HomeMy WebLinkAboutSurvey Indirect Cost Plan Review
INDIRECT COST PLAN REVIEW
2003/2004
DEPARTMENT FOLLOW-UP SURVEY
Presented to the
Deschutes County Audit Committee
by the
Internal Audit Program
David Givans, CPA – County Internal Auditor
Report# 04/05 - 3 Dated October 22, 2004
Deschutes Count y,
Oregon
{THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004)
To: Audit Co mmittee
CC: Mike Daly, Tom DeWolf
From: David Givans, Count y Internal Auditor
Subject: Internal Audit Report on the INDIRECT COST PLAN REVIEW 2003/2004
DEAPRTMENT FOLLOW-UP SURVEY (Report #04/05-3)
Date: October 22, 2004
The enclosed survey reports feedback fro m County departments concerning the Indirect Cost
Plan Review for 2003/2004. Informat ion contained in this report is from survey quest ionnaires
received. The fo llow-up was requested by the Board of Count y Commissio ners to assist them in
developing appropriate policy direct ion for the 2005/2006 County budget process.
A survey was determined to be the most expedient method to obtain direct feedback fro m
departments. There were 27 surveys given to Count y departments and internal service funds.
Two small depart ments passed on submitt ing survey responses. Three internal service funds
passed on submitt ing survey responses. Detail charts and comments are provided at the end of
this report in Appendix I. A copy of the survey is in Appendix II.
Survey result s have been provided to internal service fund management and any responses
provided were included at the end of this report.
Deschutes Count y,
Oregon
Internal Audit Program
David Givans, CPA
County Internal Auditor
Deschutes Services Building
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200
Bend, OR 97701
Phone: 541-330-4674
Fax: 541-385-3202
davidg@co.deschutes.or.us
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004)
{THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004)
INDIRECT COST PLAN REVIEW2003/2004
– Depart ment Follow -up Survey
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background ………………………………………………………………………….... 1
1.2. Object ives and scope …………………………………………………………………. 1
2. REVIEW RECOMMENDATION QUESTIONS
2.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….... 1-2
2.2. General Issues …….……………………………………………………………..… 2-7
2.3. Informat ion Techno logy ….……………………….………………………………... 8-9
2.4. Finance and Administrative Services .…………………………………………….. 9-10
2.5. Personnel …………………………………………………………………………..… 10
2.6. Legal ……………………………………………………………………………... 11-13
2.7. Implications to grant applicat ions ……………………………………………….. 13-14
2.8. Closing survey quest ions ……………………………………………………….... 14-15
3. SATISFACTION QUESTIONS
3.1. Introduction .………………………………………………………………………16-17
3.2. Informat ion Techno logy ………………………………………………………..….... 17
3.3. Building Services …….………………………………………………………….. 17-18
3.4. Finance ………………………………………………………………………..……... 18
3.5. Personnel ………………………………………………………………………… 18-19
3.6. Legal ……………………………………………………………………………..….. 19
3.7. Administrative Services …………………………………………………………. 19-20
3.8. Communicat ion response - Selected internal service funds ..……………………..… 20
4. RESPONSES FROM INTERNAL SERVICE FUND DEPARTMENTS AND
MANAGEMENT
4.1. From internal service fund departments ....…………………………………........ 21- 24
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I – Detailed Charts and response comments by Count y departments
Reco mmendat ion responses ……….………………………..………………………... 25-49
Satisfact ion responses ………………………………………………………………… 50-62
APPENDIX II – Survey Template (blank) …………………………………………………. 63-69
APPENDIX III – Methodology…………………………………………………….................... 70
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004)
{THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) i
INDIRECT COST PLAN REVIEW 2003/2004
Report# 03/04-3 (Dated October 22, 2004)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Board of County Co mmissio ners requested that department feedback be obtained on the
original report. The Deschutes County’s Audit Committee approved the project as part of the
04/05 internal audit workplan. The purpose of the survey was to assist County Management in
developing po licy and implementing reco mmendatio ns made in the original report.
The fo llowing internal service funds were reviewed:
· Informat ion Techno logy (IT)
· Building Services
· Finance
· Personnel
· Legal
· Administrative Services
RECOMMENDATION RESPONSES:
The fo llowing chart highlights the overall reco mmendat ion responses. Summary o f responses
are include in the report and detailed responses by department are included in Appendix I.
SUMMARY CHART OF AVERAGE RESPONSE BY SURVEY QUESTION#
1.1 1.1
1.3
1.0
1.6
1.5
1.3
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.9
0.2
0.8 0.8
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.1 1.0
1.5
1.0
1.3
-
1.0
2.0Que s t i o n 1 Q u e s t i o n 2 Q u e s t i o n 3 a Q u e s t i o n 3 b Q u e s t i o n 4 a Q u e s t i o n 4 b Q u e s t i o n 4 c Q u e s t i o n 5 a Q u e s t i o n 5 b Q u e s t i o n 6 Q u e s t i o n 7 Q u e s t i o n 8 Q u e s t i o n 9 Q u e s t i o n 1 0 Q u e s t i o n 1 1 Q u e s t i o n 1 2 Q u e s t i o n 1 3 a Q u e s t i o n 1 3 b Q u e s t i o n 1 3 c Q u e s t i o n 1 4 Q u e s t i o n 1 5 Q u e s t i o n 1 6 A v e r a
g e o f r e s p o n s e s
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Indifferent
Overall, it would appear departments have agreed with a majorit y o f the recommendat ions. It is
up to County management whether and how to implement the proposed recommendat ions.
The quest ions with lower average support (<.5) are as fo llows:
· Question 5a: County management should consider allocat ing costs of the BOCC to
funds/depart ments.
{Auditor comment – This was an observat ion from other Oregon Counties. It should be
revisited in the future after the County has implemented the other more significant
recommendat ions.}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) ii
· Question 5b: County management should consider allocat ing costs of building usage to
funds/depart ments.
{Auditor comment – This was an observat ion from other Oregon Counties. It should be
revisited in the future after the County has implemented the other more significant
recommendat ions.}
· Question 8: Informat ion techno logy should remove these adjust ments from its allocat ion
computation.
{Auditor comment –I continue to support this recommendat ion. The significant number
of indifferent responses indicated departments did not understand this reco mmendat ion
and perhaps the finding as summarized in the survey.
The recommendat ion to remove the adjustments from the IT allocat ion methodology was
based on review of other counties’ methods as well as input fro m an advisory co mmittee.
The IT infrastructure charge is based on department’s relat ive use of the IT system as
measured by hardware types. This charge would cover applications, citrix infrastructure,
backups, securit y protocols, etc, that every department utilizes.
Some of the departments that disagreed with this question also benefit by its continuance.
Some of the departments benefit ing from the current adjust ment already benefit through
less direct IT time charges. It would not be fair to give so me departments a lesser charge
for items that all use equally.}
SATISFACTION RESPONSES:
The fo llowing charts summarize depart ment satisfaction wit h internal service funds for
cost/services and co mmunicat ion. Summary o f responses are include in the report and detailed
responses by department are included in Appendix I.
Summary Chart of Average Satisfaction with Cost/Services
by Internal Service Fund
0.5
0.1
0.9 0.9
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.1
1.2
0.8 0.8
0.6
-
1.0
2.0
IT Building Services Finance Personnel Legal Administrative
Services
Internal Service Fund
A v e r a g e o f r e s p o n s e s
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) iii
Summary Chart of Average Satisfaction with Communication
by Internal Service Fund
0.7
(0.2)
0.1
-
0.1
(0.3)
(1.0)
-
1.0
IT Building Services Finance Personnel Legal Administrative
Services
Internal Service Fund
A v e r a g e o f r e s p o n s e s
Adequate
Some
Not at All
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Authority:
The Deschutes County Audit Committee authorized the fo llow-up by its approval o f the
County’s internal audit workplan for fiscal year 2003/2004. The fo llow-up was expedited at the
request of the Board of Count y Commissio ners to assist them in developing appropriate policy
direct ion in time for the 2005/2006 County budget process.
Purpose of the survey:
A survey was determined to be the most expedient method to obtain direct feedback fro m
departments. There were 27 surveys given to Count y departments and internal service funds.
Two small depart ments passed on submitt ing survey responses. Three internal service funds
passed on submitt ing survey responses. An overall response rate of 80% is a good return on
surveys. Detail charts and comments are provided at the end of this report in Appendix I. A
blank survey is enclosed as Appendix II.
The survey was created primarily fro m recommendations reported in the Indirects Cost Plan
Review 03/04 (report #03/04-3). This report should be referenced to understand the nature of the
findings and associated recommendat ions.
1.2 OBJECTIVES and SCOPE
Object ives:
The object ive o f the fo llow-up survey was to obtain Count y department feedback on the internal
service fund review (report #03/04-3). This fo llow-up was not to determine the extent of
recommendat ion implementation by management of County internal service funds.
Scope:
The fo llow-up survey was primarily for reviewing the findings and associated recommendations
included in the original review. We limited our review to the six primary internal service funds
included in the review – informat ion techno logy, building services, legal, personnel, finance and
administrative services. Addit io nal sat isfact ion survey quest ions were added to obtain feedback
on cost, service and co mmunicat ion. Internal service funds had opportunity to provide feedback
on the survey before it was sent out.
2. REVIEW RECOMMENDATION QUESTIONS
2.1 Introduction
The fo llowing chart highlights the overall responses. Summary of responses are include in the
report and detailed responses by department are included in Appendix I.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 2
SUMMARY CHART OF AVERAGE RESPONSE BY SURVEY QUESTION#
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.0
1.6
1.5
1.3
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.9
0.2
0.8 0.8
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.1 1.0
1.5
1.0
1.3
-
1.0
2.0Que s t i o n 1 Q u e s t i o n 2 Q u e s t i o n 3 a Q u e s t i o n 3 b Q u e s t i o n 4 a Q u e s t i o n 4 b Q u e s t i o n 4 c Q u e s t i o n 5 a Q u e s t i o n 5 b Q u e s t i o n 6 Q u e s t i o n 7 Q u e s t i o n 8 Q u e s t i o n 9 Q u e s t i o n 1 0 Q u e s t i o n 1 1 Q u e s t i o n 1 2 Q u e s t i o n 1 3 a Q u e s t i o n 1 3 b Q u e s t i o n 1 3 c Q u e s t i o n 1 4 Q u e s t i o n 1 5 Q u e s t i o n 1 6 A v
e r a
g e o
f r e s p o
n s e s
Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Indifferent
2.2 General issues
Question 1 - Indirect charges are not allocated to internal service funds
Recommendation 1: Internal service departments should gather relevant statist ics to calculate
costs to other internal service funds. Internal service funds should consider these imputed costs
when developing a fully costed hourly rate for third party contracts. Analysis indicates there is
no significant benefit to allocat ing between internal service funds.
Question 1 - Internal service departments should understand what their total cost to operate is
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.1 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many depart ments across the Count y.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 3
Question 2 - Board of County Commissioners are exempt from all but one
indirect cost
Recommendation 2: Indirect costs should be allocated to the BOCC.
Question 2 - Indirect costs should be allocated to BOCC
(Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.1 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many depart ments across the Count y.
Question 3 - Allocation bases using budgeted amounts might not properly
reflect activity
Recommendation 3a - Management should consider utilizing prior results of activit y for
allocat ion bases (i.e. fro m prior calendar year) if this will achieve better equit y in assessing
charges for the projected period.
Question 3a - Allocation bases using actual activity are more relevant in allocating charges than budgeted
amounts - (Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.3 or slightly better than “So mewhat Agree”. There was
consistent agreement from many departments across the County.
Recommendation 3b - This might depend on the type of allocat ion base used. An even better
approach is to use actual act ivit y results and actual cost to subsequent ly adjust charges to
funds/depart ments.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 4
Question 3b - Charges should be adjusted to reflect actual charges by the internal service fund
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.0 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many depart ments across the Count y.
Question 4 - Efficiency and effectiveness of internal service fund services are
not measured
Recommendation 4a: Activit ies of Count y internal service funds should be separated into clearly
ident ifiable co mponents.
Question 4a - Internal service funds should separate services into meaningful cost components
(Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.6 or between “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat
Agree”. There was consistent strong agreement from most departments across the
County.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 5
Recommendation 4b: Internal service managers should clarify expectations and responsibilit ies
with users.
Question 4b - Internal service funds should clarify the level of service customers will receive
(Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.5 or between “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat
Agree”. There was consistent strong agreement from most departments in the
County.
Recommendation 4c: The County should consider implement ing appropriate performance
measures so qualit y and cost of services can be mo nitored. Qualit y can also be measured by
comparison to industry standards and surveying department’s sat isfact ion with the qualit y of
services. When costs and performance are consistent ly calculated, decisio n makers and cit izens
can determine the true cost of providing County services and achieving outcomes.
Question 4c - Internal service funds should implement appropriate performance measures so quality and cost of
services can be monitored - (Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.3 or slightly better than “So mewhat Agree”. There was
consistent agreement from most departments in the County.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 6
Question 5 - Survey of Oregon counties identified some other indirect costs
Recommendation 5a: County management should consider allo cating costs of the BOCC to
funds/depart ments.
Question 5a - County management should consider allocating some of the BOCC as an indirect cost (Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .1 or “Indifferent”. The opinio ns of depart ments were
inconsistent.
{Auditor comment –This was an observat ion from other Oregon Counties. It
should be revisited in the future after the County has implemented the other more
significant recommendations.
Recommendation 5b: County management should consider allo cating costs of the BOCC and
building usage to funds/depart ments.
Question 5b - County management should consider allocating building usage (rent) as an indirect cost
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .2 or “Indifferent”. The opinio ns of depart ments were
inconsistent. Many larger departments so mewhat favored approach.
{Auditor comment – This was an observat ion from other Oregon Counties. It
should be revisited in the future after the County has implemented the other more
significant recommendations.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 7
Question 6 - User departments do not have input on internal service fund
methods and allocations
Recommendation 6: The County should consider forming a subco mmittee of County
Departments to review the indirect cost plan including internal service fund budgets and
allocat ion methodology prior to allocat ion of charges to departments to gain a better
understanding of internal service fund charges and the underlying allocat ion methodology.
Question 6 - A committee should be formed to annually review the indirect cost allocations prior to allocation
of charges to departments - (Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.0 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m most departments in the County.
Question 7 - Some funds/departments do not receive allocations
Recommendation 7: Internal service funds should calculate charges to all funds/depart ments.
Finance should provide internal service fund managers with the ant icipated fund/depart ment
descript ions to be used in the County budget.
Question 7 - Internal service funds should calculate charges based on inclusion of all applicable funds/depts.
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .9 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was both strong
agreement and neutral fro m so me departments in the Count y.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 8
2.3 Information Technology (Internal service fund - 660)
Question 8 - The IT department does not have sufficient basis for adjustments
to its allocations
Recommendation 8: IT should remove these adjustments fro m its allocation co mputation.
Question 8 - IT should remove adjustments from its allocation computation
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .2 or “Indifferent”. Department opinio ns were
inconsistent.
{Auditor comment –I continue to support this recommendat ion. The significant
number of indifferent responses indicated that departments did not understand this
recommendat ion and perhaps the finding as summarized in the survey.
The recommendat ion to remove the adjustments from the IT allocat ion
methodology was based on review o f other counties’ methods as well as input
fro m an advisory committee. The IT infrastructure charge is based on
department’s relat ive use o f the IT system as measured by hardware types. This
charge would cover applicat ions, citrix infrastructure, backups, securit y protocols,
etc, that every department utilizes.
Some of the departments that disagreed with this question also benefit by its
continuance. Some of the departments benefit ing from the current adjust ment
already benefit through less direct IT time charges. It would not be fair to give
some departments a lesser charge for items that all use equally.}
Question 9 - Internal and external billing rates used by Information
Technology are understated
Recommendation 9: Information techno logy should recalculate its direct hourly charge rates.
Total compensat ion should be divided by available charge hours (total hours available for work
less anticipated overhead hours). In addit ion, the department should consider including in its
billing rates the additional overhead incurred by the department including supervisory overhead,
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 9
training, supplies and other departmental overhead. For outside service contracts, the department
should consider using a fully costed hourly rate.
Question 9 - Best practices require IT to include overhead costs in their calculation of direct hourly charge rates
- (Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .8 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many Count y departments. Many of the large departments were
neutral.
2.4 Finance and Administrative Services (Internal service fund-630/625)
Question 10 - Finance allocation base requires a review of each
fund/department budget
Recommendation 10: The County Finance Department should consider utilizing transact ional
allocat ion bases or use them as a tool to corroborate and adjust their current methodology and
adjustments.
Question 10 - Finance should consider utilizing transactional allcoation bases to allcoate charges
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a .8 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many Count y departments.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 10
Question 11: Finance does not allocate service fees to all funds/departments
Recommendation 11: Finance should calculate costs to all funds and departments and allocate
costs to those that can legally be charged. The general fund should probably incur the costs for
those funds not charged.
Question 11 - Finance should calculate charges based on inclusion of all funds/depts.. That can be legally
charged - (Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.2 or slightly better than “So mewhat Agree”. There was
consistent agreement from many Count y departments.
2.5 Personnel (Internal service fund - 650)
Question 12 - Some costs incurred by departments are expended by Personnel
and allocated out as indirect costs
Recommendation 12: The County should consider recording direct costs as expenditures to the
operating department. These costs may be coordinated through the Personnel depart ment.
Question 12 - Personnel should not pay direct costs of departments
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.1 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m many Count y departments. One department voicing
disagreement thought that all departments should bear centralized human resource
costs.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 11
2.6 Legal (Internal service fund - 640)
Question 13 - Legal costs are allocated on an out-dated time study
Recommednation13a: Legal should update its time study to support its allocat ion to all
funds/depart ments.
Question 13a - Legal should update its time study to support its allocation to all funds/depts.
(Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.4 or between “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat
Agree”. There was consistent strong agreement from most County depart ments.
Recommendation 13b: Legal counsel should keep time records.
Question 13b - Legal Counsel should keep time records
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.1 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m most County depart ments.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 12
Recommendation 13c: Legal should consider allo cating the overhead equitably amo ng the users
of their services based on time charges.
Question 13c - Legal should utilize its overhead costs in determining legal fee rates charged
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.0 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent
agreement fro m most County depart ments.
Question 14 - Legal has not been billing non-County entities for legal support
Recommendation 14: Legal should track and bill all t ime spent with non-Count y entit ies. A
fully costed billing rate should be used. The department should develop procedures for billing
and co llect ion so this funct ion can be performed in a timely manner.
Question 14 - Legal should track and bill all time spent with non-county entities
(Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.5 or between “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat
Agree”. There was consistent strong agreement from most County depart ments.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 13
Question 15 - Legal incurs costs directly traceable to operating departments
Recommendation 15: Outside legal fees should be paid by the benefit ing department.
Question 15 - Direct legal costs of departments should be paid by those departments
(Summary)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.0 or “Somewhat Agree”. There was consistent "Strong
Agreement" from many County depart ments with a few vo icing "Strong
Disagreement". No negative co mments were provided.
2.7 Implications to grant applications
Question 16 - Some grant applications do not include internal service fund
costs
Recommendation 16: Management should consider complying wit h the OMB Circular A-87
requirements for indirect cost plan certificat ion. By do ing so, the County may be able to recover
reasonable indirect costs. In addit ion, the County will have better management information as to
the underlying costs for its programs and be better able to make decisio ns about those programs.
Question 16 - The County should develop an indirect cost allocation plan in compliance with OMB Circular A-
87 requirements - (Summary)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Indifferent Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Average response was a 1.3 or between “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat Agree”. There
was consistent strong agreement fro m most County departments. One disagreeing
response indicated that many grants limit or disallo w indirect costs.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 14
{Auditor Comment – One disagreeing co mment indicated that some grants limit
or do not allow indirects. This is a fair observat ion. However, without a certified
indirect cost plan (Plan), departments will o ften not have the option to build in the
indirect costs within the grant applicat ion and must incur the internal indirects
charged for these programs. Without a calculat ion, departments might not have
an understanding of how much they are taking on in indirects with so me grant
proposals. In addit ion to County indirects, there are often departmental indirects
that should be addressed in grant proposals. }
2.8 Closing survey questions
The fo llowing closing questions were to assess if departments believed the review was
successful and whether they had any interest in participat ing in a committee, obtain a copy of
this report, or wanted any addit io nal informat ion.
Question 17 - Would you be interested
in being on a committee to annually
review indirects
Yes
41%
Undecided
32%
No
27%
A good number of departments are interested in providing input.
Question 18a - Interested in a meeting to
discuss the report?
Yes
50%
Undecided
36%
No
14%
Question 18b - How would you like to
meet?
Large
groups
20%
Small
groups
60%
One-on-
One
20%
Informat ion technology vo lunteered to work with internal audit to present small group meet ings
to present the findings and reco mmendat ions and results of the survey. No meetings have been
carried out at this t ime. They might be scheduled if this is determined necessary in
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 15
communicat ing the decisio ns of the Board.
Question 19 - Do you have an interest in
following up on your answers and input
on indirects?
Interested
55%
Undecided
36%
Uninterested
9%
All departments will receive a copy of this survey report.
Question 20a - Do you think the review
and findings are useful?
Yes
73%
No
0%
Undecided
27%
Question 20b - Should a review be done
every three to four years?
Yes
86%
No
0%
n/a
14%
A majorit y of departments thought this was a useful review and provided valuable input.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 16
3. SATISFACTION QUESTIONS
3.1 Introduction
County depart ments were asked to rate their sat isfaction with cost allocat ion, services provided
and co mmunicat ion for the fo llowing Count y internal service funds:
· Informat ion Techno logy (IT)
· Building services
· Finance
· Personnel
· Legal
· Administrative Services
Summary Chart of Average Satisfaction with Cost/Services
by Internal Service Fund
0.5
0.1
0.9 0.9
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.1
1.2
0.8 0.8
0.6
-
1.0
2.0
IT Building Services Finance Personnel Legal Administrative
Services
Internal Service Fund
A v e r a g e o f r e s p o n s e s
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Summary Chart of Average Satisfaction with Communication
by Internal Service Fund
0.7
(0.2)
0.1
-
0.1
(0.3)
(1.0)
-
1.0
IT Building Services Finance Personnel Legal Administrative
Services
Internal Service Fund
A v e r a g e o f r e s p o n s e s
Adequate
Some
Not at All
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 17
The fo llowing charts summarize the responses by internal service fund. The nature of the
comments and departmental responses are summarized. Detailed charts of responses by
department and all co mments are included at the end of the report in Appendix I.
3.2 Information Technology
Satisfaction with cost/services - Information Technology
Summary
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
The average response is between “Neutral” and “Generally Sat isfied" (.5 for Cost Allocat ion/.8
for Services).
Most departments were generally sat isfied with costs and services. The “Generally Dissatisfied”
ratings came most ly fro m depart ments whose funding did not come significant ly from the
General fund.
3.3 Building Services
Satisfaction with costs/services - Building Services
Summary
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 18
The average response is close to “Neutral” (.1 for Cost Allocat ion/.1 for Services) with a
significant dispersio n between answers.
The generally dissatisfied ratings came fro m different size depart ments. There were some very
strong comments fro m some departments.
3.4 Finance
Satisfaction with costs/services - Finance
Summary
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
The average response is “Generally Sat isfied” ( .9 for Cost Allo cat ion/1.2 for Services).
Most departments were generally sat isfied with costs and services.
3.5 Personnel
Satisfaction with costs/services - Personnel
Summary
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
The average response is “Generally Sat isfied” (.9 for Cost Allocation/.8 for Services).
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 19
Most departments were generally sat isfied with costs and services. The only reason given for a
“Generally Dissat isfied” rating indicated that they should ut ilize actual FTE instead of budgeted.
3.6 Legal
Satisfaction with costs/services - Legal
Summary
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
The average response is “Generally Sat isfied” (.7 for Cost Allocation/.8 for Services).
Most departments were generally sat isfied with costs and services. The “Generally Dissatisfied”
ratings on costs came fro m the largest departments who did not see support for the amounts
charged. One department was dissat isfied with the timeliness of services provided.
3.7 Administrative Services
Satisfaction with costs/services - Administrative Services
Summary
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Very Satisfied Generally Satisfied Neutral Generally Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
Cost allocation Services
The average response is between “Neutral” and “Generally Sat isfied” (.6 for Cost Allocat ion/.6
for Services).
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 20
As a new internal service fund, many depart ments had a neutral response on all counts. Some
departments did not understand the charge for this service.
3.8 Communication responses – Selected internal service funds
Satisfaction with Communication Level - Selected Internal Service Funds
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Very Well Adequate Some Not at all
R e s p o n s e c o u n t
IT Building Serv.Finance Personnel Legal Admin Serv.
The fo llowing are averages for the funds:
Internal Service Fund Average score Average Response
IT .7 Adequate/Some
Building Services -.2 Some/Not at all
Finance .1 Some
Personnel 0 Some
Legal .1 Some
Administrative Services -.3 Some/Not at all
IT had the strongest ratings in this category. Most departments had “Not at all” indicated in
responses. From the comments, not many departments feel informed on internal service funds
charges and services.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 21
4. REPONSES AND COMMENTS
4.1 From Internal service fund departments
Internal service fund management provided the fo llowing comments (in italics).
Renee Warner (Building Services) verbal response dated 10/19/04:
“Building Services appreciates the input from Departments. We take our services very seriously.
We are adding procedures and changes to improve communication with our customers. “
Mark Pilliod (County Counsel) response dated 10/19/04:
I just wanted to follow up with a couple of additional comments regarding the draft audit
report/survey on indirect charges.
Part of the difficulty with precisely "billing" the legal department's time to various county
departments is that much of its time is devoted either to all departments or to another indirect
service department, such as Personnel, on behalf of another department. For example, Mark A.
will spend the better part of two day in presenting and additional time in preparing for a series
of workshops on supervisor training. In the coming months I expect to spend considerable time
analyzing and then preparing training for all departments a uniform set of steps to assure
contract procurement rules are understood and followed. Recently, and for the foreseeable
future Mark A. and I will work with Mike Viegas on behalf of the county as a whole
implementing a host of adjustments brought on by an investigation/complaint of the federal
Department of Justice pertaining to the Americans with Disabilities Act. Every other year the
state legislature (and this November, the electorate as well) enacts a host of new laws which
must be analyzed and implemented. I could go on. The point is that no single department is
directly benefited by these efforts, and, I suppose based upon their comments, the respondents in
your survey would resist any effort to "bill" their department for this work, since they never
requested it. Not doing this work is not an option, if the Legal department is to fulfill its mission
to address proactively (and sometimes reactively) the "extra-departmental" legal needs of the
county. The question of who the legal department should bill for this work is really secondary to
our feeling that the work needs to get accomplished.
{Auditor comments - There are many options for billing out internal services. The most
fundamental principle is that the costs should be allocated relat ive to the services
received. Most County governments I surveyed used time charges (as we do to some
extent) to allocate legal charges. They also would charge time to general government.
The general rule is that you use must charge your time to all users and split your costs
evenly between those users. General government should assume their cost of legal
services and direct departments should not end up bearing those costs. I understand the
reluctance to bill departments for time but the BOCC should be supportive and perhaps
would be interested in supporting a retainer funded through the General Fund or Risk to
make sure departments utilize Legal for small questions.
The one except ion for charges is for other internal service funds. The analysis, I did,
indicated that there was little difference obtained going through and addit ional iterat ion
of charges between internal service funds before allocat ing those charges out to
departments.}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 22
Another point which I would like to stress is the nature of the survey questions. I understand that
the various questions or topic areas were developed by a committee, so I'm not quibbling with
the subject matter, per se. However, as one who's familiar with polling methods, I would have to
say that the questions were not phrased in a neutral manner. Instead, they were phrased in the
form of what some might call "leading questions." In polling parlance, this would be considered
a "push poll," where the desired response is implicit in the phrasing of the questions. The fact
that responses were to be rated on the five-point scale of strongly disagree to strongly agree
doesn't overcome this inherent flaw. I cannot say that the results would be significantly different
than what you obtained, but the implication that this was scientific isn't established by the
various comparison statistics that were generated and presented in the draft report.
{Auditor comments - I attempted to keep the questio ns and the potential answers neutral,
but most of the survey quest ions were based directly on audit recommendat ions.
Reco mmendat ions generally take a posit ion and that was inherent in those questions. The
object ive was primarily to get feedback fro m the departments on the specific
recommendat ions made in the review of indirects. The effort was not intended to be a
scientifically based survey. In addit ion, all internal service departments were given a
draft to comment on before it was sent out. Comments received prior to the survey being
distributed were considered and addressed in advance.}
I hope you will accept these comments in the spirit in which they've been given, trying to achieve
a sound report. Let me know if you would like additional clarification.
Specific comments in reading the report:
1. Reference in Reco mmendat ion 4c to “industry standards” -
What industry does a government law office belong to - private or public? Show me a
government law office (other than District Attorney’s) that have implemented
performance measures. Even if you find one, it’s probably much larger than Deschutes
County.
{Auditor comment – I did not specifically look for this, but you are probably right.
Deschutes County is just getting to the size where management is starting to implement
performance measures.}
2. Reference to Recommendation 13b - “Legal counsel should keep t ime records” -
Legal’s billing rates should be based upon charges/rates of private firms furnishing
government legal service.
3. Reference to Recommendat ion 14 - “Legal has not been billing non-Count y ent it ies for
legal support”
Examples??
{Auditor comment – Deschutes County 911 County Service District received legal
services without a legal charge. This might be occurring for some other smaller Count y
Service Districts.}
4. Reference to Recommendat ion 16 - “Management should consider complying with the
OMB Circular A-87 requirements for indirect cost plan certificat ion.”
Can you explain the basis of the above assertion – that compliance with OMB Circular
A-87 is “required”. As a survey question, I’m not surprised by the response given the
way the comment is phrased.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 23
{Auditor comment – Federal grants primarily, and some other grants, require that the
OMB Circular A-87 guidelines be fo llowed if the grant dollars will be used to cover any
indirect costs. The federal grant applicat ions I am aware of, have been submitted without
requesting indirect reimbursement. Some of these grants require matching monies or the
maximum grant might be requested to cover operatio ns. However, the County
Departments in these situat ions are incurring addit ional indirects from this act ivit y and
are not being reimbursed. If they could include these costs, they would recover these
costs and would be in a posit ion to understand the costs incurred when proposing new
grant aided programs. }
Who certifies?
{Auditor comment - Certification of the indirect cost plan is by the Count y’s Finance
Officer.}
What are department indirects?
{Auditor comment - Departmental indirects relate to the overhead incurred within the
operating department for their programs (i.e. supervisio n and internal administrative
costs) as opposed to the indirects from the County internal service funds.}
5. Reference to Communit y Development response to Question 1 “They should be aware of
the total cost of their operation like everyo ne else. This may help them be more efficient.
This works better if client depts. are given opportunit y to affect their charges through
managed use of the service”
This could result in less service in the short run but greater expense in the long run. Also
defeats the benefit of in-house legal staff.
6. Reference to Mental Healt h response to Question 3a “But would a system like this be
cost effect ive with addit io nal t ime invo lved?”
Good point.
7. Reference to Assessor response to Question 3a “Makes sense, but you still need to
budget, and stabilit y from one year to the next would be much more desirable than large
peaks and valleys. Also, if using actual would you pay in arrears (incurred this budget
year and paid for in the next)? If so what happens if funding dries up prior to billing? If
not in arrears what happens when unant icipated expenditures occur in mid budget cycle?
General fund depart ments that do not have an ending fund balance would have possibly
different issues regarding this than separate funds.”
Good point.
8. Reference to Auditor comment to Question 3a “Many of the Legal departments in other
Counties are direct charges to departments and are not treated as an indirect. Many of the
cost allocat ion plans reviewed relied on prior period actual results for allocat ions.”
What counties were examined?
{Auditor comment – See page 34 of the report. Washington, Clackamas, and Mario n
counties had direct time charges that were not made part of their indirect cost plan. }
9. Reference to Auditor comment to Question 3b “The above recommendation contemplates
utilizing actual results o f period to subsequent ly adjust charges so that the departments
utilizing services actually pay the charges.”
When are charges adjusted? How often? Budget adjustments too?
{Auditor comment – I believe Jackson Count y adjusts their current year charges based on
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 24
review of the prior year budgeted to actual just after the close of the prior year. If OMB
Circular A-87 is fo llowed it requires a method to adjust costs to actual.}
10. Reference to Question 4c - “Internal service funds should implement appropriate
performance measures so qualit y and cost of services can be mo nitored.”
I would like to know what departments use performance measures and whether those
measures accurately reflect quality/quantity of service.
{Auditor comment – I am aware that Juvenile, CDD and the Sheriff have varying degrees
of performance measures. The Finance Director and I have been looking at ways to
increase the County’s use of performance measures and benchmarking to answer
effect iveness and efficiency quest ions. }
11. Reference to Question 5b survey co mments “County management should consider
allocat ing building usage to funds/departments.” Communit y Development comments –
“However, taking out of the mix those buildings owned by the customer dept.” Mental
Health co mments – “Yes, if other types of charges are correspondingly reduced.”
The County “owns” all buildings – not an individual department??
{Auditor comment – The idea of this is that the Count y incurs costs for buildings (to
varying degrees) that departments occupy. Having an indirect charge for rent will allow
recovery of so me of those costs by so me grants. In particular, the Assessor is charged
rent for their portion of the building so they can recover some of this through the State’s
assessment and taxation grant. }
12. Reference to Question 13b response by Risk management - “Yeah and then they could be
excellent accountants as well! Spend as much t ime accounting for the service as
providing it. I've been on a billable hour and understand the scam.”
True
Mark Amberg (Deputy Count y Counsel) response dated 10/19/04:
David, as you and I have discussed, I'd just like to add that, although it is important to have
some form of accounting for what we do and how we spend our time, we need to keep in mind
what our purpose is as an in-house legal department. If we were in private practice, it would be
important to track our time for each client down to the tenth of an hour so we could make money
and make sure we were accurately billing our clients. I think that exact accounting is far less
important for in-house counsel. I don't want to have any system that discourages departments
from picking up the phone and calling us for what seem to be nickel and dime questions. A major
function we serve is prevention of problems (an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure). If
departments get the sense that their budget will be impacted every time they call us, my fear is
that we simply won't get the calls. This could result in an issue that could have been easily
addressed up front turning into a major liability for the County - perhaps at the cost of tens or
hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I think we need to track our time the best we can but that the percentages of time spent working
for each department should only be used as guidelines for indirect billing purposes rather than
for an exact accounting of time to the departments.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 25
APPENDIX I –
DETAILED CHARTS AND COMMENTS FROM DEPARTMENTS
Abbreviations for departments
SO - Sheriff’s Office
CDD - Communit y Development
MH - Mental Health
AS - Assessor's Office
H - Health
R - Road
J - Juvenile Co mmunit y Just ice
DA - District Attorney
AP - Adult Parole & Probation
RM - Risk management
SW - Solid Waste
CO - Clerk's Office
T - Tax
911 - 911
CCF - Comm. on Children and Families
F - Fair & Expo
JC - Just ice Court
V - Veteran's Services
LL - Law Library
IS-IT - Internal service fund - Informat ion
Techno logy
IS-L - Internal service fund - Legal Counsel
IS-F - Internal service fund - Finance
RECOMMENDATION QUESTIONS:
QUESTION 1 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 1 - Internal service departments should understand what their total
cost to operate is.
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Internal service depart ments should gather relevant statist ics to calculate
costs to other internal service funds. Internal service funds should consider these imputed costs
when developing a fully costed hourly rate for third party contracts. Analysis indicates there is
no significant benefit to allocat ing between internal service funds
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 26
Strongly Agree
1. Is logical and results in more accurate allo cat ions. (SO)
2. They should be aware of the total cost of their operation like everyo ne else. This may
help them be more efficient. This works better if client depts. are given more opportunit y
to affect their charges through managed use o f the service. (CDD)
3. Internal service depart ments have a huge resource advantage...they can pass 100% of
their cost on to their customer". I don't have that same option, so your increased internal
service charge, forces me to cut my cost in other areas in order to stay within budget. My
option to stay wit hin budget is to cut cost. But they should not see themselves as a "fixed"
cost center. Like every other "fund" department they too must be able to "flex" their
services to match available resources."(H)
4. Never have understood why so me depart ments are not charged for use. (RM)
Somewhat Agree
1. As long as this does not drive indirect costs up any more (MH)
2. Makes sense that they would know their cost of operating (AS)
3. Agree that, for accounting purposes, services provided by other internal service
departments should be included so we know the true costs of our operations. Do not
believe that there should be an actual charge of costs between internal service
departments.(IS-L)
Indifferent
1. Believe we are getting the value for our services (J)
Somewhat Disagree
1. Alt hough the above statement is true, it also somewhat obscures the cost of an internal
dept to a line dept. (i.e. I don't know the total cost of finance because I’m paying for it in
IT, Bldg. Svc., Etc) It also adds an unnecessary level of co mplexit y. (T)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment- The abbreviated recommendation, provided in the survey, confused
some readers. The recommendat ion acknowledges that it would not be worth the effort
to allo cate costs to Internal Service Funds. However, the recommendation asserts the
charges should be calculated and co mmunicated to those Internal Service Funds so they
can understand their cost to operate. This might be relevant to some funds that provide
services outside of the County (IT and Building Services) when they develop their charge
rates.}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 27
QUESTION 2 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 2 - Indirect costs should be allocated to BOCC
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Indirect costs should be allocated to the BOCC.
Strongly Agree
1. Would create better understanding of cost of doing business (MH)
2. Absolutely. You need to know the cost of services provided. (RM)
3. Why would they be exempt? (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. Agree that, for accounting purposes, services provided by other internal service
departments should be included so we know the true costs of our operations. Do not
believe that there should be an actual charge of costs between internal service
departments. What is the rational for having the board subject to one but not all indirect
costs? (IS-L)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree
1. They o ften funct ion as an internal service provider (dept liaisons, for example). (CDD)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment - CDD disagreement was the subject of recommendat ion #5a. In the
absence of charging the BOCC as an indirect cost, it should receive the same t ypes of
charges as any other department utilizing services.}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 28
QUESTION 3a – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 3a - Allocation bases using actual activity are more relevant in
allocating charges than budgeted amounts
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Management should consider utilizing prior results of
activit y for allocation bases (i.e. fro m prior calendar year) if this will achieve better equit y in
assessing charges for the projected period. This might depend on the type o f allocat ion base
used.
Strongly Agree
1. Absolutely. Not only actual FTE, but what that FTE did and for whom. (CDD)
2. But would a system like this be cost effect ive with addit ional t ime invo lved? (MH)
3. I think budgets (like HBT, etc.) Should budget with real" fo lks. Our workers' comp.
Charges are developed linked to payroll. No payroll, no risk resources." (RM)
4. Budgeted #'s vary too greatly fro m actual, and not in consistent, or proportionate patterns.
(T)
Somewhat Agree
1. My experience is if you use budget the allocat ions are adjusted if there are significant
variances between budget and actual. (SO)
2. Makes sense, but you still need to budget, and stabilit y fro m one year to the next would
be much more desirable than large peaks and valleys. Also, if using actual would you
pay in arrears (incurred this budget year and paid for in the next)? If so what happens if
funding dries up prior to billing? If not in arrears what happens when unant icipated
expenditures occur in mid budget cycle? General fund departments that do not have an
ending fund balance would have possibly different issues regarding this than separate
funds. (AS)
3. Ok with the current practice. (J)
Indifferent – No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 29
Somewhat Disagree
1. Not certain I understand exactly what is meant by this but if what is meant is that
allocated charges should be based strict ly on past actual act ivit y for a department, then I
disagree. Actual activit y should be a primary basis for allocat ing charges but our business
and act ivit y for the departments can fluctuate quite a bit depending on circumstances. For
example, when allocat ing charges, we should look at historical actual act ivit y and at
projected activit y for a department. (IS-L)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment - Many of the Legal departments in other Counties are direct charges
to departments and are not treated as an indirect. Many o f the cost allocat ion plans
reviewed relied on prior period actual results for allocat ions. }
QUESTION 3b – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 3b - Charges should be adjusted to reflect actual charges by the
internal service fund
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: An even better approach is to use actual activit y results and actual cost
to subsequently adjust charges to funds/departments.
Strongly Agree
1. Precisio n is an object ive, to make charges all the more accurate. (CDD)
Somewhat Agree
1. Need some consistency for budgeting purposes, we feel a rolling average would be worth
strong considerat ion (MH)
2. As stated in the report recommendat ions, prior years actual costs may be the best method
for determining an equitable allocation for the projected period. (R)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 30
3. Actual is very tough to base charges. What if you have an abnormal year. Trending may
be more appropriate. Actual will require constant adjust ments. (RM)
4. We should pay for actual, and any carryo ver could be spent on programs in areas
significant ly different from those who funded it. (T)
Indifferent
1. Again would this be in arrears (incurred this budget year paid for in the next)? You
would also need a very clear (binding?) cost from the indirects so a department could
budget accordingly. (AS)
Somewhat Disagree
1. As noted above, don't believe there should be actual charges between internal service
funds. (IS-L)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment - The above recommendat ion contemplates utilizing actual results of
period to subsequent ly adjust charges so that the departments utilizing services actually
pay the charges.}
QUESTION 4a – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 4a - Internal service funds should separate services into meaningful
cost components
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Activit ies of Count y internal service funds should be separated into
clearly identifiable co mponents.
Strongly Agree
1. Just as a private business would want to know, so they can see what they're paying for.
(CDD)
2. Very important, not just expenditures but ways to measure qualit y and effect iveness.
How do they determine whether they are do ing a good job? Need to develop measures to
track. (MH)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 31
3. It would be helpful if the operating departments received so me sort of invo ice from the
internal service departments quant ifying the services provided and the associated costs.
This would be no different than what the road department does when we bill other
departments for services (vehicle maintenance is a good example). The down side to this
of course is that the internal service providers would need to develop a cost accounting
system. (R)
4. It is an example of where we pay for Cadillac service when maybe we don't need a
Cadillac in all cases. We have no detail fro m which to make meaningful cost/benefit
assessments. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. If possible. I know our fund is used for stuff we did not plan on or that is related. I have
no concept whether others are in the same boat. (RM)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
QUESTION 4b – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 4b - Internal service funds should clarify the level of service
customers will receive
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Internal service managers should clarify expectations and
responsibilit ies with users.
Strongly Agree
1. BUT, based on the DESIRED level of the customer. (CDD)
2. Would like a negotiated process. (MH)
3. Here is the key po int: the customer" should dictate the level of service they can afford to
purchase from the internal service department not visa-versa. The idea of a "user" group
of department heads that meet with the large cost internal service providers would be
very helpful. (i/s and building services). This way the department head would have a
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 32
higher level o f buy-in to what services they say they need and can afford to purchase. All
this effort to try and quantify and just ify the level of services provided and reach
consensus around the basic allocation formula continues to miss this most basic point. "
(H)
4. Current ly, operating depart ments only have a vague idea of the level of service, usually
based on past experience rather than on a policy or agreement. (R)
5. Absolutely. It's crazy that we pay for something and have no idea what we should be
receiving in exchange. Obviously, this is not any way to do business. (AP)
Somewhat Agree
1. I think most of us do not have a clue about the breadth of service provided so detail could
not hurt. (RM)
2. This sounds like a laudable goal but not sure how easy or realist ic it is to do this. (IS-L)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
QUESTION 4c – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 4c - Internal service funds should implement appropriate
performance measures so quality and cost of services can be monitored
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: The County should consider implement ing appropriate performance
measures so qualit y and cost of services can be mo nitored. Qualit y can also be measured by
comparison to industry standards and surveying department’s sat isfact ion with the qualit y of
services. When costs and performance are consistent ly calculated, decisio n makers and cit izens
can determine the true cost of providing County services and achieving outcomes.
Strongly Agree
1. Just as any good manager should. (CDD)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 33
2. Very important, not just expenditures but ways to measure qualit y and effect iveness.
How do they determine whether they are do ing a good job? Need to develop measures to
track. (MH)
Somewhat Agree
1. May be difficult to implement. (R)
2. They've been talking about performance measures for forty years and it is mostly talk
because it is very difficult to emplo y object ive, meaningful standards. I think the latter
idea, comparison to benchmarks, other counties, industry standards is a faster, cheaper
and more useful point of discussio n. (T)
3. This will increase indirect costs (IS-IT)
Indifferent
1. Don't know. If we were subject to the same playing field as others (like not conducting
business under a microscope or with all the public meet ing requirements), than yes. I do
not see these as equal. Kind of an apples to oranges comparison. (RM)
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
QUESTION 5a – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 5a - County management should consider allocating some of the
BOCC as an indirect cost
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: County management should consider allocating costs of the BOCC to
funds/depart ments.
Strongly Agree – No comments
Somewhat Agree
1. Would create consistency. (MH)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 34
Indifferent
1. If/when t imes get tight. (CDD)
2. I'm not sure what is meant here. We should charge the BOCC for service but I don't see it
going the other way. (RM)
Somewhat Disagree
1. I don't see the basis other than a commo n desire to share costs with other activit ies. (T)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment - The survey of larger counties indicated they charge an indirect cost
for a portion of the cost for their Commissio ner Office. }
QUESTION 5b – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 5b - County management should consider allocating building usage
(rent) as an indirect cost
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: County management should consider allocating building usage to
funds/depart ments.
Strongly Agree
1. I think this is an important cost component that lends to better comparabilit y wit h the
private sector. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. Should be for informat ion only. This is not a controllable expense. (SO)
2. However, taking out of the mix those buildings owned by the customer dept. (CDD)
3. Yes, if other types of charges are correspondingly reduced (MH)
4. Unknown. People have different qualit y space. Charge higher amounts if you are in a
new building versus a daycare center? (RM)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 35
Indifferent
1. You already do this don't you. I get a $ 150,000 annual charge for our HHS building. Do
you mean charges for use of other county space...like at the BOCC? Rent should be a
direct charge not an indirect. (h)
2. I'm confused on this one. I thought indirect costs paid to Building Services were
essent ially rent" in the current arrangement."(LL)
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
{Auditor Comment – The survey of larger counties indicated some of them charge for
rent. Deschutes County only has a couple of departments that actually pay a rental
charge. There is a lack of consistency in charging departments that occupy space.}
QUESTION 6 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 6 - A committee should be formed to annually review the indirect
cost allocations prior to allocation of charges to departments
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: The County should consider forming a subco mmittee of County
Departments to review the indirect cost plan including internal service fund budgets and
allocat ion methodology prior to allocat ion of charges to departments to gain a better
understanding of internal service fund charges and the underlying allocat ion methodology.
Strongly Agree
1. Only if it is likely the recommendations of the committee would be incorporated into the
indirect budget methodology, or at a minimum very strongly considered at the
commissio ner level. (MH)
2. But, again this co mmittee should have a say about what level o f service they can afford to
purchase. This is far more important than co ming to terms about any kind of an allo cat ion
process or formula. (H)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 36
3. I think this is the key. Current ly we're not really users in the sense that we have no
cho ice - either to service level, or cost. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. More important would be annual meet ings between the customer and internal service
dept clarifying level o f service to be provided and accompanying cost. (CDD)
2. Most laypeople do not have a clue. I'm t ired of committees full of people you spend most
of your time trying to explain what is going on (e.g.- EBAC co mmittee). (RM)
3. I believe that most of my reservat ions would be addressed if I were more informed. A
committee would help in this area (SW)
4. More costs, bureaucracy, etc. (IS-IT)
Indifferent
1. Need to find a way to obtain data so departments know whether their charges are higher
or lower than other counties. (IS-F)
Somewhat Disagree
1. Indirects should be negotiated by the provider and the user of the service. (SO)
2. This is part of what the budget committee and internal auditor are supposed to do - I don't
think an addit io nal committee is needed. Proposed indirect charges are submitted to each
department before they submit their budgets. If particular departments or the budget
committee have concerns about indirect allocations, they can address those concerns with
the indirect service depart ment. (IS-L)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
QUESTION 7 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 7 - Internal service funds should calculate charges based on
inclusion of all applicable funds/depts..
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 37
Full recommendation: Internal service funds should calculate charges to all funds/departments.
Finance should provide internal service fund managers with the ant icipated fund/depart ment
descript ions to be used in the County budget.
Strongly Agree
1. They should be aware of the total cost of their operation like everyo ne else. This may
help them be more efficient. This works better if client depts. are given more opportunit y
to affect their charges through managed use o f the service. (CDD)
2. This is only fair. You use it, you pay for it. (RM)
3. Other than the circular allocat ion of allo cations between internal service funds, everyone
else should pay their fair share. Otherwise, we wind up fooling ourselves into making
poor management decisio ns based on information that is inherent ly flawed. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. Will be more accurate (MH)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree– No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
QUESTION 8 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 8 - IT should remove adjustments from its allocation computation
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: IT should remove these adjust ments from its allocat ion computation.
Strongly Agree
1. Strongly. This was a mistake in the first place and should be corrected as soon as
possible. (CDD)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 38
Somewhat Agree
1. This will leave them underfunded, they need to be held to a higher standard. (MH)
Indifferent
1. I do not like the system" charges (infrastructure) and charges to account for other
departments that are not charged. " (RM)
2. Don't know what adjust ment we're talking about here. (T)
3. Don't know enough re this issue to comment. (IS-L)
Somewhat Disagree
1. Some organizat ions have their own it departments so should receive an adjust ment. (SO)
2. Again, this is not about allocat ion formula to me at all. I don't have any disagreement
with the method that i/s uses to assign charges. However, I need to be able to say...I can't
afford what you are selling me... so I will choose a lesser level o f service or I may need to
shop elsewhere. (H)
Strongly Disagree
1. Adjust ments should be kept in place for those departments that rely on their own internal
staff for it funct ions. (R)
{Auditor comment –I continue to support this recommendat ion. The significant number of
indifferent responses indicated that departments did not understand this recommendation and
perhaps the finding as summarized in the survey.
The recommendat ion to remove the adjustments from the IT allocat ion methodology was
based on review of other counties’ methods as well as input fro m an advisory co mmittee.
The IT infrastructure charge is based on department’s relat ive use of the IT system as
measured by hardware types. This charge would cover applications, citrix infrastructure,
backups, securit y protocols, etc, that every department utilizes.
Some of the departments that disagreed with this question also benefit by its continuance.
Some of the departments benefit ing from the current adjust ment already benefit through less
direct IT time charges. It would not be fair to give some departments a lesser charge for items
that all use equally.}
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 39
QUESTION 9 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 9 - Best practices require IT to include overhead costs in their
calculation of direct hourly charge rates
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Informat ion techno logy should recalculate its direct hourly charge rates.
Total compensat ion should be divided by available charge hours (total hours available for work
less anticipated overhead hours). In addit ion, the department should consider including in its
billing rates the additional overhead incurred by the department including supervisory overhead,
training, supplies and other departmental overhead.
For outside service contracts, the department should consider using a fully costed hourly rate.
Costing a service is not the same thing as pricing it. The pricing decisio n needs to weigh issues
of equit y and efficiency. (Costing Government Services: A guide for Decision Making).
Strongly Agree
1. Sounds good, I don't want labor costs I don't use buried in equipment that I do use. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. As long as it continues to diligent ly track their hours, this is ok. (CDD)
2. Compare wit h industry standard (MH)
3. I never have liked the piece of equipment charge. It varies so much by user. (RM)
Indifferent
1. That’s fine, but again who do I charge to re-coop my own overhead cost? (H)
Somewhat Disagree
1. Alt hough I don't like assessment per piece of equipment, I don't believe IT indirect costs
should include supervisio n, training, and supplies. (JC)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 40
QUESTION 10 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 10 - Finance should consider utilizing transactional allocation bases
to allocate charges
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: The County Finance Department should consider utilizing transactional
allocat ion bases or use them as a tool to corroborate and adjust their current methodology and
adjustments.
Strongly Agree
1. The heaviest users should pay more. Commo n sense. (CDD)
2. This is industry standard (MH)
Somewhat Agree – No comments
Indifferent
1. Do not understand the concept. (RM)
Somewhat Disagree
1. There is no high correlation between a transact ion and finance services, except maybe in
payro ll. We do a lot of checks, but we export the file they use to generate them. (T)
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 41
QUESTION 11 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 11 - Finance should calculate charges based on inclusion of all
funds and depts. that can be legally charged
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Finance should calculate costs to all funds and departments and allocate
costs to those that can legally be charged. The general fund should probably incur the costs for
those funds not charged.
Strongly Agree
1. Otherwise, customers get charged more for the service than it costs to provide. The costs
the general fund pays for are pretty much general fund operations. (CDD)
2. Absolutely. What is just ificat ion for not charging other users? (RM)
Somewhat Agree
1. This would ult imately make finance more accurate (MH)
2. Sounds reasonable to me. (T)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 42
QUESTION 12 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 12 - Personnel should not pay direct costs of departments
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: The County should consider recording direct costs as expenditures to
the operating depart ment. These costs may be coordinated through the Personnel department.
Strongly Agree
1. Otherwise, subsidies can and do occur. (CDD)
2. Sounds reasonable. (RM)
Somewhat Agree
1. This seems to make sense. (MH)
Indifferent
1. We like the current system. (J)
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree
1. We need a more centralized human resource department and thus the cost should be
directed there and charged back to departments. (H)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 43
QUESTION 13a – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 13a - Legal should update its time study to support its allocation to
all funds/depts.
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Legal should update its time study to support its allocat ion to all
funds/depart ments. Legal should consider allocat ing the overhead equitably amo ng the users of
their services based on time charges.
Strongly Agree
1. If they have the means to efficient ly do this (MH)
2. I do not know their methodology for charges. (RM)
3. Clearly things may have changed significant ly and need to reflect those changes. (T)
Somewhat Agree
1. ...And take it one step further and bill on an ongoing basis based on usage. (CDD)
2. This is occurring. Since the first of the year, legal has kept time records. Method of
keeping time records still needs to be updated. (IS-L)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 44
QUESTION 13b – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 13b - Legal counsel should keep time records
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l I S -F i n a n c e
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Legal Counsel should keep time records
Strongly Agree
1. Why wouldn't they? (MH)
2. This is occurring. Since the first of the year, legal has kept time records. Method of
keeping time records still needs to be updated. (IS-L)
Somewhat Agree
1. ...And take it one step further and bill on an ongoing basis based on usage. (CDD)
2. I know it's a pain, but that is the only way to measure cost/benefit and fairly allo cate costs
and priorit ies. (T)
Indifferent
1. Yeah and then they could be excellent accountants as well! Spend as much time
accounting for the service as providing it. I've been on a billable hour and understand the
scam. (RM)
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 45
QUESTION 13c – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 13c - Legal should utilize its overhead costs in determining legal fee
rates charged
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Legal should utilize its overhead costs in determining legal fee rates
charged.
Strongly Agree
1. A much better model! (J)
2. This occurred in determining the most recent adjustment to our billing rate. (IS-L)
Somewhat Agree
1. Ok, as long as depts. can buy the service they need. I recognize the concern that depts.
sometimes may not seek legal advice when they should because of concerns about cost.
However, this should be a management issue, not a reason not to charge properly. (CDD)
2. This would seem to make sense (MH)
3. It's part of the cost of having their services. (T)
Indifferent
1. Don’ know the basis for charges. (RM)
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 46
QUESTION 14 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 14 - Legal should track and bill all time spent with non-county
entities
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Legal should track and bill all t ime spent with non-County ent it ies. A
fully costed billing rate should be used. The department should develop procedures for billing
and co llect ion so this funct ion can be performed in a timely manner.
Strongly Agree
1. Wit hout getting too cumberso me and expensive to operate. (CDD)
2. Seems ridiculous that they do not (MH)
3. I'm not interested in subsidizing other operations. (RM)
4. I didn't know they could provide outside services, but if they do, they should be fully
loaded. (T)
5. This is occurring. (IS-L)
Somewhat Agree
1. Is there enough non-county billable time to just ify developing a procedure to track and
perform this process? (R)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 47
QUESTION 15 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 15 - Direct legal costs of departments should be paid by those
departments
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Outside legal fees should be paid by the benefit ing department.
Strongly Agree
1. Wit hout getting too cumberso me and expensive to operate. (CDD)
2. Seems ridiculous that they do not (MH)
3. I'm not interested in subsidizing other operations. (RM)
4. I didn't know they could provide outside services, but if they do, they should be fully
loaded. (T)
5. This is occurring. (IS-L)
Somewhat Agree
1. Is there enough non-county billable time to just ify developing a procedure to track and
perform this process? (R)
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree -No comments
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 48
QUESTION 16 – CHART AND COMMENTS
Question 16 - The County should develop an indirect cost allocation plan in
compliance with the OMB Circular A-87 requirements
-2
-1
0
1
2Sherriff's O f f i c e C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t M e n t a l H e a l t h A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e H e a l t h R o a d J u v e n i l l e C o m m u n i t y J u s t i c e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n R i s k m a n a g e m e n t S o l i d W a s t e C l e r k 's O f f i c e T a x 9 1 1 C C F F a i r & E x p o J u s t i c e C o u r t V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s L a w L i b r a r y I S -I n f o r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y I S -L e g a l C o u n s e l
Departments (from largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Strongly
Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Indifferent
Somewhat
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Full recommendation: Management should consider complying with the OMB Circular A-87
requirements for indirect cost plan certificat ion. By do ing so, the County may be able to recover
reasonable indirect costs. In addit ion, the County will have better management information as to
the underlying costs for its programs and be better able to make decisio ns about those programs.
Strongly Agree
1. The feds recognize and accept this practice. Why not? (CDD)
2. Yes, as long as not cost prohibit ive (MH)
3. Should be looked into to see if beneficial (AS)
4. Long overdue. (H)
5. Makes sense. (RM)
6. That is the way things work, or should. (T)
7. By acquiring a federal indirect rate departments will be able to take those costs right off
the top of grants. This will help tremendously in our abilit y to receive funds for true
costs. We strongly reco mmend this be moved on immediately. (CCF)
Somewhat Agree – No comments
Indifferent – No comments
Somewhat Disagree – No comments
Strongly Disagree
1. Many grants limit indirect costs or do not allow them at all! (J)
{Auditor Comment - Juvenile’s comment is correct but without a certified Plan departments
will o ften not have the option to build in the costs within the grant applicat ion and must
always incur the internal indirects charged for these programs. Without a calculat ion,
departments might not have an understanding of how much they are taking on in indirects
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 49
with so me grant proposals. In addit ion to County indirects, there are often departmental
indirects that should be addressed in grant proposals.}
OPEN COMMENTS
1. The County Auditor did an excellent job with this study. This was lo ng overdue. (CDD)
2. Admin - Link Grants person cost to benefit derived. There are some quest ions fro m
Mental Health directed at the necessit y o f the "state of the art" software and equipment
that IT is permitted to purchase and then charge for. It is our hope that it truly is the
intent of the County to address concerns like this through the somewhat newly formed IT
committee. If this committee has the authorit y to really be an influential force with
regard to the techno logy and purchasing decisio ns made by IT. It is the feeling of Mental
Health that it would be nice if each of the indirect departments would maybe visit the
departments they serve or perhaps draft a memo that outlines the services they provide.
We feel it is likely that we would use more of the available services if we could see the
ent ire menu. Difficult to respond without full understanding of the impact of the
recommendat ions on individual departments as services to the public." (MH)
3. I don't understand the basis for internal service charges. I think they should be fair across
the board and not charged to departments that have money! For, example - Workers
Compensat ion for clerical workers is the same for any department. I have no clue the
basis for any depart ments' charges and whether they are equitable in relat ion to other
departments. Are my charges comparable wit h other departments? So, now you have a
department that expends a great deal of money on infrastructure, software, new furniture,
etc... Are these luxuries" incorporated in internal charges. Is it necessary for departments
to support a lifest yle that between departments is not equitable? "(RM)
4. I did not include many co mments because I don't feel informed enough. I don't think it is
necessarily a good idea to focus totally on allo cated or actual costs when considering the
value that our internal service departments bring. Long term financial benefit s and other
non fiscal benefits are important factors as well. There are some areas where I have
outsourced some services and would like to see a reduction in the internal service costs,
but I don't want to jeopardize the bigger picture by reducing my support, and I am not
informed enough to know what kind of impacts I might have by looking at outsourcing.
(SW)
5. The Veterans' Service's Department has no problems wit h the current system. Everything
works great with all the Departments listed. Thank you (V)
6. Being a small and iso lated department, many of my answers reflect my general lack o f
understanding about the indirect costs and how they affect the Law Library's budget. I
appreciate your report and survey. Wit h a small staff, large physical space, and limited
revenue sources, I feel the Law Library is an unusual situat ion, and that I need to educate
myself on the best way to utilize those revenues. (LL)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 50
SATISFACTION QUESTIONS:
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY:
Information Technology - Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H e a l t h
A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .5)(Avg. .8)
Cost allocations comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. In terms of responding to requests for assistance/service, IT does an excellent job. They
are pleasant, helpful and respond quickly. Costs for Citrix seemed high, but our
department did not come on board until much later than other departments so we had to
play catch up. (AP)
2. Good service but expensive. Reduced 04/05 but 03/04 at 21,000 for 4 FTE. We have few
service calls. (RM)
3. Overall service is very good. At times, however, it seems as if we are charged for IT
time as they work on problems that are IT generated. This seems unfair.(SW)
Neutral
1. Charges seem so high, but maybe that is what it takes to stay current with techno logy. I
would say our level our response borders on the one we actually checked and generally
dissat isfied. (MH)
2. As part of the General Fund and wit h the BOCC and Budget Committee approving these
indirects it has litt le effect on my budget, if I were self funded I might see this differently
(AS)
3. I've had very brief exposure to it - it's okay but not controllable. (T)
4. Seems like so much mo ney for a tiny department and equipment. (LL)
Generally Dissatisfied
1. Rating is based ent irely on financials, as I am aware of an inequit y in the amount charged
to CDD. On the plus side, I believe IT is ahead of the game in basing much of its
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 51
allocat ion on dept usage. (Hours tracking, # of devices, etc.) Rating on service would be
Very Satisfied. (CDD)
2. IT cost should not be considered fixed, but should "flex" within the same budget
constraints affect ing non general fund departments. (H)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Very responsive. Might consider quarterly or annual client meet ings. (CDD)
2. Expensive, but level o f service and product is good (MH)
3. Great service for a very expensive price. (T)
Neutral - NO COMMENTS
Generally Dissatisfied
1. Wit hout benchmarking wit h other counties, you don't know if the costs for the services
provided are appropriate. (SO)
2. The Road Department has its own internal IT staff and receives very litt le direct support
fro m IT. (R)
3. As above, seems like high costs for such a small department (LL)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
IT - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = .7)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A
d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well- NO COMMENTS
Adequate
1. Monthly reports are great. (CDD)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 52
2. Thank you for asking this quest ion. My response really applies to all departments.
Frankly, I don't think anyo ne from any of these departments has ever told me what we
should get for our dollars. I take that back a bit in that IT was clear as to what we would
receive in terms of Citrix. In regard to Building Services, only when I was so
exasperated over our custodian's performance did I request (and receive) a list of duties to
be performed. (AP)
Some
1. Monthly reports are helpful (J)
2. Info provided. I hate paying for other users that get a free ride. (RM)
3. For IT and all of the fo llowing depts. - I'm not aware of any formal co mmunicat ion of
internal service plans. What I know of them I've gotten informally. (T)
Not at all - NO COMMENTS
BUILDING SERVICES:
Building Services - Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H e a l t h
A s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e
H e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e & P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .1)(Avg. .1)
Cost allocations comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. I am aware of a recent reallocat ion of outdated numbers which more accurately allo cated
costs based on occupied space, but I believe much more can be done in tracking hours
and charging depts. based on actual usage. (CDD)
2. Response time is frequent ly poor, but there seems to be signs of improvement over the
last 6 months or so. (MH)
Neutral
1. Good response for Risk Management. (RM)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 53
2. Per conversat ion: Considering using outside services since poor service. Need
expectation so know what they should get for their money. They are already contracting
out lawn care. (SW)
3. New Bldg has obviously changed things.(T)
Generally Dissatisfied
1. Informat ion on how the rate/$ is determined is not provided.(SO)
2. I'm not certain what the issue is with Building Services. Perhaps too much to do and not
enough staff to do it may be the case. In any event, somet imes our requests are dealt
with quickly and other times it feel like pulling teeth to get Building Services here to
respond to our problem, etc. Response time does not seem related to the seriousness of
the problem eit her. For example, we recent ly discovered that you could open the door
fro m our wait ing room into our office area with a nail or credit card. This is a serious
securit y breach due to the nature of our business coupled with the fact that we have
offenders living in the first floor of our building. It took more than one request and
several days to get someone over here to address that problem. Our custodial services are
dismal. It's difficult to understand just what we are paying for. We requested a list of
duties fro m Building Services that the custodian was to regularly co mplete and were
amazed at the items that were on it that had never been done (vacuuming inside our
offices, vacuuming our wait ing room, etc.) It appears that the only dut ies completed by
our custodian are to empt y wastebaskets and wipe out bathroom sinks and toilets.
Carpeting (either in o ffices or hallway or conference rooms) never appears to be
vacuumed. Due to a huge increase in our Building Services Indirect Charges two years
ago, we had to cut our custodial services to 3 days a week. This wasn't so bad when we
were only open 4 days a week, but now that we are back to a 5-day work week, we
consistent ly have overflowing trash bins and used paper towels on the bathroom floor
when we co me to work in the morning. Frankly, I'd like to hire a business in the
communit y to clean our building. I believe that we'd get better service. (AP)
3. We are paying an exorbitant amount for janitorial service; I don't feel that the costs have
been outlined clearly to ident ify what we are paying for. I would like to see an itemized
list of what that money covers. (911)
4. Not dissat isfied so much as unclear on what exact ly is being paid for (LL)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Responsive. (CDD)
2. Seems to get the job done eventually (MH)
3. Very good service for a more reasonable price. (T)
Neutral - NO COMMENTS
Generally Dissatisfied
1. It seems it would be less expensive to the county to outsource this service. (SO)
2. Same as above; not sure what services I am getting for the costs. (LL)
Very Dissatisfied
1. See cost allocat ion comment above. (AP)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 54
Building Services - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = -.2)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well - NO COMMENTS
Adequate - NO COMMENTS
Some
1. Only see materials bills. (CDD)
2. Have had to request info (J)
Not at all – NO COMMENTS
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 55
FINANCE:
Finance - Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A
d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .9)(Avg. 1.2)
Cost allocation comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. The Finance Depart ment is very helpful and responsive. (AP)
2. Pay the bills timely. I wish they would not change my vouchers for insurance to
categories we don't want. I dislike the pooling" of resources into one fund when there are
many more purposes. Too cumberso me to change so we live with the status quo. (RM)
Neutral
1. More work should be done on calculat ing dept usage--indicators such as # of
transactions, vouchers, deposits, etc as a means to allocate cost. (CDD)
2. We don't pay much, but they don't do much for us - most of their cost is incurred on
behalf o f a few big departments. (T)
Generally Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. A litt le unyielding in so me budget policies, but generally posit ive to work with. (CDD)
2. Seems like fair bang for buck (MH)
3. They do a great job, it's just a matter of the equit y of the allocat ion, which may be fair, I
don't know. (T)
Neutral - NO COMMENTS
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 56
Generally Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Finance - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = .1)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well- NO COMMENTS
Adequate - NO COMMENTS
Some
1. Pretty much a given. (CDD)
Not at all - NO COMMENTS
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 57
PERSONNEL:
Personnel - Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A
d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .9)(Avg. .8)
Cost allocation comments
Very Satisfied
1. No problems – responsive (RM)
Generally Satisfied
1. Efforts should continue to make sure as much as possible is billed direct ly to using depts,
rather than paid generally by personnel and allocated. (CDD)
2. Training budget is large and confusing for most departments. Not clear on all services
available fro m Personnel. (MH)
3. Excellent service. I do wish, however, that they would weed through job applicants and
remove those that don't qualify for the posit ion before sending the applicat ions to us.
(AP)
4. Okay as far as I know, seems fair based on what I know some of the other depts. are
paying.(T)
Neutral- NO COMMENTS
Generally Dissatisfied
1. Should not be based on planned FTE (SO)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Somet imes difficult to get a hold of, but generally useful. (CDD)
2. Always quick and friendly wit h response, but it seems like so me considerat ion should be
given to Personnel handling a bigger piece o f the hiring process; such as init ial screening
of applicat ions and so me invo lvement with general reference checking (MH)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 58
3. We don't use a lot of services, but they always provide great, timely service. (T)
Neutral - NO COMMENTS
Generally Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Personnel - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = 0)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well- NO COMMENTS
Adequate - NO COMMENTS
Some
1. Minimal service fluctuation. (CDD)
Not at all - NO COMMENTS
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 59
LEGAL:
Legal - Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A
d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .7)(Avg. .8)
Cost allocation comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Expensive wit h outside lit igators. Init ially charged to cover lit igator's cost. We add
outside attorneys so beco mes very expensive. (RM)
Neutral
1. See service co mment below. (AP)
2. Seems fair. (T)
Generally Dissatisfied
1. No informat ion is provided on the $ amount is determined. (SO)
2. I see no reason why Legal couldn't operate more like a private law firm and bill 'clients'
based on actual usage. (CDD)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Need them a lot for Mental Healt h, they treat us very professionally and are typically
quite helpful (MH)
2. Service level has really improved, we don't pay much, but if we need more legal service I
am concerned that they don't have the resources to provide it. (T)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 60
Neutral
1. Could focus more on helping clients reach a goal rather than po int ing out obstacles.
(CDD)
Generally Dissatisfied
1. Most staff are very responsive and helpful. Some delays in getting an answer or
assistance. Recent ly I needed a contract amendment so that a contractor could hire extra
emplo yees. It was 4 months between my request and receiving the document. (AP)
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Legal - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = .1)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well- NO COMMENTS
Adequate - NO COMMENTS
Some - NO COMMENTS
Not at all
1. Never any ment ion of cost vs. service. (CDD)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 61
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
Administrative Services-Dept. satisfaction with costs/services
-2
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A
d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Cost allocation Services
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neutral
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
(Avg. .6)(Avg. .6)
Cost allocation comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Seems acceptable as posit ions supported are needed (MH)
Neutral
1. A limited t ime allocat ion study would probably be better than basing it on the budget.
(CDD)
2. There should not be a charge for this. (H)
3. A couple times a month, I ask the County Administrator for advice. Other than that, I'm
not at all clear about what we are paying for. (AP)
4. Communicat ion is vital. Some players" have more input and authority. "(RM)
5. Not aware of what we are paying for. (T)
6. as with Bldg maintenance, I would like a itemized list of what this cost covers (911)
Generally Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Service comments
Very Satisfied - NO COMMENTS
Generally Satisfied
1. Helpful.(CDD)
2. I don't feel that Admin should be an indirect cost at all. (H)
Neutral - NO COMMENTS
Generally Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Very Dissatisfied - NO COMMENTS
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 62
Administrative Services - Dept. satisfaction with communication level
(Average = -.3)
-1
0
1
2
S h e r r i f f 's O
f f i c e
C o m
m
u n i t y D
e v e l o p m
e n t
M
e n t a l H
e a l t h
A
s s e s s o r 's O
f f i c e
H
e a l t h
R o a d
J u v e n i l l e C o m
m
u n i t y J u s t i c e
D
i s t r i c t A
t t o r n e y
A d u l t P a r o l e &
P r o b a t i o n
R i s k m
a n a g e m
e n t
S o l i d W
a s t e
C l e r k 's O
f f i c e
T a x
9 1 1
C C F
F a i r &
E x p o
J u s t i c e C o u r t
V
e t e r a n 's S e r v i c e s
L a w
L i b r a r y
Departments (From largest to smallest in terms of indirect charges 04/05)
Very well
Some
Adequate
Not at all
Communication comments
Very Well- NO COMMENTS
Adequate - NO COMMENTS
Some - NO COMMENTS
Not at all
1. Again, I'm in the dark as to what we're paying for. (AP)
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 63
APPENDIX II – SURVEY TEMPLATE (BLANK)
INDIRECT COST PLAN REVIEW SURVEY (8/04)
In February 2004, departments received a cop y of the review of indirects for 03/04. The
review was focused on evaluating the allocation methodologies used for selected County
internal service funds. Your input in this surve y will aide the Board in responding to these
recommendations and Department concerns in the 05/06 budget c ycle. There are 29 brief
questions (some have areas for additional comment). Those who respond will have a voice in
how things move forward!
PLEASE RETURN ON OR BEFORE AUGUST 31, 2004
Thanks for your time in completing this survey!
David Givans (County Internal Auditor)
Remember: The purpose of this review and these findings was to make the allocat ion of
indirects fairer and make sure all depart ments receive their appropriate share of indirect costs.
Please try to address the questions object ively. Some of these findings may increase or decrease
indirect costs to departments.
Instructions: Please answer all questions before you save your changes and forward the
document back in an e-mail: to Davidg@co.deschutes.or.us. The detailed findings are
included in the appendix. Please call if you have any questions (330-4674)!
Responding Department:Unidentified, if not on list, please ident ify
Opening questions:
Please mark the appropriate box based on careful consideration of the question. Please
provide your comments, especially if dissatisfied, in the comment area following that internal
service fund. Please be as specific as you can. Internal services would appreciate the
constructive feedback.
a. How satisfied or dissat isfied are you with your fund’s indirect cost allocat ions?
Internal
Service dept
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neither
satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
IT
Please comment on IT:
Building
Services
Please comment on Building Services:
Finance
Please comment on Finance:
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 64
Internal
Service dept
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neither
satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Personnel
Please comment on Personnel:
Legal
Please comment on Legal:
Administrative
Services
Please comment on Admin Services:
b. How satisfied or dissat isfied are you with services provided for the cost?
Internal
Service dept
Very
Satisfied
Generally
Satisfied
Neither
satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Generally
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
IT
Please comment on IT:
Building
Services
Please comment on Building Services:
Finance
Please comment on Finance:
Personnel
Please comment on Personnel:
Legal
Please comment on Legal:
Administrative
Services
Please comment on Admin Services:
c. How well has the internal service department communicated to you the level of services you
should receive for your indirect charges?
Internal Service
dept
Very
Well
Adequately
Some
Not at All
IT
Please comment on IT:
Building Services
Please comment on Building Services:
Finance
Please comment on Finance:
Personnel
Please comment on Personnel:
Legal
Please comment on Legal:
Administrative
Services
Please comment on Admin Services:
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 65
General findings:
Your responses will address the highlighted recommendations noted after each issue.
Please tab through the survey, select in the drop down menus the most relevant answer, and
place any comments you might have in the comment area.
1. Indirect charges are not allocated to internal service funds
Internal service departments should understand what their total cost to operate is. This
will affect how they bill outside entities. This would require internal service
departments to develop costs for other internal service funds.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
2. Board of County Commissioners are exempt from all but one indirect cost
Indirect costs should be allocated to the BOCC. They are not an internal service fund
and should be treated like everyone else.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
3. Allocation bases using budgeted amounts might not properly reflect activity
Allocation bases using actual activity are more relevant in allocating charges than
budgeted amounts (i.e. actual FTE is better than budgeted FTE).
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Charges should be adjusted to reflect actual charges by the internal service fund
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
4. Efficiency and effectiveness of internal service fund services are not measured
Internal service funds should separate services into meaningful cost components so
customers can identify what they are paying for.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Internal service funds should clarify the level of service customers will receive.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 66
Comments:
Internal service funds should implement appropriate performance measures so
quality and cost of services can be monitored. When possible, they should compare
themselves to industry standards.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
5. Survey of Oregon counties identified some other indirect costs
County management should consider allocating some of the BOCC as an indirect cost
to funds/departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
County management should consider allocating building usage (rent) as an indirect cost
to funds/departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
6. User departments do not have input on internal service fund methods and
allocations
A committee should be formed to annually review the indirect cost allocations prior to
allocation of charges to departments in the budget process.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
7. Some funds/departments do not receive allocations
Internal service funds should calculate charges based on inclusion of all
funds/departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Information Technology findings:
8. The IT department does not have sufficient basis for adjust ments to its
allocations
IT should remove adjustments from its allocation computation.
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 67
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
9. Internal and external billing rates used by Information Technology are
understated
Best practices require Information Technology to include overhead costs in their
calculations of direct hourly charge rates. This will shift costs to direct labor charges
away from charges assessed per piece of equipment.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Finance and Administrative Services findings:
10. Finance allocation base requires a review of each fund/depart ment budget
Finance should consider utilizing transactional allocation bases to allocate their
charges.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
11. Finance does not allocate service fees to all funds/departments
Finance should calculate charges based on inclusion of all funds and departments and
allocate costs to those that can legally be charged. The general fund should incur the
costs for those funds not charged.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Personnel findings:
12. Some costs incurred by depart ments are expended by Personnel and allocated
out as indirect costs
Personnel should not pay direct costs of departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Legal findings:
13. Legal costs are allocated on an out-dated time study
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 68
Legal should update its time study to support its allocation to all funds/departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Legal counsel should keep time records.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Legal should utilize its overhead costs in determining legal fee rates charged.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
14. Legal has not been billing non-County entities for legal support
Legal should track and bill all time spent with non-County entities. A fully costed
billing rate should be used. The department should develop procedures for billing and
collection so this function can be performed in a timely manner.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
15. Legal incurs costs directly traceable to operating departments
Direct legal costs of departments should be paid by those departments.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Grant Finding:
16. Some grant applications do not include internal service fund costs
The County should develop an indirect cost allocation plan in compliance with the
OMB Circular A-87 requirements. By doing so, the County may be able to recover
reasonable indirect costs from some grants.
Survey Response Selection Menu: Indifferent
Comments:
Closing questions:
17. Would you be interested in being on a committee (if one is formed) to annually review
indirect cost allocations? Undecided
18. Would you be interested in meet ing to discuss the review report? Undecided
a. If so, how would you like to meet? n/a
19. What interest do you have in fo llowing up on your answers and input on indirects?Undecided
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 69
20. Do you think the review and findings are useful? Undecided
a. Should a review of the indirects be done every three to four years? n/a
OPEN COMMENT SECTION:
Report# 04/05 - 3 (Dated October 22, 2004) Page 70
APPENDIX III –SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The fo llow-up survey invo lved developing an appropriate survey questions and format to obtain
feedback fro m the numerous departments on recommendat ions made in the review.
The survey was designed to obtain department input on the recommendations made. The
exposure of some department management to these issues is probably varied. Departments were
provided with the full report details behind each question. Some responses indicated that
departments may not have read the full report and/or developed a full understanding of the issue.
The survey relied on informat ion and data received fro m departments. In addit ion to the
recommendat ions, general satisfact ion quest ions were posed to departments in the areas of cost
allocat ion, services and communication. To avoid the potential for questions to be leading, on
every quest ion in which we asked for departments’ opinio n, they were given an opportunit y to
say that they were indifferent or neutral. To this end, we constructed the questions so that the
first response cho ice was "neutral" or equivalent wording. All questions allowed for a written
comment. We especially encouraged comments when they were dissat isfied.
The survey was shared with internal service departments for input before they were sent out.
Based on internal service department input we modified some of the questions and added more
comment sections. Internal service departments raised no further issues wit h the survey design.
Survey responses were assembled with virtually no modificat ion. The only modifications made
were to remove posit ive or negat ive emplo yee references in co mments. Auditor comments were
primarily to explain quest ions brought up and/or to further clarify informat ion.