THOMPSON: CITY OVERPAID $1 MILLION TO SHELTER GROUP IN QUEENS

New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr. speaks at a June 22, 2006 news conference announcing that the City overpaid more than $1 million to Homes for the Homeless (HFH) for services provided at the Saratoga Family Inn in Jamaica, Queens. Pictured (l to r) are Thompson and John Graham, Deputy Comptroller for Audits, Accountancy and Contracts. Photo credit: Marla Maritzer

View Audit

The City’s Department of Homeless Services (DHS) overpaid the non-profit organization Homes for the Homeless (HFH) more than $1 million for services provided at the Saratoga Family Inn in Jamaica, Queens, according to an audit released today by Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr.

HFH also failed to provide key social services mandated under the contract, which totaled more than $7.2 million for Fiscal Year 2004.

Under the contract, DHS was required to pay HFH for use of 222 rooms at the Saratoga Family Inn and for meals and services including health screenings, counseling, recreation, child-care services, as well as assistance in finding permanent housing and employment.

Thompson’s audit revealed that, in fact DHS paid for HFH’s expenses to run the entire 255-room complex. The audit found that through an agreement between DHS and HFH for which there was no documentation, the City had already paid HFH more than $890,000 to use the additional 33 rooms at the Inn that were not covered under the contract.

“Not only did DHS fail to monitor its payments for the use of the Saratoga Family Inn, it also failed to ensure that its clients got the important services they needed,” Thompson said. “Also, it is troubling that DHS continues to engage in unregistered, handshake agreements with vendors.”

In October 2003, DHS agreed to Thompson’s call to end the agency’s practice of engaging with vendors without going through approved procurement processes.

The audit’s main findings include:

• DHS overpaid HFH $1,055,339 in Fiscal Year 2004 for the following services unrelated to the Saratoga contract:
  • DHS paid real estate taxes of $1,605 for property adjacent to the Inn owned by HFH;
  • DHS paid $136,879 for legal services associated with HFH’s attempts to obtain a zoning variance;
  • DHS paid $916,855 for rooms not covered by the contract. (Through an arrangement which DHS was unable to document for auditors, the City had already paid HFH more than $890,000 for the use of these non-contract rooms.)
• HFH did not consistently provide the following social services:
  • Health screening documentation
    Biweekly client assessment interviews
  • Individualized living plan implementation
    Child care
  • Assistance in finding permanent homes
  • Assistance in obtaining employment
• HFH also violated contract provisions regarding conflict of interest by hiring one of its board members to obtain a zoning variance.
• DHS failed to provide a written agreement governing the use of the 33 non-contract rooms.

• Thompson called on Mayor Michael Bloomberg to put an end to the Department’s practice of engaging in offline contracts.
• Thompson said: “Back in 2003, Mayor Bloomberg made the following statement when he announced contract reforms with the Department of Homeless Services: ‘Good government means transparent management and accountability, and bringing more facilities into a formal contracting process will be better from every perspective.’
• Clearly, this agency has a demonstrated history of disregard for City procurement rules. I urge Mayor Bloomberg to stop DHS from flouting the very regulations he upheld three years ago.”

In light of the Rent Guidelines Board’s recent preliminary decision to raise the cost of one-year and two-year leases for rent stabilized apartments, Thompson urged the Board to enact any increase at the low end of the proposed ranges. In a letter to the Board, Thompson wrote this decision is critical to protect City residents who require affordable housing.

"Rent stabilized housing is the only affordable housing resource left to many low and moderate-income tenants," Thompson wrote. "Despite our continuing efforts to compensate for the City’s dramatic loss of affordable housing, our City has not kept pace with its rapidly diminishing availability."

He mentioned that the Mitchell-Lama program, which has been extremely successful in providing affordable housing, has experienced substantial erosion as many buildings have begun to opt out of the program. In addition, some longstanding initiatives such as the 421-a program, no longer serve their intended purpose and now largely benefit owners of luxury housing. Once families have been priced out of their apartment, rent stabilized tenants have no other options. Currently, the market for rentals and co-ops/condos is so strong that owners are able to ask for rents and prices well above what the medium renter can afford—in every neighborhood of the City.

According to Thompson, the critical need for affordable housing affects every New Yorker’s quality of life and our City’s long-term economics viability. New York’s future depends upon our ability to ensure that middle and working class families can afford to live here.

THOMPSON AUDIT FINDS SOME IMPROVEMENT, SOME PROBLEMS AT ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL

Download the Complete Audit Report

Since an initial audit in 2002, Animal Care and Control of New York City (AC&C) has made improvements in sanitary conditions in the city’s animal shelters, but serious conditions remain, according to an audit released today by Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr.

Thompson’s audit found cleaner shelters overall and improved efforts to encourage adoptions. These findings show significant progress from the 2002 audit, which found compelling evidence of animal mistreatment and unsanitary conditions.

Today’s audit also shows, however, that concerns persist about the health of the animals. Sick animals continue to be housed with healthy animals, and the dogs in the Manhattan and Brooklyn shelters are not exercised regularly.

Thompson’s audit also found that security at the shelters appeared to be lax during the auditors’ visits. In a survey used by the auditors, clients reported that they handled animals without any assistance from shelter volunteers or staff. Also, AC&C could not document that it undertook investigations of animals identified as missing from the shelters.

Although AC&C was able to document stepped-up efforts to encourage animal adoptions, the auditors could not verify that adoptions have increased.

“Our audit of AC&C in 2002 found evidence of animal neglect and mistreatment. As a result of that audit, AC&C took significant steps to overhaul its operations to put the well-being of the animals first,” Thompson said. “The result of these efforts is reflected in today’s audit, which finds many important improvements. There is still a long way to go and many serious problems to address, but this audit shows a level of commitment from AC&C to fulfill its mission to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of pets in New York City.”

Today’s audit evaluated the conditions under which animals are sheltered by AC&C and the level and success of AC&C’s efforts to promote animal adoptions from its shelters during the period July 2004 through March 2006.

In addition, two surveys were conducted to obtain opinions from the public concerning their experiences with AC&C. The first survey was sent to 300 randomly selected customers. The second was sent to 100 pet rescue organizations who had rescued 10 or more dogs and cats from AC&C.

The audit findings include:

• Overall AC&C shelter conditions are adequate, and AC&C shelter staff is generally responsive to the needs of the animals. There was no evidence of animal abuse or mistreatment.

• Fifty-two percent (20,586) of the animals in AC&C’s care were euthanized in 2005. This represents a decrease of 13% from 2004.

• Almost all the animals observed had water and identification cards.

• Efforts should be made to improve cleaning of adoption wards, spot cleaning, and properly drying floors.

• AC&C did not adequately isolate sick animals from healthy animals, as required by its contract with the City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH). This condition was also cited in the Comptroller’s 2002 audit.

• Customers and pet rescue organizations expressed concern about the health of the animals they receive from AC&C. Medical care of the animals was the only area in which pet rescue organizations rated AC&C’s services slightly below average; seven of the 29 organizations that rated AC&C medical care gave it the lowest possible rating (1).

• Dogs in the Manhattan and Brooklyn shelters are not exercised regularly, if at all. The Comptroller’s 2002 audit also cited this deficiency. AC&C maintained that it could not use its dog runs at the Manhattan shelter because of noise complaints, but could not explain why the Brooklyn runs were not used.

• Shelter security needs to be improved. By allowing visitors to handle animals on their own and to walk unaccompanied throughout the shelter, there is a potential that members of the public can injure themselves, staff members or the animals. In addition, animal pharmaceuticals can be stolen.

• AC&C had no documentation that it investigated animals that were identified as missing from its shelters.

• Although AC&C has improved its adoption efforts, it is still hampered by the fact that it does not provide adoption services at its Queens and Bronx facilities.

• Although AC&C’s adoption numbers appear to have increased and its rate of euthanasia appears to have declined, auditors were unable to verify the adoption outcome statistics from AC&C’s computer system or via original adoption agreements. Original documents for 30 percent of the sampled adoptions were unavailable.

• AC&C lacks a required customer service quality-assurance program.

AC&C and DOHMH officials generally agreed with the audit’s findings and 13 recommendations.