2. AUDIT OF MONITORING ELIGIBILITY FOR SOCIAL HOUSING
SUBSIDIES AND THE ROLE OF THE HOUSING BRANCH – REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL
VÉRIFICATION DE
LA SURVEILLANCE DE L’ADMISSIBILITÉ AUX SUBVENTIONS RELATIVES AUX LOGEMENTS
SOCIAUX ET RÔLE DE LA DIRECTION DU LOGEMENT - RENVOI DU CONSEIL |
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Request
the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the eligibility assessment and
on-going monitoring processes of the Service Manager or designate for social
housing applicants and tenants as part of the 2008 work plan; and,
2. Request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch as part of his 2008 workplan.
For the
Information of Council
That the following be direction to staff:
That
the Auditor General and Housing Management staff ensure that the protocol
developed for social housing eligibility audit include safeguards to respect
vulnerable clients’ rights and that any intrusion into private lives be carried
out with full disclosure at the onset.
RECOMMENDATION DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil :
1. Demande au vérificateur général de la Ville d’effectuer une
vérification des processus d’évaluation de l’admissibilité et de surveillance
continue appliqués par le gestionnaire de service ou son délégué pour les
demandeurs et les locataires de logements sociaux dans le cadre du plan de
travail de 2008; et,
2. Charge le vérificateur général de mener une vérification du
rôle et du mandat de la Direction du logement dans le cadre de son plan de
travail de 2008.
Pour la gouverne du Conseil
Que le personnel soit avisé de
l’énoncé suivant :
Que le
vérificateur général et l’équipe de gestion de la Direction du logement
veillent à ce que le protocole élaboré aux fins de la vérification de
l’admissibilité au logement social comprenne des mesures de protection visant à
faire respecter les droits des clients vulnérables et que toute intrusion dans
la vie privée desdites personnes soit faite sur la base d’une divulgation
complète dès le début.
DOCUMENTATION
1.
Deputy City Manager, Community and
Protective Services Department report dated 14 April 2008 (ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0018).
2. Extract
of Draft Minutes, 1 May 2008.
Report to / Rapport au:
Community and Protective Services Committee
Comité des services communautaires et de
protection
14 April 2008 / le 14 avril 2008
Coordonnatrice de comité
|
City-Wide/ à l'échelle de la Ville |
Ref N°: ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0018 |
SUBJECT: AUDIT OF MONITORING ELIGIBILITY FOR SOCIAL
HOUSING SUBSIDIES AND THE ROLE OF THE HOUSING BRANCH – REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL
OBJET: Vérification
de la surveillance de l’admissibilité aux subventions relatives aux logements
sociaux ET RÔLE DE LA DIRECTION DU LOGEMENT - RENVOI DU CONSEIL
That the Community and Protective
Services Committee consider the following Motion for referral back to Council:
WHEREAS the
City of Ottawa is committed to providing social housing to as many of its
citizens who are eligible for assistance as possible;
AND WHEREAS
there are now over 10,000 people awaiting access to social housing in the City;
AND WHEREAS
concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the current process to
monitor income levels of tenants of social housing and ensure continued
eligibility for subsidized housing;
AND WHEREAS
questions have been raised regarding the respective roles and responsibilities
of the City’s Housing Branch versus the providers of social housing;
THEREFORE BE
IT RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the
eligibility assessment and on-going monitoring processes of the Service Manager
or designate for social housing applicants and tenants as part of the 2008 work
plan;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch as part of his 2008 workplan.
Que le Comité des services communautaires et de
protection examine la motion avant d’en référer au Conseil :
ATTENDU QUE la Ville d'Ottawa s’est engagée à
offrir des logements sociaux au plus grand nombre de résidents admissibles
possible;
ATTENDU QU’à l’heure actuelle, plus de 10 000 personnes sont en attente
d’un logement social dans la ville;
ATTENDU QUE des préoccupations ont été exprimées
en ce qui touche l’efficacité du processus actuellement utilisé pour surveiller
les revenus des locataires de logements sociaux et s’assurer qu’ils demeurent
admissibles aux logements subventionnés;
ATTENDU QUE des questions ont été soulevées au
sujet des rôles et des responsabilités de la Direction du logement de la Ville
par rapport à ceux des fournisseurs de logements sociaux;
IL EST DÉCIDÉ QUE le Conseil demandera au
vérificateur général de la Ville d’effectuer une vérification des processus
d’évaluation de l’admissibilité et de surveillance continue appliqués par le
gestionnaire de service ou son délégué pour les demandeurs et les locataires de
logements sociaux dans le cadre du plan de travail de 2008;
ET QUE le Conseil chargera le vérificateur général
de mener une vérification du rôle et du mandat de la Direction du logement dans
le cadre de son plan de travail de 2008.
WhereaS the Housing Department has
undertaken an audit of eligibility by KPMG;
AND WHEREAS the Province has
prescriptive rules and regulations for eligibility which may be impacted by
Provincial reform being considered by the Provincial-Municipal Review; and,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the
Motion be deferred to no later than mid-July 2008 and at the same time as the
KPMG review comes to Community and Protective Services Committee for
discussion.
As per the Motion above, the Auditor General was to report back to the Committee and Council by July 2008.
CONSULTATION
Staff support Council’s direction on Audits of social housing process, however would recommend that Council provide direction on the scope of the recommended audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch, given that the Branch is involved in the delivery of services (new development, homeless support services, homeless shelter operations) beyond the role of Service Manager under the Social Housing Reform Act.
Office of the Auditor General
The
KPMG report evaluates local policies and priorities for social housing. Although Chapter 5 does comment on some
aspects of the income eligibility and administration rules, it deals primarily
with the appeals process. As such, this
report does not provide an independent assessment of the adequacy and
effectiveness of the eligibility review and monitoring process. It therefore does not address the areas
intended to be examined by the deferred motion.
The intent of the original motion was for the OAG to undertake an audit of the full role of the Housing Branch. As a part of the regular audit process, the scope would be determined during the planning phase and as such the Auditor General recommends that it not be pre-determined at this time.
Should Council approve the motion, the additional audits would be conducted, within the existing resources of the OAG, during 2008. The addition of these new audits would not have an impact on the work already planned by the OAG related to the Ottawa Community Housing Corporation.
Document 1 - Audit of Monitoring Eligibility for Social Housing Subsidies –
Referral From Council (ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0010)
Document 2 - Extract of Minute, 6 March 2008
The recommendation of the Community and Protective Services Committee will rise to Council.
DOCUMENT 1
Report to / Rapport au:
Comité des services communautaires et de
protection
28 February 2008 / le 28 février 2008
Submitted by / Soumis par: City Council /
Conseil municipal
|
City-Wide/ à l'échelle de la Ville |
|
Ref N°: ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0010 |
SUBJECT: AUDIT OF MONITORING ELIGIBILITY FOR SOCIAL
HOUSING SUBSIDIES – REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL
OBJET: Vérification
de la surveillance de l’admissibilité aux subventions relatives aux logements
sociaux – RENVOI
DU CONSEIL
Pursuant to Section 77(12) of the Procedure By-law,
that the Community and Protective Services Committee waive the procedures to
consider the following:
That the Community and Protective
Services Committee consider the following Motion for referral back to Council:
WHEREAS the
City of Ottawa is committed to providing social housing to as many of its
citizens who are eligible for assistance as possible;
AND WHEREAS
there are now over 10,000 people awaiting access to social housing in the City;
AND WHEREAS
concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the current process to
monitor income levels of tenants of social housing and ensure continued
eligibility for subsidized housing;
AND WHEREAS
questions have been raised regarding the respective roles and responsibilities
of the City’s Housing Branch versus the providers of social housing;
THEREFORE BE
IT RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the
eligibility assessment and on-going monitoring processes of the Service Manager
or designate for social housing applicants and tenants as part of the 2008 work
plan;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch as part of his 2008 workplan.
Conformément
à l’article 77(12) du Règlement de procédures, que le Comité des services
communautaires et de protection déroge aux procédures afin d’examiner ce qui
suit :
Que le Comité des services communautaires et de
protection examine la motion avant d’en référer au Conseil :
ATTENDU QUE la Ville d'Ottawa s’est engagée à
offrir des logements sociaux au plus grand nombre de résidents admissibles
possible;
ATTENDU QU’à l’heure actuelle, plus de 10 000 personnes sont en attente
d’un logement social dans la ville;
ATTENDU QUE des préoccupations ont été exprimées
en ce qui touche l’efficacité du processus actuellement utilisé pour surveiller
les revenus des locataires de logements sociaux et s’assurer qu’ils demeurent
admissibles aux logements subventionnés;
ATTENDU QUE des questions ont été soulevées au
sujet des rôles et des responsabilités de la Direction du logement de la Ville
par rapport à ceux des fournisseurs de logements sociaux;
IL EST DÉCIDÉ QUE le Conseil demandera au
vérificateur général de la Ville d’effectuer une vérification des processus
d’évaluation de l’admissibilité et de surveillance continue appliqués par le
gestionnaire de service ou son délégué pour les demandeurs et les locataires de
logements sociaux dans le cadre du plan de travail de 2008;
ET QUE le Conseil chargera le vérificateur général
de mener une vérification du rôle et du mandat de la Direction du logement dans
le cadre de son plan de travail de 2008.
The City is committed to providing social housing to as many of its citizens who are eligible for assistance as possible. Concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the current process to monitor income levels of tenants of social housing and ensure continued eligibility for subsidized housing. Questions have also been raised regarding the respective roles and responsibilities of the City’s Housing Branch versus the providers of social housing.
CONSULTATION
The process for determining and monitoring eligibility for social housing subsidies is mandated under Provincial legislation - the Social Housing Reform Act (SHRA).
The City delegated responsibility for the application, waiting list (including local and provincial priority status for urgent needs) and housing offers part of the process to the Social Housing Registry.
The subsidy eligibility component is done by housing providers at the time of tenant intake and refers to assessing household income to determine how much that household is expected to pay towards their rent, and thus if and how much subsidy is required.
Subsidies cover the difference between what the housing unit costs the housing provider to operate (utilities, taxes, maintenance, etc.) and what low-income tenants can afford to pay based on 30% of their gross household income. The SHRA mandates that tenants are to report changes in household composition and/or income, which can affect the level of subsidy provided. All subsidized tenants are also required to provide annual proof of income to their provider, and rents are adjusted accordingly. If misrepresentation is proven, there are defined penalities and processes to redress any arrears that may have resulted. Ultimately, tenants may lose their subsidies, which may lead to eviction due to failure to pay the full rent. Tenants in arrears to a provider are disqualified from accessing subsidized housing elsewhere unless they agree to a repayment program to redress the arrears.
All 55 of the City’s housing providers are privately held not for profit corporations, including Ottawa Community Housing (OCH), although the City is the sole shareholder of OCH.
The Housing Branch role as Service Manager is to monitor and ensure that providers and the Registry undertake their roles in accordance with the legislation. We do on-site operational reviews and they provide annual information returns (AIRs) that document both fiscal and operational compliance with legislation and the various operating agreements, including eligibility protocols. The City is audited by the Province on that compliance.
Office of the Auditor General
The requested audits represent an addition to the 2008 work plan of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG). Although the Auditor General determines the content of the annual work plan independently, Council can request additions to it.
Should Council approve the motion, the additional audits would be conducted, within the existing resources of the OAG, during 2008. The addition of these new audits would not have an impact on the work already planned by the OAG related to the Ottawa Community Housing Corporation.
The recommendation of the Community and Protective Services Committee will rise to Council.
DOCUMENT 2
AUDIT OF MONITORING ELIGIBILITY FOR
SOCIAL HOUSING SUBSIDIES – REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL
Vérification
de la surveillance de l’admissibilité aux subventions relatives aux logements
sociaux – RENVOI DU
CONSEIL
ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0010 city-wide / À l’Échelle de la ville
At the outset and responding to a request by the Committee Chair,
Russell Mawby, Director of Housing advised that the Social Housing Reform
Act was put in place during the 1990’s and is a very prescriptive
legislation that is fundamentally about fraud.
The opportunity to review the processes in place is good and is very
much focused on looking at a very strong legislative process that the City is
in fact accountable as a municipality. The
City is audited by the province with regards to compliance with that
legislation.
Debbie Barton, Ottawa Social Housing Network made
the following comments:
·
Council had
decided to leave the administration of waiting lists and rent-geared-to-income
assistance with the registry and social housing providers, where it had been
for many years. This decision was
recently reviewed by KPMG (2007) and they are recommending no change in their
draft report
·
housing providers
undergo operational reviews from the Housing Branch on a regular basis and each
provider has an annual, independent audit process, which includes a review of
tenant files and rent calculations. All
of these processes provide a significant accountability structure imbedded
within the system of social housing
·
if the purpose of
the proposed audit is to ensure that systems in place are appropriate and
adequate in assessing initial and ongoing eligibility for subsidized housing,
they would welcome such a review. They
feel confident that the outcome will clearly demonstrate that housing
providers’ commitment to due diligence
·
if the Motion is
approved, it is suggested that the current reviews in place (provincial,
municipal and provider audits) form part of that analysis to help reduce
replicating work already done by auditors and senior administrators.
Ms. Barton wondered if the extent of the
problem is known or whether the request for the audit is a reaction to
anecdotal information. She recalled
that in 2007, 17 tenants (less than 2% of their subsidized tenant population)
in her own organization did not report increased income on a timely basis and
of those, 14 entered into repayment agreements and three had their subsidy
withdrawn and were obliged to pay the full market rent. She explained that it was through their
annual review of their income that the difference was discovered and through a
variety of proof such as pay stubs, income tax returns, et cetera, these
assessments are made. She did not know
whether or not such proof was prescribed by the province.
Ms. Barton requested that the Committee defer the request to the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch because there are two major provincial initiatives currently underway which could have a significant impact on their work. She indicated that provincially-lead task forces are looking at the services realignment and poverty reduction and these initiatives present great opportunity for the Network to effect true change in the way things are done. She emphasized that Housing branch staff need the time and the resources to provide information to these important initiatives. Given there is a possibility of significant change to the way that social housing is funded and administered, the Network suggests that Council await the results of the aforementioned initiatives before proceeding with such a review.
When asked by Councillor Feltmate what is entailed in the
KPMG report, Mr. Mawby indicated that the legislation is very prescriptive
about general access to social housing subsidies. Council has exercised it’s ability to define local
priorities/rules to accommodate specific issues and as a result, staff believe
there are some households that should have priority access to social housing,
i.e., the homeless, those with medical needs, urgent safety, et cetera. He went on to state that in 2007, the City
reviewed, with KPMG and their community partners, proposed changes to those
local priority rules. The Housing
Stakeholders Advisory Group has received the final KPMG draft report and once
staff have had a chance to work with their providers, the department will bring
a report to Committee.
Councillor Feltmate asked the Auditor General to comment
on the aforementioned report and whether there was duplication with what is
being requested in the Motion. Alain
Lalonde, Auditor General was not aware of the report referenced by the Director
and therefore could not comment on whether or not it would address what is being
raised in the Motion referred by Council.
He suggested he obtain a copy of Mr. Mawby’s report for review, with
comments to be provided to Council at the meeting in March. He did confirm that in any type of audit
conducted, they rely on other organizations’ work to ensure there is no duplication.
Given the other initiatives in play, Councillor Feltmate
proposed deferral of the Motion until the Committee receives the information
from KPMG (at the latest July) and that the Committee have the benefit of the
information from the province at that time as well.
Chair Deans presumed the Auditor General would review
that and come back when the Motion is again before the Committee, with his
views and recommendations with regards to whether he felt it was necessary to
continue with the original Motion from Council. Mr. Lalonde indicated his intention would be to review the report
prepared by KPMG.
When asked to describe how he would conduct the audit as
requested in the Motion, Mr. Lalonde indicated he would review the process
outlined by Ms. Barton to ensure these processes achieve the purpose to
determine the level of revenue.
Councillor Holmes suggested he could examine whether or not the proof of
revenue, as described by the delegation, is strict enough. Mr. Lalonde confirmed this and would also
review the consistency because he understood it could vary from one
organization to the next. Once that is
known, he would determine if they are applied consistently and then review what
kind of mechanism the organization has to check that and are they doing it
within the legal framework, et cetera.
Following that, they would talk to the Housing Branch about what they
are planning to do.
To the delegation, Councillor El-Chantiry asked if there
was a mechanism in place to review a clients’ income if they are self-employed
or if they receive additional income on the side in cash and there is no paper
trail. Ms. Barton confirmed they are
asked to provide an affidavit of income and then they follow up with an actual
audited statement from the assessment form for income tax. If the income was underestimated, there
would be adjustments done and a repayment schedule would be put in place. When asked by the councillor if there was a
mechanism in place to ensure the occupant of the house, for example, is the
same that is receiving the subsidy, Ms. Barton advised that they are governed
under several privacy acts and are not able to go into people’s homes. However, if information is brought to their
attention by a third party or it is suspected, they do have an obligation under
the Social Housing Reform Act to follow-up.
If they are not satisfied and believe there is additional income, they
can withdraw the subsidy and the client could appeal.
Moved by P. Feltmate
WhereaS the Housing
Department has undertaken an audit of eligibility by KPMG;
AND WHEREAS the Province
has prescriptive rules and regulations for eligibility which may be impacted by
Provincial reform being considered by the Provincial-Municipal Review; and,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
THAT the Motion be deferred to no later than mid-July 2008 and at the same time
as the KPMG review comes to Community and Protective Services Committee for
discussion.
CARRIED
AUDIT OF MONITORING ELIGIBILITY FOR SOCIAL HOUSING SUBSIDIES AND THE
ROLE OF THE HOUSING BRANCH - REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL
Vérification
de la surveillance de l’admissibilité aux subventions relatives aux logements
sociaux ET RÔLE DE LA DIRECTION DU LOGEMENT - RENVOI DU CONSEIL
ACS2008-CCS-CPS-0018 CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Linda Lalonde suggested that any monitoring of the eligibility for social housing subsidies be carried out in a very sensitive way to protect those living in social housing.
When asked why this item was back on the agenda so soon (original Committee direction had staff reporting back by July), Russell Mawby, Director of Housing advised that staff provided the Auditor General with a draft copy of the KPMG report on the local priorities review and it was his understanding that the report was not an audit process and did not affect the impact of the Motion put forward by the Committee in March. Alain Lalonde, Auditor General agreed that the report was a consulting assignment for KPMG and did not address the Motion. Based on these comments, Chair Deans explained that she had agreed to put it back on the agenda.
In response to further questions from Councillor Cullen with respect to the inherited system that was downloaded to the City and the social housing units that are managed by housing providers, Mr. Lalonde indicated that the purpose of the audit is to review the eligibility and monitoring process with a compliance audit, which will examine the rules that the various intervenors have to play and looking at the intent of the procedures. The second part of the audit relates to the role and responsibilities of the Housing Branch where scopes will be defined.
Councillor Feltmate was disappointed that the item was before Committee now because she had hoped the Committee would have had the benefit of the KPMG report and the report from the province before considering this referral Motion from Council. Responding to questions posed by the councillor, Mr. Mawby stated that the full scope of the social housing portfolio deliberately includes a number of households that are not receiving subsidies and his understanding of the specific question related to eligibility is related to those households who are in receipt of subsidy. The councillor noted the concerns about the issues being brought forward and whether they are accurate and whether all departments had to go through an audit process. Mr. Lalonde explained that part of his audit plan is to identify various areas and do an audit based on a rotational basis. He confirmed that the intention is to cover the entire city.
In response to further questions from Councillor Feltmate around scoping the eligibility rather than the entire role and mandate, Mr. Lalonde could not recommend that course of action because of the need to establish an audit plan; to scope it to a very narrow issue would be as much work as covering the entire branch and he preferred to do the same process as has been done with other branches.
Councillor Feltmate wondered what kind of protocols would be established to speak to clients and staff and Mr. Lalonde indicated that the first step is to speak with management about the processes and the limitation the City has vis-à-vis discussion with the tenants. He added that many of his discussions would be based on legal grounds. The councillor was concerned that more vulnerable tenants may feel threatened by the audit and wanted the process to reduce that threat as may be perceived by them. The Auditor General explained that during the audit they would have constant discussions and would be able to identify and understand those issues. He assured the councillor that they would take into consideration the people they are dealing with and recognize that there are very sensitive issues being considered. He confirmed the audit would not include interviewing tenants, but stated they would have to find ways in order to satisfy that portion of the Motion from Council.
That the Community and Protective Services Committee consider the
following Motion for referral back to Council:
WHEREAS the City of Ottawa is committed to providing social housing
to as many of its citizens who are eligible for assistance as possible;
AND WHEREAS there are now over 10,000 people awaiting access to
social housing in the City;
AND WHEREAS concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of
the current process to monitor income levels of tenants of social housing and
ensure continued eligibility for subsidized housing;
AND WHEREAS questions have been raised regarding the respective
roles and responsibilities of the City’s Housing Branch versus the providers of
social housing;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to
conduct an audit of the eligibility assessment and on-going monitoring
processes of the Service Manager or designate for social housing applicants and
tenants as part of the 2008 work plan;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council request the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the role and mandate of the Housing Branch as part of his 2008 workplan.
CARRIED
Moved by P. Feltmate
That
the following be a direction to staff:
That
the Auditor General and Housing Management staff ensure that the protocol
developed for social housing eligibility audit include safeguards to respect
vulnerable clients’ rights and that any intrusion into private lives be carried
out with full disclosure at the onset.
CARRIED