring should be adequate to ensure required levels of services
were received for

contract awards. As no formal monitoring was performed for DBS contracts, we
focused our

emphasis on evaluating contract monitoring policies and procedures that were
being

implemented. Our audit noted issues regarding the sufficiency of the
monitoring process.



18



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Finding 11 ­ Contract monitoring needs improvement.

Condition: The Division has developed contract monitoring policies and
procedures and

monitoring instruments to use in contract monitoring reviews, and District

Administrators (DA) have received training on contract monitoring
activities.

Although DBS policy directs DAs to monitor contracts in accordance with

established procedures, DAs had not begun formal monitoring activities. We
were

informed that they routinely performed informal monitoring tasks such as

maintaining regular contact and holding meetings with providers when
necessary,

documenting communications relating to contracts, and approving monthly

invoices. They had not, however, performed on-site visits to contract
provider

facilities

involving

use

of

established

monitoring

checklists,

interview



questionnaires, and other monitoring tools.

A two-person team in the Division Office's Bureau of Operations and
Compliance

comprise a unit called the Compliance Review Section. This unit had recently

performed several compliance reviews of contract providers. Selected DAs
were

participating in these reviews to obtain on-the-job instruction on how to
perform

formal monitoring activities.

Criteria:

District administrators are designated as contract managers for community

rehabilitation provider contracts. DBS's policy entitled "Contract
Monitoring and

Compliance Procedures" directs DAs to monitor provider contracts in
accordance

with the DBS Contract Monitoring and Compliance Procedures Manual.

Section 287.057(15), F.S., makes contract managers responsible for enforcing

performance of the contract terms and conditions and ensuring that
contractual

services have been rendered in accordance with the contract terms prior to

processing of invoices for payment.

Cause:

The Bureau Chief for Client Services and Support felt that DA relations with

contract providers could be negatively impacted if they are required to
perform

duties as recorded in the procedures guide. He prefers that Division Office
staff in

the Compliance Review Section perform formal monitoring.

Effect:

Timely and effective monitoring of contract performance cannot be attained

without the participation of DAs. The Compliance Review Section was
essentially



19



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



established to oversee monitoring of contract providers by the DAs, as well
as

conduct its own independent compliance reviews of contracted services.

The need for timely and effective monitoring of contracts is considered
critical

given the nature of the contracts, the fact that services were being
self-reported by

contract providers, and the basic deficiencies reported by recent DBS
compliance

reviews (e.g., low service provision and closure rates, insufficient client
progress

reporting, inadequate file documentation, and issues regarding staff
certification).

Recommendation: DBS management should ensure that contracts are monitored in

accordance with established procedures.

Management

Response:

DBS management will ensure that contracts are monitored in accordance

with established procedures by the district administrators that are

designated as contract managers. Milestone: The district administrators

that are designated as contract managers will comply with the DBS

"Contract Monitoring and Compliance Procedures" effective immediately.



Operating Procedures

Effectively written operating procedures have many benefits that include
clearly delineated

processes, greater consistency in operations, and establishment of internal
controls over

business activities. Existing procedures are not adequately detailed to
provide employees clear

and detailed guidance concerning core activities performed. This lack of
procedural controls is

a cause for many of the findings in this report.

Finding 12 ­ Procedures should be improved.

Condition: Procedure manuals for Vocational Rehabilitation Services and
Blind Babies

primarily are comprised of policy statements rather than operational
procedures

with sufficient detail to guide employees. Additionally, the Blind Babies
manual

made reference to a previously used case management system.

Written



standardized operating procedures had not been prepared for core activities

performed by DBS employees. Examples include:

·

Provision of client products and services via the AWARE system (e.g.,

procedures on determining, authorizing, and documenting maintenance,



20



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



training, rehabilitation technology services, physical and mental
restoration,

and other products and services).

·

Provisions for obtaining and documenting quotes for the purchase of client

products and services.

·

The administration and provision of services by contracted service

providers.

Criteria:

Written procedures are an essential component of the Department's internal

control structure that helps ensure management directives are carried out.
They

should be prepared to address all essential functions and regularly updated.

Cause:

Procedure manuals had not been updated to reflect use of the AWARE case

management system, and had not been written with sufficient detail to serve
as

operating procedures to guide and direct DBS staff members in the districts.

Effect:

Adequately detailed written procedures will: help ensure office activities
are

performed in accordance with statutes, rules, and management's directives;

provide a basis for evaluating staff performance; and serve as a training
tool for

new staff. Absent written operating procedures, management lacks assurance

that its directives will be performed.

Recommendation: Management should analyze all core activities performed by
DBS staff

members in district offices and prepare detailed standardized operating

procedures that will guide employees on all activities important to the

Division's mission.

Management

Response:

DBS

management

will

work

to

develop

standardized

operating



procedures manuals to supplement the policies and procedures currently

developed and adopted.

Milestone: Standardized operating procedure



manuals will be prepared and promulgated by December 31, 2008.



Finding 13 ­ Access rights to approve purchase authorizations need to be
addressed.

Condition: AWARE purchase authorizations were approved by DBS employees who
were not

authorized to do so. Additionally, individual approval limits for
authorizations were



21



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



too high to provide reasonable management control of the process. Our review
of

AWARE authorizations noted the following:

·

DBS employees in positions not authorized to approve authorizations were

doing so.

For example, 387 authorizations had been approved by

Other positions approving



administrative secretaries in two districts.



authorizations included rehabilitation technicians, rehabilitation
specialists,

and a word processing systems operator.

·

Division Office staff members providing technical support for the AWARE

system were given authorization to approve authorizations.

·

Approval limits were set at $50,000 per authorization for district employees

and $1,000,000 per authorization for selected employees at the Division

Office, including the technical support positions noted above.

Criteria:

AWARE authorizations should be approved by employees in specified positions,

principally the District Administrator and Rehabilitation Supervisor
positions. Other

employees at the Division Office are authorized to approve authorizations in
a

backup capacity.

The AWARE system is programmed to allow approval of



individual authorizations up to a limit designated in the system. We noted
that the

average authorization amount approved was under $500 and only one

authorization exceeded $50,000 during the 2006-07 fiscal year. Limiting
approval

authority for expenditures is an important control that strengthens
management's

oversight of purchases.

Cause:

DBS staff indicated that individuals who should not have had system rights
to

approve authorizations had apparently been "overlooked" when system security

was tightened in January 2007. Several staff members at the Division Office,

including three technical support staff, were given system rights to approve

authorizations in a backup capacity.

streamline the authorization process.

Effect:

Management controls are weakened or eliminated when approval authority is
set

too high or not limited to the appropriate employees. This can result in
increased

risk that inappropriate transactions occur. Technical support staff members
who

The approval limits were set high to



22



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



have programming access to the AWARE system architecture should not have the

capability to approve authorizations.

Recommendation: a) DBS management should adopt written procedures to ensure
only

authorized staff are given AWARE system access to approve

authorizations.

b) Approval access should be limited to employees who have a working

knowledge of the specific transactions being approved. Approval of

authorizations by the Division Office in a backup capacity should be

limited. AWARE technical support employees should not be given the

ability to approve authorizations.

c) Transaction approval limits should be re-evaluated and set to lower

levels.

Management

Response:

DBS management re-evaluated transaction approval limits and lower

levels have been established for all approvers. Approval rights have been

delineated to designated personnel in the AWARE system. Also

management has identified a primary person to serve as backup in the

event of a necessary emergency approval. Milestone: Completed during

May 2008.



Non-Client Purchases Using AWARE Authorizations

The AWARE authorization system was designed to provide products and services
for individual

clients either through direct payments to the clients or through payments to
vendors who

provide products and services to clients.

However, AWARE also was used to facilitate



payments for products and services not directly identifiable to specific
clients. The following

finding includes examples of such payments and demonstrates the lack of
operating procedures

to guide and direct DBS staff on the types of purchases to be made using the
AWARE system.

Finding 14 ­ Purchasing practices need to be improved.

Condition: AWARE authorizations were used as an expedient way to purchase
products and

services, some of which should have been procured using direct orders or
formal

contracts. We noted the following questionable uses of AWARE authorizations:



23



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



·



Fixed monthly payments (totaling $90,667 from December 2006 through

December 2007) were made to a community rehabilitation provider for

follow up services to clients whose DBS cases had been closed.

Payments had previously been funded using the DBS Grants and

Donations fund. Procurement of services was not awarded using a formal

contract.



·



Fixed monthly payments (totaling $80,000 from January through August

2007) were made to two vendors for delivery of peer support services.

Cooperative agreement formats were used in place of contracts.

The



cooperative agreements did not incorporate the provisions of formal

contracts (e.g., designation of a contract manager, sufficient descriptions

of performance duties, deliverable reporting, payment terms, requirements

for staff qualifications, incorporation of standard terms and conditions,
etc.)

One of the vendors received a $20,000 payment described as "seed"

money, which was not in accordance with the cooperative agreement

provisions.

·

One vendor was paid for presenters who provided DBS staff training at

several events from December 2006 through June 2007. None of the

seven individual payments was greater than $25,000, the threshold for

competitive bidding requirements, but the seven payments totaled

$95,069, well above the threshold for competitive bidding.

quotations were not obtained for these services.

·

Advance payments of $70,000 were made to a state university for hosting

a sports camp for Vocational Rehabilitation clients. DBS staff reportedly

chose the provider after reviewing several other potential providers,

however, no written documentation of this or of any quotes obtained was

prepared. A non-standard contract was used, which was signed by a DBS

program consultant who did not have signatory authority. Services by the

university were begun before the contract was executed.

·

Equipment described as demonstration units for community rehabilitation

centers around the state was purchased using authorizations. The cost of

most of the individual equipment items was greater than $1,000, but these

24



Price



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



items were not accounted for as tangible personal property (i.e., tagged,

assigned to a property custodian, and tracked as a part of the official

property inventory).

·

AWARE authorizations were issued after receipt of product or service

invoices, and not as pre-authorizations of purchases.

Criteria:

·

When the purchase price of commodities or contractual services exceeds

$25,000, purchases are subject to competitive procurement practices.

·

Purchases considered exceptional (e.g., single source) or exempt (e.g.,

services to persons with disabilities) must have those conditions

documented and be made in accordance with provisions of Section

287.057, F.S. Procurement of contractual services greater than $25,000

is to be evidenced by a written agreement embodying all provisions and

conditions of the procurement of such services (Section 287.058(1), F.S.).

·

Use of cooperative agreements for the procurement of contractual

services is not addressed in DBS policies.

·

Florida Statutes prohibit advance payments to vendors except in certain

circumstances, none of which apply in the instances noted.

·

Section 287.057(10), F.S., provides that an agency shall not divide the

procurement of commodities or contractual services so as to avoid

requirements for competitive sealed bidding.

·

Contracts that bind the Division can only be signed by the Commissioner

of Education.

·

Section 287.058(2), F.S., provides that contractual agreements over

$25,000 in value must be executed before services are rendered.

·

The Division is required to identify, manage, and control state-owned

tangible personal property in accordance with applicable laws (Section

273.02, F.S.), and rules (Chapter 69I-72, Florida Administrative Code).

Cause:

AWARE authorizations were used to expedite payments for various products and

services. DBS policies and procedures are not in place to provide guidance
to



25



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



staff on the types of purchases that are allowed using the AWARE system.

DBS does not have a policy to direct staff on the use of cooperative
agreements.

They appear to have been used in the instances noted to facilitate payments
to

vendors in place of issuing formal, more restrictive contracts.

Regarding the expenditures for staff training, we were informed that a
former

division director instructed that specific persons be used as training
consultants.

No attempts were made to determine whether other vendors were available or

whether fair prices were being charged.

The non-standard contract for hosting of the sports camp for Vocational

Rehabilitation clients was signed by a DBS program consultant who was not

aware that he was not authorized to do so. Activities related to the camp
were

begun before a contract was prepared and signed.

DBS staff members were unaware that equipment purchased for demonstration

(not for individual client use) should have been accounted for as tangible
personal

property.

Effect:

Contractual services may not be acquired based on a system of full and fair
open

competition, which helps ensure the Division pays a fair and reasonable
price for

services obtained. The appearance and opportunity for favoritism is
increased,

and public confidence that contracts are awarded equitably and economically
is

compromised.

Without a contract containing appropriate provisions and conditions as
required by

law, the Division may not be able to maintain adequate control over the
services

provided, the payment process, the monitoring process, etc.

Unauthorized advances to providers may result in the Division paying for
services

not received.

The contract for hosting of the sports camp for Vocational Rehabilitation
clients

included an assertion that the person who signed on behalf of DBS had full

signatory authority; the employee, however, did not have this authority.
Allowing a

contractor to provide services before a written agreement is executed
creates risks

to the Division.



26



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Control of tangible personal property is weakened when it is not recorded in
the

State property system. Equipment can be lost or stolen without detection.

Use of AWARE authorizations as noted above circumvents the usual procurement

methods and the controls designed in these methods.

Recommendation:

a) AWARE authorizations should only be used for case management

when there is a specific individual who will be served or benefited.

The DOE Purchasing Administrator should be contacted for

advice on procurement of client products and services.

b) Policies and procedures should be prepared to guide DBS staff on

the types of purchases to be made using the AWARE system. To

maintain

an

effective

level

of

internal

control,

AWARE



authorizations should be used only in a case management

capacity when there is a specific client that will be served or

benefited.

c) DOE guidelines should be followed regarding appropriate

procurement methods to use. Direct orders or contracts should be

used when appropriate.

d) DBS should develop policy regarding use of cooperative

agreements in procuring client services.

e) Advance payments to vendors should not be made unless

authorized and in accordance with Florida Statutes.

f)

Contracts should only be signed by the Commissioner of

Education or a person who has been formally delegated to sign for

the Commissioner.

g) State-owned tangible personal property should be accounted for

in accordance with applicable laws and rules.

Management

Response:

DBS management concurs with all recommendations for improving

purchasing practices. DBS is in the process of preparing policies and

procedures that will address the following: AWARE authorizations

utilization, appropriate purchases using the AWARE system, how and



27



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



when to use cooperative agreements, and authorizations for advance

payments. Milestone: DBS policies and procedures on purchasing will be

prepared and promulgated by June 2008.



Purchase Authorization Payments

The AWARE authorization process provides the means for purchasing and
requesting

payments for client products and services. The system was designed to
process purchases for

individual clients in a case management setting. In a review of selected
payments, we noted

findings regarding the timing and support for authorizations issued. We
noted two other findings

related to payments for client services.



Finding 15 ­ Payment processing for purchase authorizations should be
improved.

Condition: We reviewed 69 selected purchases made using AWARE
authorizations. These

payments were for such products and services as equipment, cash assistance

(maintenance), school tuition, low vision aids, and medical procedures. We
noted

the following irregularities:

·

Authorizations for 23 purchases were issued after products or services had

been received.

·

Nine of 10 purchases involving payment of maintenance assistance to

clients did not have adequate support for amounts paid or sufficiently

documented justification by DBS staff.

Criteria:

Authorizations are essentially purchase orders issued for the acquisition of

products or services and if accepted, serve as a legal commitment to which
both

parties must adhere. As such, these instruments should be issued and
accepted

before they are authorized to provide products or services.

Maintenance payments to clients should have adequate support for amounts
paid.

Justification for payments should be sufficiently documented.

Cause:

Written operating procedures have not been prepared to ensure activities are

performed in accordance with statutes, rules, and management's directives.
DBS

staff did not always issue authorizations in advance of products or
services.



28



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



Support documents or AWARE case notes were not always prepared to support

and justify amounts paid to clients as direct maintenance.

Effect:

Authorizations issued before products or services are provided bind the
vendor or

contractor to the terms established and approved by DBS staff, and
circumvent

the controls inherent in the approval process. Payments to clients that are
not

adequately supported and justified may represent improper payments, payments

for an incorrect amount, or payments for an unauthorized purpose.

Recommendation: DBS management should ensure (preferably via written
operating

procedures) that purchasing tasks are performed properly. Authorizations

should be issued before products or services are initiated. All purchases

should be documented with adequate support and justification for

amounts paid.

Management

Response:

DBS management will develop standardized operating procedures that

will address the recommendations listed. Milestone: Standardized

operating procedure manuals will be prepared and submitted to the OIG

for review by June 30, 2008.



Finding 16 ­ Payments of cash advances to clients by contract providers
occurred.

Condition: Contract providers made cash advances (maintenance) directly to
clients, and

then billed DBS for reimbursement. We identified approximately $56,000 in
such

payments for the twelve months ended September 30, 2007, to reimburse three

contract providers. Additional amounts may have been paid by other contract

providers. We were informed by DBS management that this practice has been

halted.

Criteria:

The established process for issuing maintenance payments involves DBS

disbursements based on an approved authorization which results in the
issuance

of a state warrant payable to the client. The client is to sign a receipt
evidencing

acceptance of the warrant when received. Allowing contract providers to make

such payments circumvents the controls inherent in the established process.

Cause:

Written operating procedures are not in place that direct how such payments
are

to be performed. District administrators contacted explained that this
practice was



29



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



being allowed as state warrants took longer to process.

Effect:

This practice has inherent risks involving the handling and transfer of cash
that

could result in misappropriation of funds. Maintenance request forms were
not

being prepared by clients as they would have been if processed by DBS staff.

Recommendation: Written procedures should be prepared to direct DBS staff on
how

maintenance is to be processed.

Management

Response:

DBS will develop standardized operational procedures to guide staff on

how maintenance is to be processed. Milestone: Standardized operating

procedure manuals will be prepared and submitted to the OIG for review

by June 30, 2008.



Finding 17 ­ Equipment purchases were made in advance of needs.

Condition: Computer equipment purchases were made without an identified
need.

One



district purchased four laptop computers using names of clients that were
never

intended to receive the equipment. This was done in order to have a backup

supply of computers.

The equipment was eventually distributed, though six



months passed before one laptop was documented to have been assigned to a

client.

Criteria:

The Vocational Rehabilitation Program Procedures Manual states that tools,

equipment, initial stocks, and supplies may be purchased for an eligible
individual

when they are necessary to achieve an employment outcome.

The Bureau Chief for Client Services and Support indicated that such items
are

not to be purchased in advance for a future use, but for a particular client
at the

time of need.

Cause:

The district administrator responsible for purchase of the equipment did so
based

on issues regarding compatibility of adaptive software with a newly released

computer operating system.

Effect:

When equipment is purchased using a different client's name, client files do
not

accurately reflect products and services provided to them. Using client's
names

as such equates to falsifying Division records. Stockpiling of equipment for
future



30



Audit of DBS Contracted and Purchased Client Services

Audit No. 07/08-01A



use puts the equipment at risk for being lost or stolen, and spends State
funds

before necessary.

Recommendation: DBS management should adopt policies and procedures that
ensure

purchases of equipment are made only for eligible clients whose case

files support the need for such equipment.

Management

Response:

DBS management will adopt policies and procedures that ensure

purchase of equipment are made for eligible cases only. Milestone:

Standardized operating procedure manuals will be prepared and

submitted to the OIG for review by June 30, 2008.



Closing Comments

The Office of Inspector General would like to recognize and acknowledge
Division staff for their

assistance during the course of this audit. The assistance provided by staff
of both the DBS

and DOE is appreciated. Audit field work was facilitated by the cooperation
of all personnel

involved.



31



Department of Education

Office of Inspector General

DBS Management Review

Issues resulting from interviews (primarily with former DBS employees)

1) Allowing contract service provider to use DBS facilities in Daytona Beach

at no cost - A client service provider, Center for the Visually Impaired,
occupies

two buildings on the rehabilitation center campus, Buildings 1185 and 1187

located on Dunn Avenue. Campbell said the provider is essentially occupying

one or both buildings "for free" meaning they are not paying rent or
utilities.

2) Expensive equipment abandoned at Rehabilitation Center in Daytona

Beach ­ Former DBS employee saw much waste associated with the

construction of the new facilities at the center. An example of waste that
cited

was the purchase of a $28,000 generator that is sitting at the center and is
not

being used. Employee indicated he received instructions from the DBS

Executive Director to leave the equipment alone (hidden) for 5 years upon
which

time it can be surplused (written off).

3) $30,000 "loan" from DBS Foundation - Per the Chairman for the DBS

Foundation, when Joyce Hildreth became the Exec. Director of DBS in 2009,
she

met with the DBS Foundation requesting $30,000 which was needed to "make

payroll". Accounting of the $30,000 from the foundation was requested from

Joyce since then, but she has never given a response. The check was number

1026 and dated 3/5/2009.

4) Transfer of Legislative funding for Blind Babies to pay for two new

contracts that will serve adult clients - Approximately $29,601 of general

revenue funds slated for the blind babies program is going to fund two new

contract providers who have requested contracts with DBS for serving older
blind

clients. The DBS received funds in new general revenue funding from the

legislature ($540,891) specifically for blind babies and it is inappropriate
for this

to occur. The funding transferred to the new contract providers was taken
from

case service dollars reserved to purchase medical procedures and supplies
for

blind babies.

5) Gifts and Donations policy have been altered from prior OIG audit - The

prior audit called for the process of determining what was funded out of the
gifts

and donations fund to be independent. The DBS Foundation was to be an

integral part of the grant process. This has been "undone" by the DBS
executive

director as she has taken it internally with DBS employees and herself
making

the determinations.



6) DBS contract planning/ development meeting attended by CRP staff

members - During recent contract development negotiations, leaders from

contract providers and a representative of the Florida Association of
Agencies

Serving the Blind (a lobby group for contract providers) openly participated
in the

process. Employee felt that it was odd to allow such representatives to
attend.

She said this is an example of how certain contract providers control
aspects of

the Division.

7) Repaid CRP for collected contract penalties (from G&D trust fund) ­

Remedies were applied to a 2010-11 VR contract. The provider objected to

paying the remedies. The remedies were collected, however, the executive

director reimbursed the provider with a check written on the DBS Gifts and

Donations fund for $22,186. Such a disbursement appears a questionable use
of

the funds.

8) DBS Credentials Committee - DBS committee that hears requests for waivers

of certification requirements for people providing direct services to
clients.

Having such a committee (especially one that is staffed with 2 CRP leaders)
is in

essence allowing the CRPs to hire anyone they want. He said that this is how

DCF got in so much trouble.

9) Land swaps - Former DBS Maintenance Superintendent, stated that the DBS

Director should not be directly involved in "land deals" with rehabilitation
center

property. He explained that she was involved with trading a large area of
the

Daytona Beach Rehabilitation Center land for a much smaller portion of
Daytona

State College land. He said that the State College needed space for a
parking

garage.



Audit No.: M-11/12-20

Prepared By: ___KK _____

Date: ____5/3/12_____



Review Phase: Fieldwork

Purpose: Summarize review of Personnel Actions

Personnel Actions data dump



Reviewed By: __________

Date: __________



Approximately 300 DBS employees, with almost 800 personnel actions from
1/1/2009 to 4/7/12

· 2009 ­ 181

· 2010 ­ 250

· 2011 ­ 303

· 2012 - 50

Condensed results:

Transaction Description

Appointment

Demotion Appt

Promotion Appt

Reassignment Appt

Employee Sync

Pay Change

Involuntary Separation

Voluntary Separation

Grand Total

2009

43

2

1

17

0

19

2

27

111

2010

80

1

6

31

19

8

6

56

207

2011

90

3

11

29

17

24

10

62

246



Notable trends:

· Personnel actions have increased over the years.

· Voluntary Separations have increased from 27 in 2009; 56 in 2010; and 62
in 2011.

· Involuntary Separations have increased from 2 in 2009; 6 in 2010; and 10
in 2011.

Management Review of the Division of Blind Services

I:\AUDIT PROJECTS\2011-2012 Projects\DBS Management Review\2.
Fieldwork\Personnel Actions\DBS MR write

up_PARs_I9.1.doc



Audit No.: M-11/12-20

Page 1 of 2



Number of positions advertised in People's First:

All (7/26/10 to 4/5/12)



Count of Requisition ID

Status

Total

Canceled

31

Filled

51

Open

11

Grand Total

93

For 2011 (only full year of data):



Count of Requisition ID

Status

Total

Canceled

18

Filled

34

Open

4

Grand Total

56

·

·

·

90 appointments (from data on the first page)

56 positions advertised

62% advertised



File Review:

·

Appointments ­ Sampled 5 appointments ­ 3 judgmental and 2 random.

o People's First advertisement

3 of the 5 were not advertised in People's First

2 of the 5 were advertised in People's First; however, 1 of those postings

was cancelled and the position was not filled from the People's First

posting.

o Internal advertisement

3 of the 5 were advertised internally by email

o Selection documentation

No documentation available to support why the candidate selected was

the best for the position.

Separations - Sampled 5 separations ­ 3 judgmental and 2 random.

o Approval documentation

Involuntary separations had Notice of Final Agency Action letter signed

by the Deputy Commissioner.

Separations appear to have followed the appropriate levels of approval

(General Counsel, Labor Relations, and Deputy Commissioner).

3 of the 5 did not have clear evidence that the employee was aware of

job performance concerns.



·



Management Review of the Division of Blind Services

I:\AUDIT PROJECTS\2011-2012 Projects\DBS Management Review\2.
Fieldwork\Personnel Actions\DBS MR write

up_PARs_I9.1.doc



Audit No.: M-11/12-20

Page 2 of 2



ûï¿ûðh
_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/joltingjacksandefur%40gmail.com


_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/joltingjacksandefur%40gmail.com


_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/elizabeth%40bowdenscomputers.com


_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/joltingjacksandefur%40gmail.com


_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/elizabeth%40bowdenscomputers.com





More information about the NFBF-L mailing list