Travis County Commssioners Court
October 14, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 18
Morning Discussion
18. Consider and take appropriate action on staff recommendations for purchase of social services from community-based organizations
>> good morning.
>> good morning, stephen.
>> in your backup you have a two-pager that is titled city council services investment process, ssip, 2004. Got it?
>> uh-huh.
>> I'm primarily going to be talking from that document. Essentially, both the stay with us staff and the Travis County staff have made a concerted effort to address concerns that -- that have been raised in a variety of community needs. Some that the Commissioners court has raised with me. Considering all of the input and feedback that we have gotten concerning a process, we are proposing -- what we are terming as a social services investment process. As you can see a comparison of what we are proposing with the old process, you can see that -- that we have generally thought of this process as being one where we are purchasing from vendors. Vendors. We wanted to start to look at that -- as from the perspective of investing with partners. That doesn't mean that we are not going to be in a formal procurement process, we would. But from a broader standpoint we wanted to ensure that -- that the vendors are looked at from a partnership standpoint because they are actually providing a -- a service that we as a -- as a county value. We want to move from a process that has been characterized by fragmented investment strategies to a process that is characterized by -- that is a comprehensive investment framework. We are looking at the dollar that's we spend and comparison to how it fits into an overall picture and individual -- in an individual area. We have been focusing on program outcomes for any given contract. We can tell you how an agency performs, but we want to look at that individual's agency's performance in the context of its overall impact on the community. We have been a little bit inflectionible in our dealing with this and the new process, we certainly want it to be flexible. In an investment framework, we consider all city and county social services dollars and a comprehensive framework that increases flexibility and maintains critical services. There are four categories that make up this framework. The first category is what we called a safety net category. In that category, we are looking at stabilizing and/or achievement -- treatment and intervention services to meet urgent health, safety and substance need -- substantive needs of people unable to secure services or victims of violence, abuse and neglect. In the integrated delivery systems category, which happens to be my favorite category because we are challenged, we are trying to create delivery systems community-wide and coordinating services so that the result will be more effective. We are looking at structures for purchasing and delivering services that improve coordination, access, quality of services, administrative efficiencies and better respond to changing needs. And services that are a product of a community process, services that -- that leverage resources with commitments from multiple stakeholders, services that coordinate funding and establish funding priorities. They may include, involve multiple service providers, but the fiscal administratively promote other continued service of care. Our example with that is our relationship with the particulars migrant council and the youth and family assessment center. The third category of services would be the services that would support a component services of the continuum of care. That means that there is not necessarily a full continuum of services that are in place, but we as a county believe that we need to be buying at least select services of that continuum of care. Individual services that fill needs within the continuum of care that have been identified through a community process. These are also services that meet identified community needs, but are neither safety net services or part of an integrated services. Characteristic could be services related to homelessness. As you know, we are living in an environment that rapidly changes. We believe that we need to -- to build some process in so that we can be responsive to those changing environmental needs. We want to utilize the c.a.n. Processes to identify emerging needs and ... To meet changing needs. We want to administrate and implement administrative guidelines to create over time a reserve that can be utilized to address changing issues. And actually the court supported that through the creation of a -- of a health reserve that we were getting from the tobacco fund, but every year there has actually been a need to utilize those resources. The initial year, I think, the dollars were used to help to bridge gaps in medication and the plir system and of course we've had to use those dollars internally, this year, for health care. It goes without saying that we want to streamline the contracting and payment processes by reducing administrative burden and response to community input and diminished resources and we want to develop a provider administrative fiscal review processes for contracting that is -- that is generally geared towards decreasing the administrative burden. As it relates to performance measures, we want to focus on select performance measures. We want to simplify the language of the performance measures. I -- this is feedback that I have actually gotten from y'all. We want to consider aligning the performance measures with other funders and that goes back to looking at the broader community impact that we are having in this investment process. We want to also consider the role that agencies play in the continuum of care, when selecting performance measures. For example, a training agency, an agency that -- where we purchase training services might not be required for job placement. But if we are looking at required to do job placement, but when we are looking at the continuum of services we would hope that they would have a relationship with an agency that might in fact have that -- that as one of the services that they provide. When we look at the current contracts, all of the contracts meet their performance requirements, the city of Austin staff is in the process of conducting the administrative and fiscal review that happens on an annual basis. We are also in the process of developing a contract with Austin community college to provide training and technical assistance to -- to our partners who -- who demonstrate that they have some weaknesses. My request this morning is for you to exempt these social services contracts from competitive procurement process and have us proceed with contract negotiations. I also propose that we do not bring contracts to you that do not meet the basic administrative requirements that we have written into the contract. I would also not bring contracts to you where -- without action plans if there are some programmatic concerns. I also believe that we should work with -- with forming a team that would have folks from purchasing, audit, the county attorney's office, my staff as well as the city of Austin staff so that we can start to really from an assistance standpoint deal with a lot of the issue that's have been raised concerning payment and also look at finding a way to really focus on select performance measures and using the simplified language that I spoke to earlier.
>> even though you made some pretty strong recommendations I think it's something that we may have been interested in doing and going in the direction, which you have been, I'm not saying that you haven't as far as trying to come up with a way of -- of getting to -- dealing with the social service needs in this community. Let me ask this question, stephen. The -- the vendors and other folk that's we do business with out there, the contracting and things like that, are they -- how are they leaning toward this new -- the recommendation that you are coming up with, proposing to us today. Have you heard any -- any conversations with any of them -- have you had any conversation was any of them, yeah, I think it's a [multiple voices] you know, all of these other kind of good things to make me go and support this. Anyway, go ahead.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> I'm Karen langley, I'm the president of the Austin area human services association.
>> okay.
>> and we fully endorsed this process.
>> fully endorsed it?
>> yes.
>> okay, all right.
>> very supportive. I meant to write a letter to y'all last week, that's why I came in person, so I could let you know that -- and support what the -- the work that stephen and staff and the city staff have been doing in -- in this process. There's a whole lot nuevo laredo things that are -- there's a whole lot of new things that are happening that are making us feel a whole lot more comfortable.
>> I have no problem with this at all. Is anybody here in opposition to what's going on? All right. So could you come up, see what you have to say.
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> I can only speak to the accountability of financial type of issues and we are not really involved with anything else. But I will tell you that the dealing with these contracts has become more and more difficult. And what I am seeing, quite frankly, is the erosion of accountability to the Commissioners court for county funds. There is a lack of appreciation for the fact that we are a separate government. That we all contract for specific things. There are contractual terms that need to be complied with and there is an increasing disregard for those. We are increasingly relying on staff that are not within the county control. When we contract human services, too often we are getting city staff does that, city staff won't tell us this. It is of concern because this is county money. I don't know how you all contemplated this interlocal. But I would assume that you did not contemplate that we, Travis County being would not be able toable for the -- accountable for the funds and that the contracts that you entered into would not be financially complied with. That's what we are seeing. When it is talked about making processes easier and more flexible, what it appears to me is what that means is a lack of controls. A lock of fiscal controls. And, you know, our people are constantly heard or hear, well, these are human needs and a bureaucracy is standing in the way. But the reality is when money is being wasted or misspent, that is taken directly from the people that that ought on -- that ought to receive those services. That's what we are seeing. We are -- we see lack of documentation, a lack of regard for what you want, in terms of -- of a contract, when we ask for more documentation, receipts are thrown together and given to my people. When it is taking an extraordinary amount of time for them to go through that. Meeting after meeting takes place trying to resolve this, this is not a good process and it's not going in the right direction. The lack of accountability and controls, I think, is a detriment to the money available for these very important direct services, which this Commissioners court has always supported. We have -- we have continuing issues that are not resolved. If you are talking about renewing contracts without going through a procurement process, I would suggest that you do not do that. The city does not want us to go through that because it is expensive, that's the government. We are a government. We get services by going through a competitive procurement process. Is that -- does that take time? Yes, it does. But that's the way governments operate. It would be easier for every contract -- for us to buy anything we want, never going through proper procurement or a vendor, but that is not has county government is set up. So I -- you may be in a position where you can't do that right now, but I would strongly suggest that you go through the procurement process. These agencies, many of them, do not understand the terms of the contracts that they sign. They call in -- and what you require as performance they cannot provide or don't intend to provide. And that tells me that there is not a clear communication to them as to what you expect. And they need to know and we -- when we sign a contract what you expect, and -- in my -- my office by law cannot cut a county check until what you have documented in your contract they have provided for us. And this is becoming increasing -- an increasing problem. The other thing that is of concern to me is that some of the more recent things, I have shared that with some of you, particularly with one agency, but it is not isolated, that that -- these kinds of bills have gone through the city of Austin for their -- for their approval. It has gone through hhs for their approval and has come to our office. These are things that government should not be paying for. And I'm appalled that two levels of screening has gotten them here. And I -- I don't know that this is the appropriate time. Many of you are -- are aware of the particular agency that is a problem right now. That's certainly not the only one, but I would recommend from a financial viewpoint because of the lack of financial accountability that we do not renew our contract with that because they are not complying with the terms of their contract, the kinds of things that they are submitted for reimbursement are not appropriate expenditures for government. So I'm sorry -- I'm sorry to -- to be the person that has to say this, but it is my role as the financial control person. I owe it to you to give you my honest opinion from where I sit.
>> I think that's -- excuse me. I think that is important to -- for everyone to understand that when you do business with county government, there is the other side of -- that is -- that is independent from -- from county government and that's the -- the district judges and the folks that they hire, the -- the county auditor specifically, in this case, to make sure that -- that they provide an independent audit of the way we do business or how we spend taxpayer money. It's really, really important that that is understood. By everyone. Therefore we can start on the same page to -- to try to -- to provide those services that people in this community need. Since county government is the safety net. It has the obligation of providing the services that -- that people cannot provide for themselves. And so -- so because of that point, then it is very important to me as I support social services, that -- that the money that we approve for that expenditure goes to clients, our constituents, who are in need of those services. We really need to look at, I think it's the area that perhaps -- that perhaps item 2, the integrated delivery system, as we go out and try to form a -- partnerships with people who are going to deliver the -- the services that this court approves, and for the clients and as a safety net. And so I think that it's real important that we come up with a list here of the services that are core, I guess, core services, that we want to purchase from -- from agencies in the community who will help us provide for that specific purpose. That service. For -- as a core service. In other words, what the county would provide if the agency was not providing and so I think it's real important to do that. Then we can move to the purchasing process which would help us identify the agencies, in the procurement process of who can provide the best service for our constituents and the cost. But it is extremely important to me that there be some accountability, both as a county and as as accountability. Let me explain -- I think the auditor has explained fairly well what the accounting is. But in terms of an agency simply telling you that they have served 100 people, that's accounting. What I need is accountability. What was the impact of our dollars that we approved on those 100 people? How did we get them to self sufficiency? Because I think that's the best way that we can respect the dignity of a person, regardless of their -- of their station in life. And I think to -- to become self sufficient, the look on that person's face is something that, you know, will just -- you know, I think bring you the tears. I just can't -- just can't describe it any other way. And so -- so that's my term, that's my definition of accountability. And there's accountability in accounting, of course, but in -- so I -- so those are the kinds of things that I need to look for. But I think we do need to get to the core list of those service that's we would provide -- services that we would provide, that we would contract with someone to provide as core as the safety net and -- and then, too, the impact. How many people have we moved to self sufficiency. And that was why I was interested in -- in having a partnership with -- with agencies that -- that provide job training. And even the agencies should probably have some -- some management training. So that -- so that the -- so that the business that they do for us, that they contract with us to do is done much, much better. And so -- so, yes, these are -- these are not normal times. These are extraordinary times when more people are going to be dependent on us because they lost a job and that job is not going to be recreated. It is not going to exist anymore. And so all of the -- all the more reason why job training is extremely important to me. So that we can move people to be in self sufficient to take care of their families as much as possible. I know some people will never be able to do that and so that's why we are here. That's why I support health and human services. And -- but those are the things that I need to see.
>> let me ask a couple of questions, if I can.
>> go ahead.
>> do we think that the contract language governing invoicing and when the county pays is clear enough, but not complied with? Or do we think that the contract language ought to be more clear?
>> thinking that the contract language is fairly clear and I --
>> I think it is.
>> looking to him because he's the one that has to enforce them on a daily basis, they are simply not complied with.
>> what we need is a strategy basically that promotes compliance with specific language in contracts. That's --
>> I think it's important that no one signs a contract, that they do not intend to comply with.
>> or that they don't understand --
>> or that they don't understand.
>> that could be.
>> if the -- right now the city of Austin basically receives the invoice, gives approval, funnels them through hhs, then they come to the dismoot to us, yes.
>> judge I think we are all trying to get to the same place. I don't want anything that's being said to be thought that we are not dedicated and committed to human services. I think our actions during the budgetary process speaks volumes. But in the same sense we need to take this as all constructive criticism. The one disagreement that I have with the auditor is in terms of whether we need to go out on a new r.f.p. Process. Quite frankly, I think if we did we would wind up with the very same agencies. Now, that doesn't mean that this is a rubber stamp process because we certainly have the right and the responsibility to fashion our needs on a year to year basis. That's where I look to the -- to the community action network in terms of the community conditions to help us focus where we need to be. But with that said, we can't -- I feel as well that we are slipping back into the bad old ways of we are funding an agency and how dare anybody say this is not what was intended. And I don't think it's every single agency. But the problem agencies create an impression out there that I'm afraid that if something does go awry, it paints a -- it inappropriately paints a picture that is not accurate and so we don't want that to happen. The best example that I have got is that I want to get us to place, kind of the way harvey Davis is with our corporations, I think we are probably the only corporation dealing with housing -- the housing staff where he actually goes on site visits, he checks their paperwork. I think they are a little shocked that people do that. But there is a reason because we have a fiduciary responsibility to say that those tax exempt bonds are for the people that were intended golly we want your paperwork, we are going to say get it back in order. Susan and her folks need auditable findings. Where my concern is that we have split up the responsibilities in this combined effort that the city is doing the monitoring, and we are doing the stuff on the planning end. Well, we have problems on the monitoring side because we are already hearing that there are agencies that have not gotten a site visit. That is unacceptable. And it makes it very difficult for us that there are people who are not under our command and control that if we see something that's not on our liking, we can't do anything about it. They don't report to us. I hope it's not a culture clash, but there just isn't any way for us to say please do it this way because that's the way we need it to satisfy our bosses. So the site visits, these are not small items. Not having your audited financials, that is not a small item. Not turning in your i.r.s. 990 forms, those are not small items. I think what we are trying to get to is that we all have faith and confidence and nothing goes awry here. If one problems occurs, there are folks that -- that's just the way it is. That is absolutely not the case. We need to make sure that we -- that we keep the confidence in folks that being well spent, well used, well invested that's what these things are. Steven, my only question that I had, you and I spent a great deal of time talking about this, how does an organization that doesn't it in the loop, isn't in the cycle, how do we know that there's not some other agency out there, might be somebody that we want to do business with. If you don't do an r.f.p., How does something that's on the outs get in.
>> there are a variety of ways, in the last couple of years, we had special initiatives, the last one that was approved was at the school initiative that we have in the process of developing an r.s.s. On right now. There would be opportunities for agencies that are in that,, actually, to apply to do business with us. We don't have direct contracts with certain agencies for, for instance, counseling type of services. We have used managed service organization arrangements through mhmr, say, for the children's partnership, an assessment center effort. In that structure arrangement, there is an opportunity for agencies that are -- that provide services that are critical to youth and families to actually be a part of that provider network through mhmr. It is our dollars that those agencies would be accessing, but we don't have a direct contract with them. It's similar to a third party payer or an hmo.
>> my last question then, anybody else that wants to join in on, I have seeing cyd here, I'm almost wondering Margaret, I think that's a great suggestion, people need to know what they are signing on to. Like almost if we have a post bid conference to get people in and help them --
>> that's a very good idea.
>> to enable them to be good partners, business partners on the business side of it because we certainly -- we have ways to deal with this on the t.n.r. Side, procurement, deliverable, et cetera. We need to assist these agencies in understanding what it is that they sign as opposed to after the fact, after the problem --
>> excellent idea.
>> golly gee, didn't you know what you were signing. The answer is no we need to do a better job making sure this is what we need turned in, this is the evidence that we need, not a word of mouth kind of thing, deliverables that the county is paying for, therefore using an example if we are paying for 60 children out of -- at has particular agency we don't expect to see an invoice for 500 teachers. Because that would not be something that would match what it is that we are procuring. It raises questions and then people go crazy.
>> thanks for that idea, I would like that.
>> stephen, when I posed the question earlier, I went through this. Very strong supporter of services -- social services, I think during the last budget process there was a circle of $500,000 to put a fence around expenditure that's we are going to need addressing the social service commitment that Travis County have said, yes, we are concerned about those things out there in this community. However, when your -- [indiscernible] opposition, because I wanted to hear the opposing views and get them on the table. Hopefully come to a resolution or resolve I guess in the sense to how we can continue to leverage a good social service product, listen to what everything is saying up here, measurable things, accountability, those kinds of things, everybody brought up a real good point, Commissioner Gomez and Commissioner Sonleitner brought up good points in how can we integrate these points to make sure that you don't have to hear a term coming from the county auditor saying wasteful spending. That was heard something about then folks not being able to deal with invoicing, a void somewhere. To eliminate those voids to make it a smoother process, more effective process, but more efficient process. Still based on performance. Based on who we serve out there in this community, I think very critical. I'm hearing all of these things collectively. I just think that we need to [indiscernible]
>> ms. Langley, anything to say?
>> thank you. I just wanted to address the -- the Commissioners court and also the auditor that the -- that the Austin area human services association fully backs, full accountability and would support through the negotiated contract process working out any of the bugs that with -- with the agencies that are not in compliance. We feel very strongly that all agencies should have annual audits and turn in 990's and be fully accountable. The last time that I -- that I counted on the list of social service agencies that have not turned in audits for last year and 990's, we are done to six to eight agencies out of 52. And I'm really, you know, I think you hit it absolutely on the mark that one or two bad apples seem to spoil the whole cart when a whole lot of us are doing really well in the fiscal and administrative accountability area. So, you know, I would be very encouraging through the negotiated contract process that whatever contract issues are not in compliance be dealt with in that fashion before the contracts are renewed with those few agencies. Because there really -- you know, it felt, I was motor phied listening to the -- mortifyed listening to the auditor, because none of us who operate non-profits would want our businesses to be framed like that. I operate family elder care we have never had an audit exemption or problem with any of our audits in the last 13 years. So -- so I just -- I don't want to be characterized, you know, in that way. I think all of us embrace full accountability, full administrative and fiscal controls and show -- the other thing that I wanted to say is that we would really fully endorse and support and be involved heavily in a joint project with stephen was alluding with barry silverberg with the Austin community college non-profit to work on setting up basic standards and fiscal controls and things like that. And do it as a management training for those non-profits not in compliance.
>> good.
>> county purchasing agent. I want to tell you first off that I'm an old social worker, I worked for health and human services for 10 years in a contract administration evaluation unit. So i, too, although I am the county's purchasing agent do have some background in social services and understand the importance of those. Our level of frustration is that it seems like we have been here at this table and had these conversations year after year after year. Little our frustration is -- also our frustration is being left out of the process. Stephen's group has recommendations on the procurement process that we have not had input into. I believe I sent a memo to the court last summer saying we are going to be at this spot. Here we are two months away from all of these contracts expiring there is no way to go through a formal proper sciewrment process at this time. I gra he with Commissioner Sonleitner there probably will be the same agencies. So we need to look at more at the outcomes of those contracts than the actual procurement process. We have a procurement process in place. It's not be involved. We have preproposal or a post award meetings with contractors and all of our other areas. There's no difference [indiscernible] what we expect of them, what the contract says. We are more than willing, we have -- I have done everything that I know how to do to get stephen's group to work with us. And I -- I needall's help. We are -- I need y'all's help, we are here to help. That's what we want to do. We are not here to impede this process. We are more than willing to help and hope that we can. [multiple voices]
>> questions?
>> I'm sorry.
>> first we need to -- what is the plan for issuing r.f.p.'s?
>> that's what I'm asking.
>> I know what you asked today, those two actions --
>> actually our plan -- [multiple voices]
>> -- in a year. Of them, I think the h.i.v. Contracts go earlier, don't they?
>> you are asking for a one-year renewal [multiple voices] basically delay issuing the r.f.p. For one year.
>> yes.
>> second is are we having problems with the -- all agencies or can we identify the one that's we are having invoicing problems with?
>> I would say that --
>> come up.
>> sorry, jose.
>> jose palicous, county auditor's office. I would say that we are having problems, we are taking it as to what the hhs is certifying. We don't have the certification from hhs that everything is okay. We do have a couple of agency that's we are having problems with. That we can process payments for.
>> identify them?
>> yes.
>> what --
>> I guess my thinking would be why wouldn't we identify the agencies that we are having problems with and have a mandated planning session before we renew contracts. At that training session it seems to me that we need to start by saying here's what you must do in order to get your invoices paid and we probably need a representative from purchasing, the auditor's office, the city of Austin, if they are really doing the receiving of the invoices and initial approval, that will make sure that there's no lack of understanding about what we expect. The second part is when invoices come this that are not consistent with standards that are covered during the training session, we kick them back. And -- and then, you know, when they call somebody on the Commissioners court and complain to us about delay in payment, we can say the reason you weren't paid was you didn't comply with whatever the problem was. If we do that a few times, I this the level of compliance will probably improve.
>> another point, judge, that's just the language. Very significant comment on contractual language. If the language is not there to begin with, it may be something that --
>> it's there, fairly understanding --
>> there's a miscommunicate somewhere. [multiple voices]
>> language compliance that need to be understood, that may be part of the training mechanism that you are suggesting, but -- but anyway, go ahead. For instance you have a grant that has transportation, it doesn't cover transportation. Gift certificates at a high dollar restaurant in Austin, we get payrolls that they don't foot. The time sheets are not signed. Clearly -- someone I also has signed them. The rates are different and not -- I mean, it's like it's not a matter of they don't know what we want. We get invoices before the period of the contract.
>> hold on. You are saying what you are telling me today is that the -- that the -- that they intentionally are doing this. Sn.
>> I don't know if they are intentional or not. I'm telling you what my staff sees [multiple voices]
>> and, you know, I don't know if you would call that a lack of understanding. If we don't pay for transportation, we don't pay for transportation. If -- you know, if we don't pay for trips to other cities, for executive people, we don't pay for that. These are the things that keep coming in.
>> okay.
>> there is a lesser degree of scrutiny with some of the contracts and we are getting really -- I am feeling so -- not confident in what we are getting on the one that's we are seeing the background, we have now prepared a certification that we are going to want our hhs people to sign because someone has to look at those and say these -- I looked at those and they meet the terms of the contract. Because these are the kind of things like I said if people are wasting that money, then it isn't available for the things that you all want. And that's what we are seeing.
>> that's no different from what you get on the health insurance contract. Personnel, h.r., Signs off on those audited receipts saying we have looked at them, we have audited them, they move on, that becomes a consent item -- [multiple voices]
>> we let them know per contract terms it's not allowed. We are not just saying it's not allowed. We tell them why not.
>> seems like some of these things up front could be in the sense of notes to proceed. Before cyd signs off on a notice to proceed to folks, they have to have their bond in place. Why is it that some of these things that are contractual related to their audits and 990's, part of the up front stuff, you do not even get to proceed and spend one penny until you get this stuff taken care of. Ask for it up front as opposed to after the fact. When you chase it after the fact, people get their feelers hurt, that's not what this is all about.
>> one clarification is that when we have having problems with agencies, somebody said we only had about six to eight agency that's we haven't received the audit. The list that I have 24 up to date have not seen from those 24. That's one of the problems, 24 agencies.
>> repeat just what you said.
>> I gave you a list with 24 agencies that we haven't received an audit for. We haven't received it in our office, if somebody has other information that has hasn't been provided to us as of yesterday we still question this item, they -- we didn't get them.
>> somebody said six or eight. We haven't gotten that information in our office yet, there's 24 agencies with the problem.
>> it need to get to the proper pepper for proper handling.
>> and from a workload viewpoint, we call over and ask for them. They don't come over. Then they say we don't have them they are in the city's file. If you want to look at them, come look at them. I send an auditor over there driving to the city. They look, they are not in the file. This they say we don't have a file. It wasn't in the file, but we do. If the contract says you have to return the audit within 180 days, I want it there. Or a notice of why not because I assume that when you put that in a contract, you want an audit in 180 days or if you didn't care, you wouldn't put it in there. So you know I don't know what -- what agencies don't understand about that. But that's a typical kind of thing. It shouldn't be complicated. It shouldn't be controversial. If it's in the contract, get it here.
>> yeah.
>> perhaps if I assume too much, maybe that's why it's good to have a preconference -- prebidding conference and understand all of those details. We also need to have some sessions with the agencies for management training or for contract training, contract compliance -- [multiple voices]
>> -- to understand what is going on because need deadlines have to be met.
>> I have heard a lot of mention of agencies and what they don't know, whatever. I really am somewhat uncomfortable about that because with the discussion it assumes we are all on the same page and our understanding what was -- in our understanding of what's going on. I can tell you of the four agencies that are represented, we're not. Commissioner Daugherty this is a review from our meeting yesterday. We internally are not necessarily on the same page in terms of a requirement and processes. And I think we can speak from our individual perspectives and maybe they are right from that individual perspective. But from a county organizational standpoint, and from a standpoint of having several departments and systems needing to work together, we are not there. It's not just on the agencies. I heard a lot of good ideas, it makes a lot of sense. But the bottom line here is we are not communicating, we are not really interacting to the degree that we need to in order to make this work. I will assume responsibility for the extent that health and human services has not done that and has perpetuated that. I think that it's time to draw a true line in the sand and to get together to resolve it. You are right, we talked about it from year to year. But we have not sat down and got a common understanding of all of these things. Because I believe that most of those agencies are trying to do the right thing.
>> me, too.
>> I really do. I think they are. But I think that we have a role in this, too. I can't, I don't feel comfortable with saying that we have. I don't believe that we have as an organization.
>> do we think that we can cover this training session in a couple or three hours? After that?
>> yes.
>> are we able to outline pretty much the steps that must be fold? To -- must be followed to get paid? The other things, seems to me that if the contract says you have to get us an audit in six months, there's auto ticker at that time and we identify agencies that are -- that have not complied, we notify them and give them sometime to get that in, thereafter invoices are not paid. If I were an agency I would want to know that up front. You give me six months notice, somebody gives me a reminder phone call or memo in another 30 days, then I don't think that I have a complaint if I don't meet that second deadline. Then the question is who should do that in -- in the [indiscernible] that you mentioned, we ought to put our heads together and try to get that done. The other thing is I guess the city of Austin monitors are probably applying city of Austin standards. What we have in mind are Travis County standards, right if.
>> exactly.
>> I'm not so certain that they are different as they relate to these contracts --
>> let me finish. We ought to be able to tell city of Austin, okay, you need to share with us this information for agencies in order for Travis County to pay the invoices, here's with a he look for, if we don't see this we don't pay it. I guess that I would just want to be comfortable that knowing that agencies know this in advance and so if they don't comply, it's their facility.
>> I agree.
>> [multiple voices]
>> different, the other vendor submitted an invoice for services to be rendered in the future. We never have paid those --
>> we don't do that.
>> this one was approved by the department it was not health and human services. But the vendor didn't know. I didn't know, either. Apparently t.n.r. Either overlooked it or -- [multiple voices] that can get you paid much letter than you expect. But I'm thinking a basic thing. So the vendors ought to know that up front. Because you are looking at really having to front payroll.
>> that's right.
>> probably the first four or five or six weeks. And if you know that you can plan for it. I don't know how you overlook that. But if you overlook itronix will be because you overlook something we obviously told you, see. I just wondered -- to give you a one or two minute review of what you are doing it. We want to acknowledge that we have had issues with that.
>> some of us have to get someplace. Is there a on two minute discussion or --
>> if you are ready to take action, we don't have to go through that.
>> before I go, I mean, because I do have several things to say, we do have to go I mean so I may want to have this back.
>> you want it back on?
>> or take it up at 1:30.
>> let's do it at 1:30.
>> it will have to be 2:00.
>> 2:00.
>> is that okay?
>> yes, thank you all.
>>
>>
>>
Last Modified: Tuesday, October 15, 2003 12:52 PM