AGENDA Audit & Accountability Committee · The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy...

AGENDA

Audit & Accountability Committee

Tuesday, May 2, 2017

12 Noon Conference Room A

4th Floor, City Hall

1

AGENDA

AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING

May 2, 2017 – 12:00 p.m. – Conference Room A, 4th Floor, City Hall

1. Call to Order 2. Approval of the Agenda 3. Adoption of the Minutes

a. Minutes of March 7, 2017

4. Delegation

5. Business Arising

a. Audit Report – Non-Profit Housing

b. Audit Report - Archives c. Follow-up Summary Report – Windsor Lake Water Treatment Facility d. 2016 Audit Activity

6. New Business

7. Other Business 8. Date of Next Meeting

9. Adjournment

1

MINUTES AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING March 7, 2017 – 12:00 p.m. – Conference Room A, 4th Floor, City Hall

Present: Councillor B. Tilley, Chairperson Deputy Mayor R. Ellsworth (left at 12:25 pm and returned 12:34 pm) Councillor T. Hann Kevin Breen, City Manager (left at 1:01 pm) Tanya Haywood, Deputy City Manager – Community Services Jason Sinyard, Deputy City Manager – Planning, Engineering and

Regulatory Services Victoria Etchegary, Manager – Organizational Performance and Strategy David Royale, Senior Internal Auditor

Sean Janes, City Internal Auditor Boyd Chislett, Citizen Representative

Kathy Driscoll, Legislative Assistant ADOPTION OF AGENDA

The Agenda was adopted as presented.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

The minutes of October 19, 2016 were adopted as presented.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

DELEGATION

Strategic Plan Annual Report 2016 and 2017 Priorities The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy spoke to the above noted and provided an overview. The next steps in the process will be to develop communications strategy for 2016 report and 2017 priorities and update internally and externally. Moved – Deputy Mayor Ellsworth; Seconded – Councillor Hann

The Committee recommends that Council adopt the Strategic Plan Annual Report as presented.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Accountability Framework

2

The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy discussed the above noted. She advised it supports a culture of continuous improvement and allows for a more robust system for planning, performance and reporting for the organization. It was suggested there is more of a connection and collaboration from staff through this process. Moved – Deputy Mayor Ellsworth; Seconded – Councillor Hann

The Committee recommends that Council approve the creation of an accountability framework as outlined.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Engage Evaluation The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy spoke to the above noted providing information on the upcoming evaluation of the City’s engagement policy, activities and online platform. She advised that a plan has been developed for the evaluation and will include conversations with project managers and Councillors as well as public input. She will bring forward any necessary recommendations/adjustments to Council when completed. BUSINESS ARISING

Follow-up Summary Report – Inspection Services The Senior Internal Auditor spoke to the above noted. There were a total of 56 recommendations in which presently 39 are closed with 17 pending. He noted the following out of the 17 pending items pending:

10 are related to policy and procedure with the intent to be dealt with by September 2017,

5 are related to the inspection process and will be implemented within a month, 2 are in relation to ensuring permits are signed by the owner or authorized

agent before processing and conversion of square feet to square metres when calculating the building permit fee to be applied shortly.

Follow-up Receiving Summary Report – Stores and Issuing The Senior Internal Auditor spoke to the above noted. There were a total of 28 recommendations in which 26 are closed with 2 pending. He noted the following out of the 2 pending items pending:

3

One of the pending items is in relation to a revision of policy and procedure and the other is in relation to installation of a security camera which will be done by June 2017.

Follow-up Summary Report – Recreation The Senior Internal Auditor spoke to the above noted. There were a total of 65 recommendations in which 52 are closed and 13 are pending. He noted the following of the 13 pending items pending:

10 are in relation to revisions to policy and procedure, 2 are applicable to camera installation at the new Paul Reynold’s recreation

centre and installation of a swipe card system to track number of sales etc., 1 item references Management developing written procedures outlining the

proce4ss for reviewing accounts receivable balances on a regular basis. This process would be developed in consultation with the Finance Department.

2017-2019 – Audit Plan The Internal Auditor spoke to the above noted. The three year plan was developed using a combination of the previous three year audit plan that was approved by Council, discussions with Senior Management, observation and professional judgement. Conversation ensued about the “Whistleblower” process and it was suggested there be a further analysis of this policy, reviewing best practices and possibly hiring a third party for report intake. Moved – Deputy Mayor Ellsworth; Seconded – Councillor Hann

The Committee recommends that Council approve the three-year audit plan for 2017-2019 as presented.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:15 p.m. Coucillor Tilley Chairperson

INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT

Department of Community Services

Program Review: Non-Profit Housing Division

Assignment # 16-01


Department of Community Services

Program Review: Non-Profit Housing Division

Assignment # 16-01

David Royle, CPA,

CMA, CFP

Senior Internal Auditor

Date: November 25, 2016

Sean P. Janes, CPA,

CMA, CIA, CFE

City Internal Auditor

Date: November 25, 2016

Program Review: Non-Profit Housing Division Assignment # 16-01

Office of the City Internal Auditor Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................... 1

METHODOLOGY & SCOPE ................................................................................................. 1

BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2

DETAILED ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 4

Section 1 – Community Services and Housing Standing Committee ................................... 4 Issue 1.1 – Committee Objectives / Terms of Reference ...................................................................... 4 Issue 1.2 – Performance Measurement / Data Analysis ........................................................................ 5 Issue 1.3 – Certificate of Conduct ......................................................................................................... 7

Section 2 – Non-Profit Housing Policy, Procedures Manual ................................................. 8 Issue 2.1 – Policy, Procedures Manual ................................................................................................. 8 Issue 2.2 – Criteria for Assigning Housing to Applicants ..................................................................... 9 Issue 2.3 – Credit Checks and Annual Income Testing of Tenants ......................................................10 Issue 2.4 – Income Levels for Applicants and Tenants ........................................................................11 Issue 2.5 – Rental Rates .......................................................................................................................13 Issue 2.6 – Subsidy and Transfer of Responsibility for Agreements ...................................................14 Issue 2.7 – Applicant Checklist ............................................................................................................15

Section 3 – Yardi Enterprise Express Property Management System ............................... 18 Issue 3.1 – Training/Review of the Yardi System ...............................................................................18 Issue 3.2 – Waitlists .............................................................................................................................19 Issue 3.3 – Access to Yardi System .....................................................................................................20

Section 4 – Audit Testing ........................................................................................................ 22 Issue 4.1 – Inspection Reports .............................................................................................................22 Issue 4.2 – Income Verification ...........................................................................................................23 Issue 4.3 – Miscellaneous ....................................................................................................................24 Issue 4.4 – Website ..............................................................................................................................25

Section 5 – Financial ............................................................................................................... 27 Issue 5.1 – Advanced Education and Skills Cheques ...........................................................................27 Issue 5.2 – Miscellaneous ....................................................................................................................28

Section 6 – Maintenance of Units ........................................................................................... 30 Issue 6.1 – Maintenance Requests .......................................................................................................30


Office of the City Internal Auditor Page 1

To: Chair & Council Members, Audit Committee

Area Responsible: Tanya Haywood, Deputy City Manager, Community Services

Copy to: Kevin Breen, City Manager

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVES

In accordance with the City’s approved audit plan, the objectives of this review are to

assess whether:

1. the service is being managed with due regard to risks and due diligence (risk

management),

2. processes and structures are implemented to inform, direct, manage and monitor

activities that are intended to move the City toward the achievement of our

strategic plan (governance processes), and

3. the process is being managed with due regard to control processes - i.e. policies,

procedures, regulations and council directives (control processes).

It is the overall areas of risk management, governance processes and control processes

which structured the work carried out during the review.

METHODOLOGY & SCOPE

This review of the Non-Profit Housing Division has been undertaken in accordance with

the approved three year audit plan. The review considered the City’s stock of Non-Profit

Housing units and did not include an evaluation of the City’s Affordable Housing

Business Plan. To meet the review objectives, audit procedures were performed that

included interviews with divisional staff to outline the processes for recording applicants

on a waitlist, assigning applicants to apartments, recording rent receipts from Adult

Education and Skills and handling maintenance requests. Also, detailed testing of

various supporting documentation, such as the application, waitlist, application checklist,



and verification of income was conducted. The review did not include onsite visits of the

Non-Profit Housing units. The period of review was mainly January 1 – December 31,

2015; however, as issues were discovered, testing was extended prior to and subsequent

to 2015.

BACKGROUND

The City of St. John’s, Non-Profit Housing Division, is responsible for administration

and management of 454 residential rental units throughout the City. These units vary

in size from one to four-bedrooms and are available for rent to low and moderate income

earners on the basis of net family income and need. The type of housing provided by the

City ranges from a 65-unit apartment building on Hamilton Avenue to infill housing in

the downtown core. While the majority of the housing provided by the City is in the

Downtown area, it does provide housing as far east as Forest Road and as far west as

Brookfield Road.

Housing provided by the City falls into three distinct categories:

1. Lower End of Market Housing (LEMS)

The City operates 268 units which fall into this category. Tenants in this type of housing

pay the lower end of market rent as determined annually by Newfoundland Labrador

Housing. Eligibility is based on household income and rents for these units depend on the

number of bedrooms (one to four) in the unit. Up to 15 percent of tenants per project area

in LEMS are subsidized. Utility costs are the responsibility of the tenant.

2. Rent Geared to Income (RGI)

The City operates 156 housing units which fall into this category. The RGI units are

targeted specifically at individuals and families of low income. Rents in these units are

based strictly on 25 per cent of net monthly income. Heat is included in the rent and there

is a small surcharge for lights.



3. Affordable Housing

The City also provides one bedroom apartments under the Affordable Housing Program

which has 24 units at Charter Avenue and 6 units at Churchill Avenue. These rents are set

by Investments Affordable Housing funding agreements. Tenants pay for the electrical

costs.

Eligibility

Persons in need of housing submit their applications and a determination is made as to

their eligibility for one of these programs. Generally, applicants are placed on a waiting

list until a vacancy arises.

Staffing

The Non-Profit Housing Division is comprised of a Manager and six staff members.

Two of these staff are dedicated to End Homelessness St John’s and the Affordable

Housing Business Plan. Turnover has been high and the most senior person is the

Manager who was hired March 2012. These staffing issues have created challenges for

the division in completing administrative tasks and have left the Manager with little time

for making improvements to work processes within the division.

Budget

The 2015 budget for the Non-Profit Housing Division included expenses of

approximately $5.1 million and revenues of $4.8 million. This includes the maintenance

and administration of all of the Non-Profit Housing (NPH) units. The NPH division only

provides oversight to Administration budget number 6391. All maintenance is the

responsibility of the Department of Public Works.



DETAILED ANALYSIS

Section 1 – Community Services and Housing Standing Committee

Issue 1.1 – Committee Objectives / Terms of Reference

The City has a Community Services and Housing Standing Committee and according to

the City’s website, the objectives of the Committee are:

To provide policy direction for facilitating community access to inclusive and

accessible housing, arts, culture, and recreation programs and services that

promote an active, engaged and supported community;

To provide policy direction for the enforcement of the Standard Parking and

Animal Control Regulations in the City of St. John's.

However, unlike the City’s Advisory Committees, the Community Services and Housing

Standing Committee does not have a terms of reference. Terms of reference for a

committee are important as they define the:

vision, objectives, scope and deliverables (i.e. what has to be achieved)

stakeholders, roles and responsibilities (i.e. who will take part in it)

resource, financial and quality plans (i.e. how it will be achieved)

work breakdown structure and schedule (i.e. when it will be achieved)

success factors/risks and constraints.

Terms of reference for committees help ensure the success of an organization.

Recommendation 1.1

In order to assist the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee ensure the

Non-Profit Housing program is accomplishing its objectives, management should prepare

a terms of reference for the Committee and include in the terms the frequency of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_breakdown_structure



meetings, membership and composition, membership length of term, etc. for approval by

Council.

Management Response and Intended Course of Action 1.1

It is agreed that a Terms of Reference should be prepared for the Community Services

and Housing Standing Committee. However, it is felt that Terms of Reference should be

developed for all Standing Committees of Council and need to be considered as a whole.

As this is a large project affecting many stakeholders we will consult with Senior

Management and Council to seek their advice on how to move forward with this project.

Conclusion 1.1

Guidance will be obtained by October 2017.

Action By: City Clerk Action Date: October 2017

Information Only: DCM, Community Services

Issue 1.2 – Performance Measurement / Data Analysis

In order for senior management and the Community Services and Housing Standing

Committee to determine if the Non-Profit Housing program is meeting its vision,

objectives, scope and deliverables and ensure that the program has sufficient resources,

they require periodic information about certain aspects of the program. However,

management indicated that they have not been asked to provide this type of information

to the committee on a regular basis.

Some of the types of information that would be useful to senior management and the

committee for evaluating the success of the Non-Profit Housing program would be:

aged waitlists for each type of unit

aged listing of unit vacancies



average wait time per applicant

number of applicants housed in a given period

generic tenant/applicant income levels

number of tenants receiving subsidies

any exceptions to normal practice and reasons why they occurred, etc.

This reporting could also include comparisons to previous years/periods to make them

even more useful to management and the committee. However, management may need

to consult with the Information Services Division to determine what types of reports can

be produced by the Yardi computer system used by the Non-Profit Housing Division

prior to committing to the types of reports it can provide to senior management and the

committee.

Recommendation 1.2

Management should discuss with the Deputy City Manager, Community Services and the

Community Services and Housing Standing Committee the types of reporting they

require to evaluate the success of the Non-Profit Housing program and to ensure they are

aware of the issues and resources required for the program to achieve its goals and

objectives. The discussion should also focus on the frequency of reporting, realizing that

senior management may require reporting more frequently than the committee. At a

minimum it is recommended that reporting to the committee occur on an annual basis.


Accept Recommendation

Conclusion 1.2

Recommendation will be implemented as stated above.

Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: February 2017




Issue 1.3 – Certificate of Conduct

During the review of the applicant selection process it was noted that the applicant is not

required to submit a Certificate of Conduct. In addition, as noted in Issue 2.2 below, no

policy or procedure exists regarding criteria for accepting applicants for the City’s

housing program. This could potentially increase the City’s liability risk if, for example,

the City were to house an applicant who had a criminal record and the applicant caused

injury to another tenant or damage to property.

Recommendation 1.3

To help ensure the risks noted above fall within a risk tolerance level acceptable to the

City and/or are appropriately mitigated management should:

i. open a dialogue with the Deputy City Manager, Community Services, the Manager,

Corporate Risk and Recovery and the City Solicitor regarding the potential liability

risks of not obtaining a Certificate of Conduct from applicants for the City’s housing

programs,

ii. use the results of this discussion for developing policy and/or procedure for the

applicant review process,

iii. submit the policy and/or procedure to the Community Services and Housing

Standing Committee for approval to ensure they are comfortable with the risk

mitigation measures taken, and

iv. add the requirement for a Certificate of Conduct to the Applicant Checklist if

required.


Accept recommendation

Conclusion 1.3


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: April 2017


City Solicitor

Manager, Corporate Risk and Recovery



Section 2 – Non-Profit Housing Policy, Procedures Manual

Issue 2.1 – Policy, Procedures Manual

Management advised that although they follow certain policies developed by the

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation (e.g., Transfer Guidelines) and a set of

informal procedures prepared by a former City employee, they do not have a formal set

of policy and procedures approved by the Deputy City Manager, Community Services

and the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee.

Recommendation 2.1

To assist management and staff in making decisions, completing job tasks and achieving

outcomes required to move the City toward attaining its strategic directions, management

should prepare a formal policy and procedures manual. All policies should be vetted

through the Corporate Policy Committee and the policy and procedure manual should be

approved by the Deputy City Manager, Community Services and the Community

Services and Housing Standing Committee.



Conclusion 2.1


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: January 2018




Issue 2.2 – Criteria for Assigning Housing to Applicants

Applicants for housing are placed on a waiting list and contacted by the Non-Profit

Housing Division when housing units become available. Management reviews the

waitlist and based on need, assigns the unit to the appropriate applicant. An internal

control weakness exists in this process as although the applicant is assessed based on

need, there is no formal, written criteria for management to use when assessing the

applicants and deciding which ones to select. Management advised that an additional

control has been in place for some time as they do have a second employee review the

file as a check of the decision.

Recommendation 2.2

To ensure the assignment of housing units to applicants is done in a fair and equitable

manner, management should:

i. develop a formal written set of criteria for assessing applicants and assigning housing

units. The criteria should be approved by the Deputy City Manager, Community

Services and the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee and form

part of the policy/procedures recommended in Issue 2.1. The criteria to select tenants

for housing should consider such items as:

a. income levels;

b. current address of applicant (will current St. John’s residents have preference over

applicants from outside St. John’s);

c. people with disabilities,

d. victims of violence,

e. seniors,

f. current living conditions, etc.

ii. develop a process to deal with any exceptions (fast-track applicants).

It should be noted that most of the criteria above are currently being used by management

when selecting applicants for available units.





Conclusion 2.2


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: August 2017


Issue 2.3 – Credit Checks and Annual Income Testing of Tenants

Management advised that, historically credit checks have not had a significant impact on

the decisions made by management regarding the placement of applicants in affordable

housing units and, as a result have stopped conducting credit checks of applicants.

Although this decision will save staff time and City resources it also increases the risk of

certain applicants obtaining housing units who may have otherwise not been assigned a

housing unit if the credit check had been conducted and could potentially lead to rents not

being paid.

In addition, management advised income is tested each year for Rent Geared to Income

and subsidized Lower End of Market tenants as required by the “Global Agreements”

with CMHC, but only once upon move-in for the over 200 other Lower End of Market

tenants. By not income testing all tenants on an annual basis, the City may not become

aware of tenants’ whose incomes may have increased above a level consistent with the

objectives of the affordable housing program while other applicants on the waiting list

with less income and/or greater need may not be assigned a housing unit.



Recommendation 2.3

Management should advise and seek the approval or other direction of the Deputy City

Manager, Community Services and the Community Services and Housing Standing

Committee regarding:

i. the credit checks being discontinued, and

ii. the number of tenants not having their income confirmed annually.

In addition, the guidance received from the Committee and management should be

included in the policy/procedures recommended previously in Issue 2.1.


Accept recommendation. Further investigation is required before policy and procedures

can be brought forward.

Conclusion 2.3




DCM, Finance & Administration

Issue 2.4 – Income Levels for Applicants and Tenants

Management indicated that for an applicant to qualify for the Lower End of Market

(LEM) program their annual income must be greater than $24,000. However, there is no

maximum placed on an applicant’s yearly income that will make them ineligible for this

program. Although it is unlikely that a high income applicant would be accepted into the

Lower End of Market program, which is needs based, it is possible that a tenant who was

originally accepted into the program with a low income may, in the future, earn a much

higher income.



In addition, although there are maximum income levels for acceptance into the Rent

Geared to Income (RGI) and Affordable Housing programs there is no formal

policy/procedure in place to deal with tenants who are already in these programs whose

incomes increase above the maximum income limits. This could potentially result in

applicants of greater need continuing to be waitlisted for housing which is not in line with

Council’s objective of helping those in need of adequate, affordable housing.

Recommendation 2.4

To help provide guidance to management and staff when making decisions regarding

applicants and tenants of the City’s housing programs management should:

i. review the income qualifications for the Lower End of Market program to determine

if there should be a maximum income level. This should be discussed with the

Deputy City Manager, Community Services and the final decision should be

approved by the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee.

ii. develop a policy/procedure to deal with the issue of tenants whose incomes exceed

the maximum income levels for each housing program and ensure it is properly

approved.



Conclusion 2.4






Issue 2.5 – Rental Rates

Management advised that rental rates for the Lower End of Market (LEM) units differ

depending on location. For example, one bedroom rental rates range from $500 to $620,

2 bedroom rates range from $650 to $670, 3 bedroom rates range from $645 to $740 and

4 bedroom rates range from $675 to $770. Management indicated all rental rate increases

are initially approved by NLHC. When management proposes to increase rental rates,

they contact NLHC by phone to obtain verbal approval that the increase is within the

accepted ranges for the various apartments by location. However, there is no written

documentation to indicate this approval. Further discussion with management revealed

that a general increase of $20 per month for Lower End of Market units was approved by

the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee and Council in May 2016

based on an information note provided by management. However, the information note

did not contain information on the allowable maximum rental rates.

Recommendation 2.5

In order to ensure that rental rates are reasonable, management should provide:

i. the current years rental rates by location charged by the City,

ii. documentation of the maximum allowable rental rates by location from NLHC; and

iii. the proposed rental rates to be charged by the City for the upcoming year

to the Deputy City Manager, Community Services and the Community Services and

Housing Standing Committee for information purposes/approval on an annual basis. This

should be included in the procedures of the division.


Accept recommendation.

Conclusion 2.5


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: May 2017




Issue 2.6 – Subsidy and Transfer of Responsibility for Agreements

The City’s webpage for Non-Profit Housing notes: “Usually 15 percent of the units in

each housing project receive a subsidy at any given time.” This information was

communicated to the current Manager, Housing by the former Manager, Housing by way

of an email message sent on Sept 30, 2015. The former Manager of Housing indicated in

the email "That was the rule of thumb put forth initially by CMHC but it is not in the

agreements”. However, the CMHC 2397 Agreement states in section 2.(1):

“The principle of blending incomes is to be followed when leasing units

in the project, which said principle will permit tenants at the lower end

of the income range to benefit from the subsidy in excess of the average

for the project, while those at the midpoint will receive the average

subsidy, and those at the upper end will receive less than the average

subsidy, if any, provided, however, that in the application of the said

principle, priority shall be given to families and individuals of low and

moderate income.”

Based on the wording of section 2.(1), as noted above, it is not clear if the City’s method

of providing a subsidy to approximately 15 percent of the units in each housing project is

in line with this agreement.

Also, management advised that initially “Global Agreements” for Assistance to Non-

Profit Corporations were signed by the CMHC and the City of St. John’s in the 1980’s.

Management indicated that over the years, certain responsibilities were transferred from

CMHC to NLHC; however, management was not able to provide documentation of the

transfer.

Recommendation 2.6

In order to ensure that the City is in compliance with the CMHC “Global Agreements”

management should:



i. contact CMHC/NLHC to determine if the City’s method of providing subsidies to

affordable housing tenants are in compliance with the agreements. If the City is

found not to be in compliance then management should develop a plan to ensure the

City comes into compliance as soon as possible. Management should ensure that any

guidance/direction received from the CMHC/NLHC is in writing and this

documentation should be maintained on file. The final outcome of this

communication should be forwarded to the Deputy City Manager, Community

Services and the Community Services and Housing Standing Committee for their

approval and the procedure for providing subsidies should be included in the

division’s policy and procedures manual.

ii. contact the CMHC/NLHC and request documentation regarding the transfer of

responsibilities from CMHC to NLHC. This documentation should also be

maintained on file.



Conclusion 2.6




Issue 2.7 – Applicant Checklist

When an apartment becomes available an applicant is selected from the waiting list and

the Applicant Checklist is completed. The Applicant Checklist is used to summarize and

verify the information supplied by the applicant and to document information concerning

the assigned rental unit. The first two sections of the checklist capture the name of the

applicant(s), date the application was received, unit size required, income verification,



credit bureau inquiry, etc. The third section includes the address of the unit rented, date

the welcome letter was sent, amount of rent, etc. Upon review of the checklist the

following issues were noted:

i. the Checklist does not contain spaces for the employee who completes the form to

sign and date. This information is useful for accountability and audit trail purposes.

ii. the Checklist requires the employee to record only the total gross income (monthly)

and not each source and date of income, total income and the calculation of the gross

monthly income. This makes it difficult to cross reference the income to other

documents in the file and increases the risk of error.

iii. the “Past Landlord References”/ “Home Visit/Inspection” sections are not being

completed for all applicants. (Three of the four applicants tested under Rent Geared

to Income did not have the information recorded.) Not completing references and

inspections for tenants increases the risk of accepting a tenant who may not be a good

fit for the program(s).

Recommendation 2.7

In an effort to decrease risk and improve the audit trail and accountability over the

applicant checklist process management should:

i. modify the Applicant’s Checklist form to:

a. include spaces, in each section, for the employee who completes the

checklist to sign and date, and

b. record the various current sources of income, total income and monthly

gross income, along with the corresponding dates

ii. discuss the risks of not completing the Past Landlord References / Home

Visit/Inspection section of the checklist with the Deputy City Manager, Community

Services to determine if the costs of completing the section outweigh the benefits. If

it is decided not to complete the section then it should be deleted from the checklist.





Conclusion 2.7


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: August 2017




Section 3 – Yardi Enterprise Express Property Management

System

Issue 3.1 – Training/Review of the Yardi System

The Non-Profit Housing Division uses a computer system called Yardi which was

designed to assist users in managing rental properties. Management advised that:

i. employees have not received training in the use of the Yardi System. Without proper

training, employees may not be using the Yardi software program effectively and

efficiently; and management may not be aware of all its capabilities.

ii. employees believe the Yardi System is outdated and that the property management

system at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation appears to be far

superior. It may provide increased efficiencies to the division.

Recommendation 3.1

In order for the Non-Profit Housing Division to determine if the Yardi system can

provide the resources it needs to properly manage its operations and to ensure that it is

operating efficiently and effectively, management should:

i. contact the Information Services Division to obtain training on the full capabilities of

the Yardi system, and

ii. use this information to determine if the Yardi system can meet the divisions

requirements. If it is found that Yardi is not meeting the division’s needs then

management should look for another solution, including taking a closer look at the

system in use at the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.


Accept recommendation.

Conclusion 3.1




Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: September 2017



Director, Corporate Information Services

Issue 3.2 – Waitlists

When applications for housing units are received, the applicant’s information is keyed to

a waitlist. The Yardi System has a waitlist feature that was previously used by the

division, however management found that this feature did not suit their needs and are

now using an excel spreadsheet to maintain the waitlist. Currently the Yardi waitlist has

over 2,000 applicants for 1 bedroom apartments while the Excel worksheet has 101

applicants on its waitlist. It appears that the 101 applicants recorded on the Excel waitlist

is also recorded in the Yardi System and, therefore, is a duplication. However, it is

uncertain how the remaining applicants recorded in the Yardi system will be handled.

It should be noted that the waitlist process requires applicants to re-apply on an annual

basis so that eventually the waitlist in Excel should be complete; however, for the time

being it is difficult to determine the accuracy of the Yardi waitlists.

Recommendation 3.2

In order to ensure that the applicant waitlist is accurate, management should:

i. discuss the issues that the division is having with the Yardi waitlist with the

Information Services Division during the training session recommended in Issue 3.1

to determine which list better provides the information needed by the Non-Profit

Housing Division to track the applicants.

ii. depending on which method is used, ensure the list is up-to-date.





Conclusion 3.2






Issue 3.3 – Access to Yardi System

In an effort to ensure that access to the Yardi computer system was appropriately

restricted, a list of active users as of May 25, 2016 was obtained from the Information

Services Division. The listing showed that access was restricted to only those employees

who required access to the system to perform their job duties. However, the Word

Processor III employee had been on short-term leave which had been extended several

times since February 2016. As of May 2016, the employee still had system access. As a

result management should now consider disabling this employee’s access until they

return to work in line with best practices for system security.

Recommendation 3.3

In order to improve system security management should complete the Network Access –

Delete/Disable Request form and forward it to the Information Services Division to

disable system access for the Word Processor III employee until their return to work.


Accept recommendation. Completed.

Conclusion 3.3




Section 4 – Audit Testing

Issue 4.1 – Inspection Reports

As a part of audit testing a sample of Move-In Inspection reports and Annual Inspection

reports were reviewed. These inspections are performed by Non-Profit Housing

employees and contain information regarding the condition of the units. The review of

the inspection reports noted the following two areas for improvement.

i. there is no indication if any damages/deficiencies noted in the reports warrant repair

and whether or not they have been referred to the City Buildings Division for follow-

up.

ii. The Annual Inspection reports are not signed by the person completing them and

some do not have all the check boxes “checked”. Instead, they have a line drawn

through the page with “All Ok” written on it. This decreases accountability over the

inspections.

Recommendation 4.1 In order to provide an audit trail of follow-up work resulting from the Move-In and

Annual inspections and to ensure safety issues are identified and resolved, management

should:

i. record, on the inspection reports, whether or not damages/deficiencies identified

warrant repair work and if so, record the work order number and date that the City

Buildings Division was contacted.

ii. ensure all Annual Inspection reports have each section “checked” and signed by the

employee conducting the inspection.



Conclusion 4.1






DCM, Public Works

Manager, City Buildings

Issue 4.2 – Income Verification

To test the income verification procedures used by the Non-Profit Housing Division

during the applicant selection process a sample of 20 Application Checklists were

reviewed. The review disclosed the following issues:

i. the application for one applicant noted income from an employer sponsored pension

plan, Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and a part-time job; however, the amount of income

related to the part-time job was not recorded on the application. In addition, only the

income from the pension plan was recorded on the Application Checklist which,

therefore, did not include the income related to CPP and the part-time job. As a

result, it appears this applicant’s total income was not considered when being selected

for a unit.

ii. four other Application Checklists reviewed had incomplete or missing income

verification information. For example in two of the Application Checklists “AES”

(Advanced Education and Skills) was recorded in the Total Gross Income section

instead of a dollar value and in both checklists the Income Verification section was

not completed. A third Application Checklist had “SA” recorded in the Total Gross

Income section instead of a dollar value while on a fourth checklist the Total Gross

Income section was not completed and “No” was recorded in the Income Verification

section. Having missing or incomplete information in the income verification

sections of the Application Checklists makes it difficult to verify that the applicant’s

income was properly considered prior to being placed in a unit.



Recommendation 4.2 In order to ensure that there is a proper audit trail around the income verification process

management should ensure that all current income is verified and recorded on the

Application Checklist in the appropriate sections.


Further discussion is needed, modification of Checklist might be warranted.

Conclusion 4.2

Management indicated further discussion is needed.



Issue 4.3 – Miscellaneous

The following is a further list of issues that were identified during our testing of

documents:

i. applications are not numbered when received at the Non-Profit Housing Division.

Without a numerical sequence on the application, it is difficult to determine if all

applications submitted were processed.

ii. the form used to document any changes to a tenants information (add/remove tenant,

rental rate, banking information, etc.) does not have a title which makes it difficult to

reference the form.

iii. one application reviewed had most of section 4, all of section 5, and the signature

portion of section 9 missing from the file while page 4 of another application

reviewed was not on file.



Recommendation 4.3 In an effort to strengthen internal controls over documents management should:

i. ensure that all applications are numbered when received and that the numeric

sequence of the applications are monitored.

ii. place a name/title on the form which records changes to tenant information.

iii. ensure all sections/pages of the application are on file.



Conclusion 4.3




Issue 4.4 – Website

The City’s webpage for the Non-Profit Housing Division advises that there are 424

residential rental units throughout the City – 268 units under Lower End of Market

(LEMS) and 156 units under Rent Geared to Income (RGI). However, the list for LEMS

on the webpage only adds to 255 units instead of 268. The 13 units at 15-39 Cuckhold's

Cove Road are not included in the list.

Recommendation 4.4 To ensure the webpage is complete and accurate, management should update the

webpage to include the 13 units at 15-39 Cuckhold's Cove Road for LEMS.





Conclusion 4.4






Section 5 – Financial

Issue 5.1 – Advanced Education and Skills Cheques

The Non-Profit Housing Division performs a number of financial related duties such as:

i. receives one cheque each month as well as a list of clients from the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador – Advanced Education and Skills (AES) on behalf of

over 40 clients who are tenants in the City’s Non-Profit Housing units. The cheque

for April 2016 was for $21,570. Because AES pays their clients bi-weekly, the list of

40 clients/tenants has two or three entries per client which are added for each

individual by a Non-Profit Housing employee before it is sent to the Citizen Services

Centre for keying and deposit. Several individual small cheques are received

regularly from AES on behalf of tenants who have not been included on the main list.

Having cheques received and handled at multiple locations throughout the City

increases the risk of errors being made and the potential for cheques to be misplaced.

ii. receives information from the bank such as Non-Sufficient Funds payment, checks to

see if any payments had been processed for the tenant since the date of the non-

payment and writes a “Rental Reminder” to the tenant with the up-to-date information

(i.e., amount owed less partial payments).

iii. receives receipts from the Citizen Services Centre on behalf of tenants who are AES

clients. These receipts take time to file and are not used by management.

Recommendation 5.1

In order to strengthen internal controls over the processing of revenue and make the

process more efficient, management should:

i. have the AES cheques received directly by the Citizen Services Centre, whose staff

have been trained in proper cash handling techniques, for processing and deposit. A

minimal amount of training may be needed.

ii. meet with the Deputy City Manager, Finance & Administration to discuss if the

collection of the non-payment of rent should be Finance & Administration’s

responsibility.



iii. meet with the Deputy City Manager, Finance & Administration to discuss if the

printing of the receipts is necessary.



Conclusion 5.1


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: October 2017



Issue 5.2 – Miscellaneous

Other issues that were identified from audit procedures relating to the processing of

cheques are:

i. individual cheques are sometimes received from the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador – Advanced Education and Skills (AES) with the caption “14-HRE –

Payment distribution information to follow” or “14 – HRE- 123456 A/C Name” on

the cheque stub. When these cheques are received the Tenant Relations Officer has

to look up the tenant name and address in the Yardi system, record it on the stub and

send the cheque to the Citizen Services Centre for processing. This process is

inefficient and once again increases risk as the cheques are being handled outside of

the Citizen Services Centre.

ii. AES are using multiple addresses when sending cheques to the Non-Profit Housing

Division such as City’s Non-Profit Housing and City of St. John’s. This increases the

risk that the cheques may be sent to the wrong recipient.



Recommendation 5.2 In order to make the process of handling AES cheques more efficient, management

should:

i. contact AES and request that they record the name and address of the client/tenant on

each cheque stub.

ii. contact AES and request that they use the proper address when forwarding cheques.



Conclusion 5.2


Action By: Manager, Housing Action Date: October 2017





Section 6 – Maintenance of Units

Issue 6.1 – Maintenance Requests

The Word Processor III employee in Non-Profit Housing answers the regular hours (i.e.

9:00AM to 4:30PM) phone calls from tenants for maintenance requests, prepares the

work orders, receives copies of invoices from the City Buildings Division and files them.

The City Buildings Division also maintains a file of all invoices for their records.

Emergency after hours requests are handled through the Citizen Services Centre who

contacts the Supervisor, Residential Buildings to respond to the request. In both regular

hours and after hours requests it is staff from the City Buildings Division who make the

decision regarding the maintenance to be performed. Management advised that

approximately 2,750 work orders are prepared each year – 2,600 by the Non-Profit

Housing Division during regular hours and 150 by the City Buildings Division for

emergency/afterhours.

As the staff from the City Buildings Division are properly trained to identify maintenance

issues and are the ones to respond to the requests it appears inefficient to have Non-Profit

Housing staff performing parts of this function during regular office hours. Non-Profit

Housing staff resources may be better utilized performing other duties.

Recommendation 6.1

Management should meet with the Deputy City Manager, Public Works to determine if

all maintenance phone calls, preparation of all work orders and filing of invoices should

be handled by the City Buildings Division as they make the decisions as to the work that

will be done. This may make the processing of the work orders more efficient.



Conclusion 6.1






DCM, Public Works

Manager, City Buildings

End of Report


Office of the City Clerk

Program Review: Municipal Archives

Assignment # 16-02


Office of the City Clerk

Program Review: Municipal Archives

Assignment # 16-02

David Royle, CPA,

CMA, CFP

Senior Internal Auditor

Date: December 22, 2016

Sean P. Janes, CPA,

CMA, CIA CFE


Date: December 22, 2016

Program Review: Municipal Archives Assignment # 16-02

Office of the City Internal Auditor Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................... 1

METHODOLOGY & SCOPE ................................................................................................. 1

BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2

DETAILED ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 5

Section 1 – Mandate/Policy and Procedures ........................................................................... 5 Issue 1.1 – Resolution of Council / Mandate ........................................................................................ 5 Issue 1.2 – Draft Policies Not Approved by Council ............................................................................ 6 Issue 1.3 – Records and Information Management Policy .................................................................... 7 Issue 1.4 – Work Procedures ................................................................................................................. 8

Section 2 – Safeguarding of Records ..................................................................................... 10 Issue 2.1 – Digitization of Records ......................................................................................................10 Issue 2.2 – Preservation of Records – Original and Microfilm (See no 5) ...........................................11 Issue 2.3 – Preservation of Original Maps, Insurance Plans and Business Directories ........................13

Section 3 – Planning/Management Reporting ...................................................................... 16 Issue 3.1 – Inmagic DBTextWorks Training .......................................................................................16 Issue 3.2 – Work Backlog ....................................................................................................................17 Issue 3.3 – Management Reports and Meetings ...................................................................................18

Section 4 – Operations ............................................................................................................ 20 Issue 4.1 – Accessing Council Minutes, Assessments, etc. (1890’s to 1990’s) ...................................20 Issue 4.2 – Inefficient Copying of Data into Inmagic DBTextWorks ..................................................20 Issue 4.3 – Receiving Boxes of Records Procedure .............................................................................22 Issue 4.4 – Public Access to Microfilm ...............................................................................................23 Issue 4.5 – Sign Out Form/Archives Internal Loan Form ....................................................................24 Issue 4.6 – Records Transfer List Form ...............................................................................................25 Issue 4.7 – Deaccession Form ..............................................................................................................26 Issue 4.8 – Stores Division Records .....................................................................................................27

Section 5 – Revenue ................................................................................................................. 29 Issue 5.1 – Revenue from Fees ............................................................................................................29 Issue 5.2 – Cash Float, Cash Security and Deposits ............................................................................30

Section 6 – Storage of City’s Art Collection ......................................................................... 32 Issue 6.1 – Art Collection ....................................................................................................................32



To: Chair & Council Members, Audit Committee

Area Responsible: Elaine Henley, City Clerk

Copy to: Kevin Breen, City Manager

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVES

In accordance with the City’s approved audit plan, the objectives of this review are to

assess whether:

1. the service is being managed with due regard to risks and due diligence (risk

management),

2. processes and structures are implemented to inform, direct, manage and monitor

activities that are intended to move the City toward the achievement of our

strategic plan (governance processes), and

3. the process is being managed with due regard to control processes - i.e. policies,

procedures, regulations and council directives (control processes).

It is the overall areas of risk management, governance processes and control processes

which structured the work carried out during the review.

METHODOLOGY & SCOPE

This review of the Municipal Archives (i.e., Records Management and Archives)

Division has been undertaken in accordance with the approved three year audit plan. To

meet the review objectives, audit procedures included a tour of the offices and storage

areas and interviews with divisional staff to outline the processes for:

i. departments transferring files to Records Management and Archives and requests

for such records at a later date,

ii. Records Management recording, storing and disposing of city records,

iii. Archives recording, storing and disposing of city records and donations.



iv. Archives providing assistance, search services and scanned or paper documents to

the public.

Also, testing of various supporting documentation such as departmental transfer lists,

computer storage records, disposal listings, requests for services, donations, etc. was

conducted. The period of review was mainly January – October 2016; however, as

issues were discovered, the review was extended prior to these dates. Fieldwork was

completed December 9, 2016.

BACKGROUND

The City of St. John’s Municipal Archives was formally established by a Resolution of

Council on January 11, 1989 and is under the direction of the Office of the City Clerk.

Budgeted expenditures for the Municipal Archives Division for 2016 was $282,659 and

staffing for the Division is as follows:

i. Archivist – temporarily assigned since April 2015. Previously hired fulltime as

the Archivist Technician from 2002 to March 2015.

ii. Archivist Technician – temporarily assigned November 2012 to January 2014 and

April 2015 to present.

iii. Records Analyst – permanent position since 2008.

The former Archivist had been in the position from 1989 to 2015. The office moved

from City Hall to 495 Water Street (Railway Coastal Museum) in 2003 and will move to

its new location on Terra Nova Road early in 2017.

The Records Analyst advised that there are approximately 1710 boxes of records in

storage at 495 Water Street. In addition, due to lack of space at the current location of

Records Management there are an additional 48 boxes stored in the Records Analyst’s

office, 688 boxes at City Hall and 188 boxes at a local document storage and shredding

company (i.e. ShredGuard).



In addition, the Archivist indicated that the number of records under the responsibility of

the Archives is approximately:

i. 50,000 paper records (files, reports, books, photos, maps, newspaper clippings,

ledgers),

ii. 188,000 microfiche files (flat film – building plans, legal files, permits, etc.)

iii. 688 plus microfilm (rolled film) – insurance maps, assessments (1892 to 1995),

Council Minutes, Ledgers, etc.

The total records are approximately 240,000.

The Records Analyst stores departmental records according to the retention periods noted

in Schedule B of the Records and Information Management Policy approved by Council

on May 7, 2012. Subsequent to the retention period, the records are held until the

Archivist appraises the records and decides which records should be preserved for

Archival purposes and which ones should be disposed of. Both positions perform

research to respond to the following types of requests:

i. Internal

ii. External

iii. Walk-ins

iv. Other: Phone, Email, ATIPPA, Council Directives, etc.

A summary of the requests by year is as follows:

2016 453 (As of February 2016)

2015 1,762

2014 1,636

2013 1,658

It appears the number of requests has been consistent for 2013 and 2014 with

approximately 125 additional requests received in 2015 compared to 2014. Management

advised that requests for 2016 are on par with previous years.



Requests from the public for records are as follows:

Citizens who want pictures and maps of old St. John’s

Citizens who want to trace where their family lived in St. John’s (insurance plans

from 1880, and various years onward)

Citizens who are considering/buying a house – trace the previous owners

Lawyers – checking information on properties

Engineers – Phase 1 – searching if properties had oil heat (oil tanks)

University Professors/ Public – conducting research for writing books

High school/elementary students conducting research for a paper

People outside St. John’s – other NL communities, mainland Canada and other

countries. This requires more staff time as they have to conduct the research due

to the people not being in St. John’s

ATIPPA requests which have been steadily increasing

Requests from inside the City of St. John’s are as follows:

Legal department

Planning, Development and Engineering

Councillors/Mayor – mainly requiring information for a speech

Responding to these requests can take anywhere from a few minutes to a few days. For

visitors to the Archives, the staff educate them in how to perform searches to find the

information they require; however, some visitors require more help than others.

The Archivist also has responsibility over the City owned art works, which includes

recording, storing, and arranging for Facilities Maintenance to display at City premises;

and for tracking and maintaining the City Policy Manual and By-Laws.



DETAILED ANALYSIS

Section 1 – Mandate/Policy and Procedures

Issue 1.1 – Resolution of Council / Mandate

The City of St. John’s Archives was formally established by a Resolution of Council on

January 11, 1989. City Archives is under the direction of the Office of the City Clerk

and:

i. “shall be responsible for the preservation or destruction of all types of records of

the City’s administration”,

ii. “shall be responsible for the operation of a records management training and

advisory service for use of all City departments”,

iii. “shall provide a centre where the older records of the City and records relating to

the City can be consulted by members of the public subject to the provisions of

the City of St. John’s Act”.

Although the City’s website notes that the Archives is responsible for maintaining the

fine art collection and tracking all policies and by-laws, these responsibilities are not

included in the resolution/mandate.

Mandates provide management and staff with the authority to perform their duties so it is

important that they be updated regularly.

Recommendation 1.1

Management should review the mandate of the Archives to determine if the

responsibilities of uploading and tracking the City’s policies on the website and handling

City owned art work should be the responsibility of the Archives. If so, the mandate

should be updated and approved by Council. In making this determination management

should consider the current work backlog (see Issue 3.2) and the future work

requirements of the Archives Division.




Our office fully intends to develop a new mandate for this Division which more

accurately reflects its current and future direction. The responsibility for uploading and

updating City policies is going to switch from Archives to Legislative Services.

Different aspects of the Artwork is currently being handled by both Archives and

Community Services. We will further explore to determine the best fit.

Conclusion 1.1

The recommendation will be implemented as stated above.

Action By: City Clerk Action Date: September 2017

Issue 1.2 – Draft Policies Not Approved by Council

All City policies are required to be approved by Council. The MyCity intranet website

includes the following policies relating to the Archives:

i. 09-02-01 (Mandate of the Archives);

ii. 09-02-02 (Collections);

iii. 09-02-03 (Accessions);

iv. 09-02-04 (Donations and Purchases);

v. 09-02-05 (Loans);

vi. 09-02-06 (Access and Restrictions);

vii. 09-02-07 (Archives Responsibility);

viii. 09-02-08 (Recording and Handling of City Owned Art Work).

These policies cover a wide range of important functions carried out by the Archives

Division; however, they have not been formally approved by Council.



Recommendation 1.2

Management should review the above policies to ensure they are up to date and complete.

Policies should be combined where practical and revised to include any new or different

guidance including items contained in this audit report. Management should also ensure

that all policies are vetted through the City policy approval process (i.e. Corporate Policy

Committee, SEC, Finance Committee and Council).


None of the policies noted have been approved by Council. Management will work with

the staff of Archives to review and amend all policies noted. We will combine where it

makes sense to do so and separate police from procedure ensuring that all/any revisions

go through the CPC.

Conclusion 1.2



Issue 1.3 – Records and Information Management Policy

The policy section of the MyCity intranet website includes policy #01-04-01 entitled

“Records and Information Management Policy. The purpose of the policy is “to establish

effective management control and administration over the creation, receipt, use, access,

retrieval, maintenance, storage, preservation and disposition of all corporate records

regardless of format.” Schedule B of the policy provides the record retention schedules

for City documents in a tabular format and includes columns entitled “Current Retention

Period” and “Suggested Retention Period”.

The Records Analyst and Archivist advised that the “Suggested Retention Period” was

approved by Council in the last revision dated October 20, 2015. However, the policy



and website was not updated to show only the approved retention period. Having both of

these columns included in the policy can be confusing to departmental management and

staff who may not know which retention period to use.

Recommendation 1.3

In order to avoid confusion, only the retention periods approved by Council in the last

revision should be included in Schedule B of the Records and Information Policy.


We will make the amendments to the existing policy (Schedule B) and have it approved

by Council in its correct format.

Conclusion 1.3


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: May 2017

Issue 1.4 – Work Procedures

The Records Analyst, Archivist Technician and the Archivist have documented detailed

procedures that they follow to complete their job duties. The division should be

commended for having documented work procedures as they are important in helping to

guide employees in how to complete day to day tasks and are also helpful when training

new employees. However, the work procedures have not been approved by management.

Recommendation 1.4

To ensure that the documented work procedures are accurate and complete and help

move the division to attainment of its goals and objectives they should be reviewed and

approved by management.




Management will work with staff in reviewing all the documented work procedures in

order to ensure they reflect the goals and objectives necessary to achieve its mandate.

Further, we will ensure that the procedures adhere to amended and/or new policies.

Conclusion 1.4


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: September2017



Section 2 – Safeguarding of Records

Issue 2.1 – Digitization of Records

Research conducted for this review revealed that numerous municipalities in Canada,

including Regina, Victoria, and Halifax, have begun the process of digitizing their

archival holdings. The National Archives of the United States of America indicates in

their definition of digitizing for public access that “...digitization should be understood

not just as the act of scanning a document into digital form, but as a series of activities

that result in a digital copy being made available to end users via the internet or other

means for a sustained length of time.” The definition goes on to outline some of the

important activities required for a successful digitization project.

Some of the numerous benefits of digitization include:

Preservation by limiting the handling of original documents

Increasing access to public documents (documents are available for anyone to use

at any time and from anywhere)

Limits time spent by the Archivist searching records for requestors, etc

The benefits of preservation and providing access to the public closely align to the

responsibilities of the Archives division as outlined in the Resolution of Council

mentioned in Issue 1.1. In addition, digitization would resolve a number of the issues

that will be highlighted throughout this audit report. However, the digitization of

archival records can be a major undertaking and would need further study to determine if

it is a project that management and Council would want to proceed with.

Recommendation 2.1

When reviewing the mandate of the Archives management should consider the many

benefits that can be achieved through the digitization of archival records and determine if

this should be added to the division’s mandate. In order to make this determination

management should consult with an individual in this area who would be knowledgeable



about the potential benefits that can be achieved through a digitization project along with

the expected costs.


We agree that digitization is the direction to take and will take any/all necessary

action to better educate ourselves on the best approach. Recognizing the multiple

responsibilities of the division and the limited staff, we will work to set realistic goals

on digitizing existing documentation.

This project will take years to complete given the nature of the task – time, volume

and resources.

Conclusion 2.1


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: December 2021

Information Only: DCM, Finance & Administration


Issue 2.2 – Preservation of Records – Original and Microfilm (See no 5)

As previously noted in Issue 1.1, the Municipal Archives is responsible for the

preservation or destruction of all types of records of the City’s administration. It stores

many records on microfilm including:

i. Council Minutes 1892 to 1996,

ii. Assessments 1891 to 1995,

iii. Water Department Ledgers 1892 to 1917

iv. City Tax Ledgers 1918 to 1931

v. General Ledgers 1893 to 1922, etc.



City Archives has two copies of these records on microfilm stored in filing cabinets in

separate rooms. Staff advised that an extra microfilm copy of the Council Minutes (i

above) is stored off-site at the Provincial Archives; however, additional microfilm copies

of the other records (ii to v above) are not.

In addition, many of the City’s original handwritten records for Council Minutes,

Assessments, Ledgers, etc. are stored on shelves in a locked room.

Three issues regarding the storage of these documents are as follows:

i. the cabinets in which the microfilm are stored do not appear to be fireproof;

ii. the original documents (Minutes, Ledgers, etc.) are not stored in a fireproof vault;

iii. there is no off-site storage of microfilm other than the Council Minutes.

In the event of a serious fire at the Archives, there is a risk that all original records and

copies, with the exception of the microfilm copy of Council Minutes at the Provincial

Archives, may be destroyed.

Recommendation 2.2

In order to decrease the risk of a complete loss of important city records, management

should:

i. determine if the cabinets at the City Archives which store microfilm are fireproof.

If they are not fireproof, then management should obtain fireproof cabinets for

storage of the microfilm.

ii. store the original records of the City in a fireproof vault.

iii. arrange off-site storage of the extra microfilm copies of the records not currently

being stored off-sight.

iv. consider digitizing the records and having the digital media stored off-site (see 2.1

above).




Our department will discuss all options and take the recommended action to ensure

that the documents are protected and mitigate potential loss.

Section iv will be dealt with as part of the digitization project.

Conclusion 2.2


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: June 2017

Issue 2.3 – Preservation of Original Maps, Insurance Plans and Business

Directories

The Archives office has hundreds of maps available for viewing, many of which are

stored in rooms not accessible to businesses and the public. Individuals may handle these

maps but they must first ask staff to retrieve them. In addition, the following original

insurance plans are available in the public viewing room:

i. 1880 – no plastic cover (fragile)

ii. 1880 revised in 1889 – laminated

iii. 1893 revised in 1902 – laminated

iv. 1914 – no plastic cover (fragile)

v. 1925 – no plastic cover

vi. 1946 – no plastic cover (fragile)

vii. 1968 – covered in plastic

They are also available on microfilm (black and white). However, because the original

insurance plans have color coded information, many individuals prefer to see the original

maps. The public are permitted to handle these maps and plans.



In addition, the Archives has the following City/Newfoundland Business Directories (not

a complete list):

i. The Atlantic Telegraph - 1877 Nfld Directory

ii. 1932 St. John's Classified Business and City Directory

iii. 1936 Lloyd's Newfoundland Directory (fragile)

iv. Photocopies of 1913, 1915, etc.

v. Original directories from 1960 – 2000.

By allowing the public to handle uncovered original documents, there is an increased risk

that they may get damaged.

Recommendation 2.3

In order to decrease the risk of damage to original documents, management should:

i. allow individuals to review the maps on microfilm, and if needed, show the

originals as long as they are handled by Archives staff only. As an alternative,

seek an expert’s advice as to whether or not the uncovered maps should be

laminated and available to the public to handle.

ii. have the directories photocopied or scanned (i.e. digitized) and made available to

the public and store the original documents. Many City directories are available

online through various websites (e.g., MUN). A comparison of the directories at

the Archives should be made with those online to determine if any need to be

copied or scanned. If they are available online, the original documents should be

placed in storage and the public should be directed to the online source for review

of the documents.

The types of documents and the medium in how they are made available should be

referenced in the policy and procedures previously recommended in Issues 1.2 and 1.4.


The review of current practices and recommendations to minimize the risk(s) will be

dealt with as part of the digitization plan.



Conclusion 2.3


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: i. May 2017

ii. December 2021



Section 3 – Planning/Management Reporting

Issue 3.1 – Inmagic DBTextWorks Training

Inmagic DB/TextWorks is a content management system—a type of database software

that enables the user to build networked and standalone textbases to manage text,

numbers, dates, and electronic images. This system is used on a daily basis by Archives

and Records Management to help manage the records/files under their control. However,

staff advised that they have not received formal training on the system. Without training,

management and staff:

i. may not be taking advantage of all the features available with the system and this

may lead to inefficiency,

ii. may not properly assess the software as to whether it can meet the needs of the

Archives and Records Management.

Recommendation 3.1

Management and staff should obtain formal training on the InMagic DB/TextWorks

system to ensure they are familiar with the system’s abilities and are better able to utilize

the system in performing their job duties (i.e. processing and monitoring).


Our office will work with Information Services to arrange for training on the latest

software management programs for all relevant staff and management.

Conclusion 3.1


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: July 2017





Issue 3.2 – Work Backlog

Staff advised that there are between 200 and 300 maps and 3,000 and 4,000 photos, most

of which were brought to the current location during the move from City Hall in 2002,

which have yet to be reviewed and entered in the Inmagic DBTextWorks computer

system database. Also, there is a backlog of appraisals, filing, etc. partly due to space

limitations and staffing changes (see Appendix A). The Archivist estimated it would take

approximately 6 months to get caught up if time was dedicated to the task. In addition,

the Records Analyst indicated that there is a backlog of approximately 3 months of files

for review due mainly to the fact that space limitations at the current Archives location

has resulted in files being stored at numerous other locations throughout the City (see

Appendix B). With the pending move of the Archives to another building, these time

frames will likely be extended. This backlog of work makes it difficult for the division to

plan its activities, achieve objectives and make process improvements.

In addition, staff have prepared an inventory of some of the records with detailed

locations recorded in the database. Staff should be commended for this because it can

lead to efficiencies when staff are required to locate records. However, other records do

not have detailed locations recorded in the database which can lead to longer search times

if these records are required.

Recommendation 3.2

To help ensure that the backlog of appraisals, filing, etc. is resolved and all records are

properly included in inventory with detailed locations documented, management and staff

should:

i. meet to discuss and develop plans for objectives, priorities, scheduling, costs, etc.

ii. meet on a periodic basis to monitor performance of the work and adjust the plans

if necessary.




We anticipate that the backlog has existed for some time and will continue to exist.

Management will work with staff to establish priorities which will be reflected in the

mandate and any/all procedures and policies.

Conclusion 3.2



Issue 3.3 – Management Reports and Meetings

Staff noted that the Inmagic DBTextWorks computer system is capable of generating

reports such as a log identifying the number of internal, external, walk-ins, and other

requests (e.g., phone, ATIPPA, Council Directives). However, management reports are

not regularly generated and reviewed by staff and management. Regular monthly or

quarterly reports to management such as number of visitors; number of files, photos, etc.

held; number of requests for files and documents; list of outstanding files; etc. would be

useful for staff and management in setting objectives and determining resource needs for

the division.

Recommendation 3.3

To enhance divisional objective setting and monitoring of results management should:

i. request regular, periodic (e.g. monthly, quarterly) reports of information that

relate to divisional goals and objectives from the Inmagic DBTextWorks

computer system.

ii. meet with staff on a periodic basis to review the reports and approve them.




Agree with recommendation and will ensure we do so moving forward.

The Supervisor of the Office of the City Clerk is taking over supervision of this area

beginning April, 2017 and will work with staff to establish appropriate goals/objectives.

Once implemented, the Supervisor will meet regularly with staff to ensure such

objectives are met.

Conclusion 3.3


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: January 2017



Section 4 – Operations

Issue 4.1 – Accessing Council Minutes, Assessments, etc. (1890’s to

1990’s)

Archives staff advised that often they have to perform manual searches of Council

Minutes, Assessment Records, etc. spanning many years. Although minutes from 1996

onward are recorded on a database and searchable by computer other minutes are not,

which can result in very time consuming manual searches. In addition, minutes from

1892 to 1929 have no indexes while records from 1930 to 1995 have typed indexes.

Recommendation 4.1

In order to reduce the amount of time searching for records on a specific topic,

management should consider these records for the digitization project mentioned in Issue

2.1. If it is determined that it would be too costly and time consuming to have all records

digitized, management should consider preparing indexes for all records and key them to

a database, which should help decrease the time required for manual searches.


Agree. This will be considered as part of the digitization analysis.

Conclusion 4.1


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: December 2021

Issue 4.2 – Inefficient Copying of Data into Inmagic DBTextWorks

When departmental management decide to transfer files to Records Management, a

departmental employee (custodian) prepares and places a Records Transfer List of the

files in each box. The list includes a temporary box number, department name, custodian



name, file closed dates, etc. The Records Analyst checks the files received from the

department to the corresponding Records Transfer List to ensure the completeness and

accuracy of the files. The Records Analyst must then copy the information from the

Records Transfer List into the Inmagic DBTextWorks system, which is the system used

to track City records/files. Having the Records Analyst re-key/copy the information from

the Records Transfer List to the Inmagic DBTextWorks system is an inefficient process.

In addition, the Inmagic DBText Works system has two separate databases – one for

Records Management and one for Archives. Once the records stored by Records

Management are due for disposal the Archivist reviews them to determine if they will be

maintained for Archival purposes. All of the records that are maintained must then be re-

keyed/copied into the Archives database. Once again, this re-keying/copying of

information is inefficient.

Recommendation 4.2

In an effort to eliminate the inefficiencies in these processes management should consult

with the Corporate Information Services Division to:

i. determine if it would be possible and cost effective to have departmental

employees key the list of transferred files directly into the Inmagic DBTextWorks

system.

ii. review the Inmagic DBText Works system to determine if there is a more

efficient process that can be used to move file records from the Records

Management database to the Archives database.


We will work with Information Services as recommended and work on a solution (either

using DBText or otherwise) to reduce and/or eliminate the unnecessary duplications of

documentation/lists.

Conclusion 4.2




Action By: City Clerk Action Date: January 2018



Issue 4.3 – Receiving Boxes of Records Procedure

According to the Receiving Boxes of Records procedure (never formally approved) any

department sending files to the Records Management Division is required to complete a

Records Management Records Transfer List and send it along with the forwarded files.

The Records Management Records Transfer List contains information such as department

name, records custodian, record dates, file information, etc. The Records Analyst uses

the transfer list to verify the number and content of the boxes forwarded to records

management.

On Sept 14, 2016, 24 boxes of files containing records for possible disposal that were

removed from the offices of three former employees of the Fleet Services Division were

received by the Records Analyst. These boxes did not contain the required Records

Management Records Transfer Lists. The Records Analyst advised that through

discussions with Fleet Services it was decided that they would send over the boxes of

files and that the Records Analyst would prepare the required transfer lists. Although this

is not a regular occurrence, having the Records Analyst prepare the transfer lists on

behalf of the departments may lead to an excessive work load and slow down the

processing and other work of the Analyst and, as previously mentioned in Issue 3.2, there

is already a substantial backlog of work in the Records Management Division.

Recommendation 4.3

Management should ensure that the Receiving Boxes of Records procedure is reviewed

and approved as a part of the procedure review recommended in Issue 1.4 and that the

Records Analyst is advised of any amendments made to the procedure. In the future, if



any deviation from the procedure is required prior approval should be obtained from

management.


We will ensure that this is properly addressed in the policy/procedures review and all

departments are made aware of the accepted protocol. This division will no longer

complete paperwork that is required to be prepared at the departmental level and any

exceptions to this practice will require management approval.

Conclusion 4.3


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: October 2017

Issue 4.4 – Public Access to Microfilm

A number of records at the Archives have been reproduced on microfilm to help preserve

the original documents. A microfilm reader machine is located in the public room at the

Archives so that individuals can view the records on the microfilm; however, the

microfilm itself is stored in a cabinet that is not accessible by the public. As a result, the

Archivist is required to stop what she is doing and provide microfilm reels each time the

public requires them. For example, on September 20, 2016 a member of the public

viewed approximately 10 reels of microfilm having to interrupt the Archivist to ask for a

new reel each time. This process can take up a lot of the Archivist’s time and appears

inefficient.

Recommendation 4.4

When the Archives moves to its new location management should ensure there is

sufficient space in the public area for storage of the microfilm in an effort to make it self-



serve. To ensure that the microfilm reels are not misfiled, users should be instructed to

leave the microfilm in a tray for staff to return to their proper storage place.


We will work with the staff to determine if there is space in the public area and assuming

there is, we will ensure that the recommendation is followed.

Conclusion 4.4



Issue 4.5 – Sign Out Form/Archives Internal Loan Form

When staff request documents/files from Records Management the Records Analyst

retrieves the records and completes a Records Management Sign Out Form, which

records the name, department and telephone number of the requester, the files signed out

and the date. Two copies of the Sign Out Form are printed with one maintained by the

Records Analyst and one forwarded to the requester along with the records. A similar

procedure is followed for requests of records from the Archives (“Archives Inter Loan”

form).

The completion of these forms are a good control to help track records that are loaned out

from Records Management and the Archives; however, the requesters are not required to

sign the forms to acknowledge receipt of the records and return them to Records

Management/Archives. Therefore, if records are misplaced or go missing, it may be

difficult to track them and assign responsibility.



Recommendation 4.5

In order to ensure the departmental employee who requested the records actually received

them and acknowledges responsibility for the records, they should be required to sign the

applicable form and return a copy to Records Management or the Archives.


We will work with staff to develop electronic forms which will then be placed on the

Intranet. Any/all requests for documentation/records will require that the necessary form

be completed, signed and submitted prior to the release of the requested information. In

addition, we will require the requester to sign and return a copy of the form upon receipt

of the document(s) as recommended.

Conclusion 4.5



Issue 4.6 – Records Transfer List Form

When a department transfers files to Records Management the department is required to

complete a Records Management Records Transfer List. The Records Transfer List

contains information such as department name, records custodian, record dates, file

information, etc.; however, there is no area for the signature of a supervisor/manager to

indicate approval of the list of items being sent to Records Management.

Recommendation 4.6

Management should revise the Records Transfer List form to include a space for the

supervisor/manager to sign to indicate approval of the items being forwarded to Records

Management.




We will revise the existing Records Transfer List form to ensure it includes a space for

the appropriate management’s signature.

Conclusion 4.6



Issue 4.7 – Deaccession Form

Occasionally an item is removed from a collection at the Archives for various reasons

including, the item is a duplicate, the item is not relevant to the collection or the

authenticity of the object is questionable. When this occurs the Archivist completes a

Deaccession Form to document the removal of the item from the collection. Although

the form is signed by the Archivist and a witness (Records Analyst or Archivist

Technician), it is not signed by management to indicate approval of the deaccession of

the item from the collection. This could potentially result in management not being

aware of items being deaccessioned.

Recommendation 4.7

To ensure that management is aware of and approves all items identified for deaccession,

the Deaccession Form should be reviewed and signed by the City Clerk.


We will work with staff to update all existing forms (including the Deaccession Form)

and make the recommended change to include a field for approval by the City Clerk.

Conclusion 4.7





Issue 4.8 – Stores Division Records

Unlike the majority of departments/divisions in the City, the Stores Division do not

transfer their older documents (e.g. Work Orders, Purchase Orders, closed tenders,

Requests for Quotes, Picklists, etc.) to the Records Management division. As a result, the

Stores Division’s records are not entered into the Inmagic DBTextWorks system and

recorded in the Records Collection database, which is meant to be the central database for

all City records.

When the Stores Division’s records are scheduled for disposal, the Stores Supervisor,

completes the “Disposal of Purchasing & Stores Records Year XXXX” form in a PDF

format, and forwards a copy of the form to the Records Analyst. This form does not

contain areas to capture the signatures of the preparer and approver of the form or the

dates when the form was prepared and approved. As a result it is difficult to assign

accountability over the contents of the form.

Finally, the Records Analyst visits the Stores Division to verify the contents of the form,

creates an official disposal list (i.e. “Financial Services – Records Due For Disposal –

2016 Purchasing and Stores” form) in Microsoft Word and prints 2 copies – one for the

disposals folder and one to be signed for approval. This results in a second disposal list

being created which appears to be a duplication of effort.

Recommendation 4.8

In an effort to increase efficiency and accountability management should:

i. ensure that all City records, regardless of where they are stored, are included in

the Records Collection database.

ii. review the process to determine if only one list of records for disposal is required

and ensure that the list is signed, approved and dated.




We will work with relevant staff to ensure that all records are included in the Records

Collection database and implement this practice into our policies including having only

one form to minimize effort and increase efficiencies.

Conclusion 4.8





Section 5 – Revenue

Issue 5.1 – Revenue from Fees

The Archives charges fees for a number of services offered to customers including

providing photocopies, digital images, Microfilm scans, etc. Four issues relating to these

fees are as follows:

i. the list of fees charged to customers was last updated on January 1, 2014 and were

determined by the Archivist and Archivist Technician. Staff indicated that the fee

structure was not reviewed/approved by management.

ii. according to the posted price list photocopy rates charged to the public are $.25

per sheet after the first 3 sheets; however, staff indicated that MUN students and

professors are only charged $.10 per sheet. This is not reflected on the price list.

iii. the photocopier is located in the public viewing room and is not coin operated.

The public are permitted to use the photocopier and report to staff the number of

copies they have taken. This could result in loss of revenue.

iv. the Archives provides up to 6 digital images at no cost to an author who is writing

a book on any aspect of St. John’s history in exchange for a copy of the book

when published. To receive the free digital images the author must complete a

Request Form; however, the form does not have a space for the author to sign and

date nor a statement agreeing to provide a copy of the book.

Recommendation 5.1 In an effort to increase controls over revenue management should:

i. review and approve the schedule of fees to be charged for photocopying, scanning

pictures, etc. and any other services offered by the Archives.

ii. reconsider the rates charged to MUN students and professors when reviewing the

schedule of fees. One item to consider would be: are professors using the

materials for writing books for sale. The rates charged for students and

professors, if different from the general public, should be added to the schedule of

fees.



iii. review the process used for photocopying to help ensure revenue completeness.

This could include the use of a coin operated photocopier or some other method

of tracking the number of copies used by the public.

iv. revise the Request Form to include a space for authors to sign and date, and a

statement agreeing to provide a copy of the book.


We are going to the review the existing schedule of fees and the entire process to ensure

adherence to policy and approval at the management level.

Conclusion 5.1


Action By: City Clerk Action Date: September2017


Issue 5.2 – Cash Float, Cash Security and Deposits

At the time of the review, the Archives Division had $209.38 in cash from sales stored in

a cashbox. The following two issues were noted with regard to the cash and its storage:

i. staff indicated that the Archives Division have never been provided with a cash

float and that the cash on hand is from revenue received that was not deposited.

ii. the cash box is kept in a locked drawer of a desk in an unoccupied office next to

the public viewing area.

In addition, the Archivist advised that the last deposit made by the Archives was back in

September 11, 2014 for $245. This is not in line with cash handling best practice which

requires the timely processing of receipts.



Recommendation 5.2

To help strengthen controls over revenue and cash on hand management should:

i. request a cash float from the Department of Finance and Administration and

deposit the cash on hand when the float is received.

ii. move the cashbox to the Archivist’s office and keep it in a locked filing cabinet or

other secure area.

iii. ensure that cash receipts are deposited in a timely manner.


Our office will review the current practice of handling cash and will ensure that the

recommendations are implemented.

Conclusion 5.2






Section 6 – Storage of City’s Art Collection

Issue 6.1 – Art Collection

Staff indicated that due to a lack of space, many pieces of the City’s art collection are

stored in the same rooms as the Archives records. Some pieces are placed on the floor

leaned up against the walls. With the staff having to visit these rooms on a daily basis,

there is a risk that some pieces may get damaged.

Recommendation 6.1

Management should store the art collection in a room separate from the Archives records

and with less traffic to minimize the risk of damage.


We will review the current art collection and consider all available options to ensure it is

stored in a manner that minimizes damage.

Conclusion 6.1





Appendix A

Appraisals Listing (Archives)

(October 05, 2016)

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTAL RECORDS

Engineering: RG 13-01 and RG 19-01

To do: About 50 boxes 2001-2004 files (yellow room and hallway)

To do: 43 Boxes of Harbour Clean up files (Hallway)

Accruals: RM 2005-2007 due in 2017 (50-70 boxes per year for about 200 in total for 3

years)

City Clerk: RG 01-01

To do: Caught up

Accruals: RM about 10 boxes of 2009 General files due in 2017

Corporate Services:

To do: 2 boxes of general admin 2000-2001 files (green room)

Accruals: RM 2 boxes of 2008 files due

Legal: RG 09-01

To do: 2 boxes of General files (2007) (yellow)

5 boxes of Real Estate files (hallway)

20 boxes of civic centre files (hallway)

Accruals: RM about 16 boxes of 2007 general files

Accruals: About 5 boxes of real estate files

Tourism:

To do: 1 box 2007 and 1 box 2011 files

Accruals: RM about 20 boxes of 2004 to 2008 general files due when move

Building:

To do: 93 boxes of 2006 Bld inspection (B1 files) (Green and yellow rooms)

*Most of these will be kept so a lot of data entry*

Accruals: RM About 56 boxes of 2007 and 39 boxes 2008 files due when move to Terra

Nova Road

**Close to 100 boxes of these received each year**

To do: 3 boxes of bld general files

Accruals: RM 3 boxes 2007 and 3 boxes 2008 due in 2017

**About 4-6 boxes of these received each year

To do: 3 boxes of Bld plumbing and electrical permits

Accruals: 3 boxes 2007 and 2008 due upon move

**Many small files… a lot of data entry required on these**

To do: 2 boxes of 2008 Complaint files (Green room) and 16 boxes of 2015/2016

Complaint files (Yellow room)

Accruals: Will be caught up then



Human Resources:

To do: 1 box of general files (yellow room)

Accruals: HR 1 box a year

Mayor’s Office:

To do: 5 boxes of general 2006-2007 files (Green room)

Accruals: HR 3 boxes for 2008 and 2 for 2009 due when move

Finance (RG 05-01):

To do: 3 boxes of 2003 files (Green room)

Accruals: RM about 15 boxes (Bob Bursey files) due upon move

Accruals: Maybe 1 or 2 boxes of director’s files

Public Works:

To do: 20 boxes of 2005-2006 general files (Green room)

Accruals: RM about 30 boxes of 2007-2008 files due when move

Recreation:

To do: 9 boxes of general 2000 files (Green room)

Accruals: RM about 10-15 boxes of 2001-2008 files

To do: 6 boxes of Mew Centre files (Green room)

Accruals: RM about 30 boxes due in 2017

Taxi Inspections:

****To do: 4 boxes to review – Not generally kept anymore****** (green room)

Accruals: RM about 2 in 2008 and 3 in 2010

---------------------

OTHER:

Maps:

About 200-300 maps that need to be catalogued. The majority of these were brought

over here from City Hall when we moved in 2002.

Photographs:

These 3000-4000 (or more) photos are a combination of donations from residents and

City Departments/employees. Many were brought over here from City Hall when we

moved in 2002.

Private collections/donations:

Close to 30 collections of varying sizes (from 1 folder to 6 boxes) that need to be

apprised and catalogued.

There were about 25 collections/items that were brought over from City Hall when the

Archives moved from City Hall to RCM in 2002. These collections/items were placed on

a shelf in one of the storage rooms with the intent of conducting an appraisal. This was

never done.



Appendix B

Records Analyst advised that the following files need to be reviewed in Records

Management before she can send them to the Archivist for appraisement:

Engineering: 4 years of boxes to be delivered to RM

Public Works: 4 years of boxes to be delivered to RM

City Clerk: ½ year of boxes to be delivered to RM

Recreation: 2 years of boxes to be delivered to RM

Payroll: 3 years of boxes to be delivered to RM

These records are separate from those (Finance, Recreation, etc.) in storage near the

mailroom at City Hall. The above records need to be recorded in the database while the

records in storage by the mailroom are already catalogued.

One of the problems is that there is not enough room in the Archives storage area to

handle the departmental files from Records Management. These files have to be

appraised by the Archivist.

The records Analyst estimates that it would take approximately 3 months to get caught up

if all the files in departments were sent to her and they could be stored in her area.

End of Report

Follow-up Summary Report: Windsor Lake Assignment # F17-01


To: Chair & Committee Members, Audit & Accountability Committee

Date: May 2, 2017

Areas Responsible: LynnAnn Winsor, DCM – Public Works

Andrew Niblock, Director – Environmental Services

Keith Barrett, Director Corporate Information Services

The table below summarizes the pending issues from the Internal Audit of Windsor Lake

#15-01.

Recommendation Status Update Date

1.2 (iii) Management of both

divisions should continue with their

discussions regarding additional

services that can be provided by the

Information Services Division and

ensure that they look at, at least, the

following items:

ensuring the facility is in

compliance with IS Division

policies and procedures and best

practices where practical (reasons

for non-compliance should be

documented and approved by senior

management)

Information Services:

In reviewing the existing IS IT

policies it has been determined that

a number of these policies are

outdated and need to be revised. As

these policies are updated, IS will

Work with Water and Waste Water

as well as other City Departments to

seek their input and conformity to

the IT policies.

Internal Audit Comment:

As a comprehensive update of all

policies will take some time, it will

be outside Internal Audit's follow-

up period. Therefore, as

management has agreed to the

recommendation, it is suggested to

the committee to close this

recommendation.

Pending




3.1 (iv) In order to improve

procedures and controls in the Lab

and help ensure compliance with the

Permit to Operate, management

should:

continue with the development of

the written procedures for the Lab

and, when completed, submit them

to the appropriate governance

committee of Council for their

review and approval.

Management is proceeding to have

the City Laboratories become

“accredited” which is a means of

determining the technical

competence of laboratories to

perform specific types of testing,

measurement and calibration. It is a

requirement of accreditation that all

procedures have to be documented

and approved. This is a lengthy

process and the earliest completion

date is 2020.

Internal Audit Comment:

As management has agreed to the

recommendation, it is suggested to

the committee that the

recommendation be closed.

Pending

4.1 (i) In order to improve the above

issues (Protection of Watershed &

Plant Assets), management should:

determine if it is practical to place a

fence, guard rail, or some other

natural barrier in the locations noted

above to prevent cars from stopping.

Management advised they will be

having a guard rail installed along

Windsor Lake.

Sep 2017

4.1 (ii) In order to improve the

above issues (Protection of

Watershed & Plant Assets),

management should:

contact the Office of the City

Solicitor to determine if

snowmobiling is a punishable

offence in the watershed and, if so,

add it to the signs.

To be implemented by September

2017.

Sep 2017

4.1 (iii) In order to improve the


Watershed & Plant Assts),

management should:

consider replacing the signs with

larger signs that are easier to read

from a distance.

To be implemented by September

2017.

Sep 2017




4.1 (iv) In order to improve the


Watershed & Plant Assets),

management should:

find a more appropriate location to

store the items currently situated in

the Lower Lift Pump Station and

trailer to decrease the risks of injury

to employees and damage to

equipment, while also ensuring the

items are easily accessible, if

needed, to respond to an emergency.

Capital projects budget has not been

approved as of March 17, 2017.

June 2017

4.3 Management should consider

installing security cameras at the

main facility, lift stations, pump

houses, reservoirs, etc., so that they

can better monitor activities around

these areas.

Management noted that the tender is

being prepared and will be issued in

2017.

Sep 2017

The following table summarizes the current status of all issues identified in the Internal

Audit of Windsor Lake #15-01.

Total Recommendations Closed Pending

32 25 (78%) 7 (22%)



The Table below summarizes the closed issues from the Internal Audit of Windsor Lake

#15-01.


1.1 To ensure that the Windsor Lake

Water Treatment Facility is in

compliance with Section 38 of the

Water Resources Act, SNL 2002

cW-4.01, management should

obtain a new Permit to Operate from

the Department of Environment and

Conservation, Water Resources

Management Division.

Completed Implemented

Closed

1.2 (i) Management of both






following items:

cost/benefit analysis of having the

IS Division perform some of the

duties now being performed by

consultants/contractors.


Closed

1.2 (ii) Management of both






following items:

security concerns around the

SCADA system and other systems

and computer equipment in the

facility.

The Water and Waste Water

Division had an audit of the

SCADA System performed by

Lofty Perch consultants. IS have

reviewed the report and have

identified some potential areas

where we may be able to provide

services. A meeting is scheduled

with the Director, Environmental

Services to discuss further.

Implemented

Closed




1.3 In order to assist in determining

trends in problems associated with

plant equipment and other processes

and controls, management should

periodically review the SCADA

system alarms/alerts reports and

sign and date them. The signed

reports should be maintained on-site

for a period of time to be

determined by management with a

suggested period of at least the

current year plus the previous two

years.


Closed

1.4 (i) To help ensure accountability

of the work performed and to

provide an adequate audit trail,

management should:

initial/sign and date the logbooks

and documents to indicate their

review and accountability.


Closed

1.4 (ii) To help ensure

accountability of the work

performed and to provide an

adequate audit trail, management

should:

request external service providers to

sign and date documents.


Closed

1.4 (iii) To help ensure

accountability of the work

performed and to provide an

adequate audit trail, management

should:

ensure that all work (inspection and

replacement of the backflow

prevention devices) performed by

the external contractor is checked by

a City employee. The Reports

should be signed by the City

employee and/or management.


Closed




1.5 (i) To further improve the safety

aspects of the facility management

should ensure that:

the Certificate of Inspection for the

fire alarm is current at all times.


Closed

1.5 (ii) To further improve the

safety aspects of the facility

management should ensure that:

the Certficate of Analysis is

signed/initialed and dated by a

supervisor or manager.


Closed

1.6 In order to ensure compliance

with the permit, management should

contact the Department of

Environment and Conservation

advising that the daily flow rate has

been increased to 87,000 m3 and

request a revised permit.

Furthermore, in the future, any

planned increases in the daily rate

above the amount recorded in the

permit should be reported to the

Department of Environment in case

a revised permit is required.


Closed

2.1 (i) In order to ensure that all

required preventative maintenance

is performed in line with the

manufacturer’s guidelines and that

management is in compliance with

Clause 2 of the General section of

the Permit to Operate management

should:

prepare a consolidated preventive

maintenance schedule for, at least,

all critical equipment at the facility

that requires preventative

maintenance.


Closed




2.1 (ii) In order to ensure that all







should:

develop a log to track all

maintenance activities performed,

including who performed the

maintenance, what work was

performed, and the date it was

completed.


Closed

2.1 (iii) In order to ensure that all







should:

review the log on a regular basis to

ensure that the scheduled

maintenance per the consolidated

schedule is being completed on a

timely basis and sign and date the

log to provide evidence that the

review was performed.


Closed

2.2 Management should prepare an

inventory listing of spare parts,

including critical components, and

ensure that it is properly maintained.


Closed




2.3 (i) In an effort to reduce

unexpected and unplanned outlays

of cash for the replacement of

critical/major equipment at the

Windsor Lake Water Treatment

Facility management should:

develop a listing of critical/major

equipment (defined as equipment

with a replacement cost of, at least,

$25,000) at the facility and

associated pumping stations. The

listing should include the estimated

replacement cost, the current years

in service, and the estimated life

expectancy for each piece of

equipment.


Closed

2.3 (ii) In an effort to reduce






request that the City’s Department

of Financial Management set up an

equipment reserve based on the

information in the listing.


Closed

2.3 (iii) In an effort to reduce






update the listing on a yearly basis.


Closed




3.1 (i) In order to improve




should:

determine the appropriate level of

water sampling to perform that will,

at a minimum, meet the Guidelines

for Canadian Drinking Water

Quality, while also providing

quality drinking water at the lowest

cost.


Closed

3.1 (ii) In order to improve




should:

ensure the entries on the Laboratory

Services Bench Data Sheets and in

the Water Trax System are accurate

by having a management employee

or designate review the entries.


Closed

3.1 (iii) In order to improve




should:

ensure explanations of how the

alerts are resolved are recorded and

maintained. Alerts should be closed

at the management level to ensure

they are aware and have approved

the resolution of all alerts.

Completed

Implemented

Closed

4.2 (i) In order to improve the

weekly site security inspection

process management should:

ensure that all Weekly Site Security

Inspection Reports are retained in a

file.


Closed




4.2 (ii) In order to improve the



develop a mechanism to ensure that

all concerns raised have been acted

upon and an audit trail exits for the

concern identified and its resolution.


Closed

4.2 (iii) In order to improve the



ensure that the “Building Security

System Test” is completed.


Closed

5.1 Management should track

employee training by hour and

ensure that each employee receives

the minimum of 24 hours of training

each year required under the Permit.


Closed

5.2 Facility management should

meet with the Manager, Emergency

Preparedness/Business Continuity to

discuss if and when a test of the

chlorine and oil spills plan can be

conducted.


Closed

Date: May 2, 2017

To: Audit & Accountability Committee Chair and Members

From: Sean Janes, CPA, CMA, CIA, CFE


Re: 2016 Audit Activity

Below is an outline of the activities undertaken by the Internal Audit Division for the year 2016. This is

for the Committees information.

Audit Reports

Presentation of the Windsor Lake Water Treatment Plant report

Completion of Fieldwork & Presentation of the Commercial Property Tax Allowance report

Planning and Fieldwork (90%) of the Non-Profit Housing report

Planning and Fieldwork (70%) of the Municipal Archives report

Special Reports

Planning, Fieldwork and Report completed for Best Practices in Municipal Civil Wedding

Ceremonies special project

Planning, Fieldwork and Report completed for the Review of Retirement Packages special

project.

Special Projects

Research into Canadian Municipal Fraud Policies

Follow-up Activity

Inspection Services – 56 Recommendations

Maintenance of Roads and Sidewalks – 9 Recommendations

Construction & Capital Projects – 7 Recommendations

Recreation Division – 65 Recommendations

Fire Prevention – 9 Recommendations

Salary Administration – 6 Recommendations

Receiving, Stores and Issuing – 8 Recommendations

Total of 160 recommendations followed up

Professional Development

Government Finance Officers Association Annual Conference (Dave)

Various Seminars & Webinars (Sean & Dave)

Sean Janes, CPA, CMA, CIA, CFE


AGENDA Audit & Accountability Committee · The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy...

Documents

Transcript of AGENDA Audit & Accountability Committee · The Manager – Organizational Performance & Strategy...