PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF OVERTIME IN THE SHERIFF S OFFICE

Transcription

1 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY PERFORMANCE AUDITOR PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF OVERTIME IN THE SHERIFF S OFFICE Prepared by: Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 DRA=

2 PROJECT SCOPE & OBJECTIVES On Februar y 10, 2016 Snohomish County Council passed Motion No directing Council staf f to issue a notice to proceed to the Of fice of the Per formance Auditor to complete a per formance audit of over time in the County Sherif f s Of fice (Audit Topic A.2 in the 2016 Audit Plan, Motion No ). The objective of this audit was to evaluate the use of over time in the Sherif f s Of fice, over time trends and administration, and alternative approaches that could be adopted to manage over time. This included identifying trends in over time usage, staf fing levels, and drivers of over time. The scope of this audit included an evaluation of existing practices, including a review of over time usage between Calendar Years

3 AUDIT METHODOLOGY To meet this objective, the SEC audit team per formed the following procedures: Inter viewed key Sherif f s Of fice personnel to determine the approach used by the Sherif f s Of fice to develop staf fing plans, allocate resources, and administer over time. Reviewed per tinent laws, rules, and labor agreements, as well as the recently completed staf fing study of patrol commissioned by the Sherif f s Of fice. Analyzed changes in demographics, workload indicators, over time budget -to-actual expenditure trends, management repor ts, and other tools used to manage over time during the audit period. Conducted benchmarking of peer law enforcement and corrections labor union agreements to identify scheduling practices and provisions related to over time. Tested a sample of over time expenditures during the audit period to assess whether established over time control and policies were followed and expenditures suppor ted. Audit fieldwork was per formed between April 1 and June 30 th, On August 3 rd, SEC discussed the repor t findings and recommendations in an exit conference with Sherif f s Of fice management. The Sherif f s Of fice responses were incorporated into the final draft. This audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 3

4 OVERVIEW This presentation is organized into two par ts: Audit Observations and Conclusions The Sheriff s Office has consistently exceeded overtime budget appropriations. Since 2015, the Sheriff s Office has implemented several changes, resulting in improvements over its control and management of overtime. Continued improvements are warranted, but some drivers of overtime are not fully within management s control. Recommendations 4

5 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS OVERTIME EXPENDITURES EXCEEDED BUDGET (SECTIONS C.1 AND D.1) In 2015, the Sheriff s Office actual general fund overtime expenditures exceeded the general fund modified overtime budget by $545,690. Law Enforcement: Between 2010 and 2015, the Law Enforcement general fund overtime budget appropriations remained relatively constant, decreasing approximately 4 percent, from $1.7 million in 2010 to $1.6 million in Despite decreases in budgetary appropriations for overtime, Law Enforcement general fund and special revenue overtime expenditures generally increased each year. Corrections: During the audit period, with the exception of 2011, actual Corrections overtime expenditures consistently exceeded appropriations, as illustrated in Figure 16. Overtime expenditures increased from more than $2.6 million in 2010 to nearly $3.3 million in 2015, an increase of 24 percent. 5

6 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO INCREASED OVERTIME (SECTIONS C.1, C.2, AND D.1) Several factors contributed to increased overtime expenditures over the audit period, some of which were within the Sheriff s Office control and others that were not. Specifically: Law Enforcement Natural Disaster New World System Training Retroactive Salary Increases Decreased non-contract law enforcement FTE, while workload increased, including uniform crime reporting data, dispatch calls, and population served Miscoded expenditures in County financial, such as longevity pay, shift differential pay, and specialty pay Inadequate budget authority for contract services overtime Corrections High Corrections Deputy vacancy rates Amendments to labor agreements including, retroactive salary increases, turnover pay, and additional vacation leave per shift New World System Training Lack of overtime data 6

7 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTINUED IMPROVEMENTS ARE WARRANTED (SECTION C.3) Several factors impacted Law Enforcement s usage of overtime and may continue to impact overtime: The County experienced significant revenue challenges over the past several years, which resulted in countywide budget reductions and mandatory salary savings. According to the Sheriff s Office, these cuts were taken from non-contract and non-grant funded positions as a reduction in contract services would also require a reduction in the associated revenue. From 2010 to 2015, the total Law Enforcement FTEs declined modestly, from 358 FTE in 2010 to 350 FTEs in 2015; non-contract FTEs declined 8 percent from 299 FTE in 2010 to 275 FTE in At the same time, workload indicators increased, with non-contract 911 calls increasing 9.5%, the population served increased 10.7%, and uniform crime statistics increased between 2% and 35%. The modified budget appropriation for contract services overtime was also consistently less than the amount required to meet contractual obligations, as shown below to 2015 Percent Change Modified Contract Overtime Budget Overtime per Contracts $217,790 $100,540 $213,177 $87,343 $110,693 $131, % $230,044 $227,412 $292,843 $290,517 $382,919 $418, % Variance ($12,254) ($126,872) ($79,666) ($203,174) ($272,226) ($286,767) 7

8 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS RECENT CHANGES IN CORRE CTI ONS OVERTIME MANAGEMENT (SECTION D.2) In the last two years of the audit period, Corrections management began reviewing its operations to identify areas where it could better manage resources and reduce the usage of overtime. The following adjustments were made either at the end of the audit period or after the audit period: Consolidating extra posts. Reduced shift bid availability. Used available staffing resources prior to extending shifts and calling staff in for overtime. Reduced Corrections Deputy vacancies from an average of 9 vacancies per month over the audit period to 4 vacancies, as shown below. Implemented practices to actively monitor overtime and hold management accountable. While Corrections has implemented changes that appear to be having a positive impact on the usage of overtime (see graph on next slide), some factors contributing to overtime are outside of the Sheriff s Office full control and will continue to impact Corrections overtime usage and costs. Specifically: Provisions in the labor agreement limit Sheriff s Office managements ability to adjust shift duration to meet workload demand. Although not required by FLSA and not a practice of other peer agencies, provisions in labor union agreements specify that turnover pay is paid at the overtime rate. In 2015, turnover pay was more than $410,000 and represented more than 12 percent of total overtime hours. 8

9 OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS RECENT CHANGES HAVE HAD A POSITIVE IMPACT (SECTION D.3) 2016 Corrections Overtime Hours vs. 5-Year Overtime Trend 5,777 5,411 5,453 5,368 4,973 4,986 5,083 4,700 4,755 4,717 4,518 4,762 4,799 4,723 4,807 4,659 4,191 4,139 4,326 4,165 4,158 4,230 4,100 3,555 3,597 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Prior 5-Year Monthly Average 2016 Budget 2016 Actual Worked per Month 2016 Monthly Projection 9

10 RECOMMENDATIONS (SECTIONS C.4 AND D.3) Based on this analysis, we recommend that the Sherif f s Of fice: Work with County Finance to: (1) Reclassify and move miscoded expenditures or fix the errors that occur during the data migration from the payroll system to the County financial system. (2) Implement cost accounting by functional area for overtime expenditures to allow the tracking of overtime expenditures with minimal manual processes. Require staff to consistently use Telestaff, including updating staff schedules and availability. Request budget appropriation for contract services overtime that are sufficient to meet contractual obligations. Work with the County to ensure budget appropriations reflect the full financial impact of negotiated salary and benefit increases, including the impact on overtime expenditures. Continue efforts to ensure overtime data is consistently categorized and captured. Continue current efforts to ensure Corrections Deputy vacancies are filled in a timely manner, reducing the need for overtime to meet workload created by vacancies. Consider negotiating future labor agreements to ensure they do not limit managements ability to adjust shift duration to meet workload demand, and to build turnover into the regular shift schedule paid at a straight time rate consistent with FLSA. 10

11 FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE AUDIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Per formance Audit Committee (PAC) met on September 26, 2016 to discuss this per formance audit. This included discussing: The procedures employed throughout this audit engagement. 11

12 Office of the County Performance Auditor Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting George Skiles, Director Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting 455 Capitol Mall, Suite 700 Sacramento, CA (916)