Detroit Charter Misses Out On Financial Oversight Opportunity

I seem to recall an item I worked on during the City Charter revision process which called for an Inspector General.  As the Charter has recently been passed by the vote, it would seem there should be option for the Inspector General to admiral some of the tasks of weeding out fraud, waste and abuse within departments, programs and contracts.  No one would listen to me, as usual.

See, the archaic Ombudsman is the only department other than Corporate Council who has powers of subpoena, which have never been used, seriously.  The Ombudsman ensconces individual report findings into aggregate data and dumps it on City Council in annual reports, so nothing ever gets fixed.  The office only reports on what it supposedly does to keep its out-dated paychecks a-coming.

Then, if City Council is to now go to Council by District, there busts another illogical fallacy to keep the Ombudsman.

I raise the Ombudsman because the Inspector General has no powers of subpoena, further limiting it potential.

In addition, it was never considered that the Inspector General could privately contract for investigation,which would entail appointment for special powers of subpoena.

Lastly, there was no referral mechanism for the Inspector General to report violations of law to Corporate Council for prosecution and recovery. Another missed opportunity for oversight.

Unfortunately, a great opportunity has been lost in the Inspector General because this would have strengthened the argument against the Emergency Manager.  It would have been one of those "why re-invent the wheel" contentions.

Oh well.  Now we have the same folks overseeing the same mismanagement. Just wait, there is more.
 Keep looking into the dark cavern of child welfare.  This is why I proposed getting the language of "children are our most precious treasures" put into the preamble of the Detroit City Charter.  It passed.

"Children are our most precious treasures" is code for posterity, future interests, economic stabalization, and it circumvents the FOIA exemptions and exclusions for audits and continuous quality improvements in program quality and delivery of services.

One of these days someone is going to listen and heed my advice.

Funding at risk for Detroit's social services

Detroit— The city is managing federal funding so poorly that it's risking future dollars for social service programs intended to help disadvantaged residents, officials examining Detroit's finances say.
State officials found numerous cases of misspending on salaries and other expenditures in the administration of Head Start, Women, Infants and Children nutrition support, home weatherization and other programs, according to the state's preliminary review of the city's finances.
That puts the city in a vulnerable spot as it seeks to convince state officials that it can handle its fiscal crisis without outside intervention. If Gov. Rick Snyder determines the city requires the oversight of an emergency manager, that person could bar the city from administering federal funds and instead give the job to Wayne County or a private company.

Whether it be Canada or the United States, there exists no oversight nor accountability over the egregious actions and inactions of child welfare organizations because poverty is an industry too big to fail.

Who oversees children’s aid societies?

Tim Brinton illustration

TIM BRINTON/NEWSART

André Marin

Just over five years ago, I was granted the opportunity in these very pages in the Starto argue for something I care strongly about: the need for independent oversight of Ontario’s children’s aid societies. Specifically, the need for that oversight to be conducted by my office, the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario.

As I prepare to release my sixth report as ombudsman Tuesday — the first of my second five-year term — I’m glad to be back, but for a regrettable reason: children’s aid societies are still immune from scrutiny. They are still shielded from independent investigation of serious complaints about their treatment of children or conduct of their staff — either by my office, or any other.

Every year, my office is forced to turn away hundreds of people complaining about children’s aid societies. We are powerless to investigate these cases, but we keep a record of them and refer people elsewhere for help if we can. Since I first raised the issue in the spring of 2006, and counting the cases I’ll be reporting on today, we have received a total of 2,587 complaints about children’s aid societies. That’s more than 2,500 people we have been unable to help.

It is, of course, up to the government to change this situation — and since the first ombudsman, Arthur Maloney, made this same argument in 1975, Ontario governments have said no. This, despite the fact that every other province in Canada allows its ombudsman to oversee child protection.

Let me be clear — this is the government’s choice to make, and if its choice is to shield children’s aid societies from independent oversight, so be it. However, in the interest of openness and transparency, it should clarify the somewhat murky status quo.

Just last month, Child and Youth Services Minister Laurel Broten stated in the Legislature, as others have before her, that children’s aid societies are already subject to “rigorous oversight.”

“I think it’s important for families right across the province that might be watching to understand that we have a very rigorous variety of oversights that allow you, as an individual, to come forward with a complaint if you do have one with respect to a children’s aid society,” she said.

A comforting statement, but sadly one that does not reflect the reality confronted by the thousands of parents who have complained to my office — precisely because they found their efforts to “come forward” thwarted.

The problem lies in the details of the various oversight mechanisms cited by Broten. She named the family courts, the auditor general, the office of the chief coroner, the pediatric death review committee, and the Child and Family Services Review Board.

Consider those first four. The courts are an adversarial and usually costly option. The auditor general follows the money. And the coroner and pediatric death review committee? To suggest these as oversight options is chilling — after all, they cannot become involved until after a child is dead.

That leaves the Child and Family Services Review Board, which my office does oversee. But the board can only look at procedural issues. It does not investigate the kind of concerns parents bring to us — serious allegations of abuse and neglect of children, and even of threats against parents by CAS staff. Rather, it dismisses complaints or orders the CAS in question to respond to them. And only those actually “seeking and receiving service” from a CAS (not concerned family members or others) can complain.

At a time when the public increasingly expects openness and transparency from government, children’s aid societies — recipients of $1.4 billion in government funds each year — remain cloaked in secrecy and subject only to limited oversight, even from the government itself.

Successive private member’s bills proposing to expand ombudsman oversight in this area, including one just last month, have failed over the past 35 years. But I’m confident that one day this will change. One ray of hope lies with the province’s Commission to Promote Sustainable Child Welfare, established in 2009 and expected to issue its recommendations in the fall of next year.

Any comprehensive review of options to improve Ontario’s child welfare system must surely look at how every other province allows ombudsman oversight. It’s high time Ontario joined them.

André Marin is Ontario’s ombudsman. His annual report will be posted Tuesday atwww.ombudsman.on.ca

This is a very aggressive site to government transparency.  I encourage leadership to take the time and look at it to possibly adopt some of the agency's initiatives.

NDP Introducing New Ombudsman Oversight Bill

NDP Introducing New Ombudsman Oversight Bill

NOTE: The Foster Care Council of Canada will be represented by Michele Farrugia, a former Crown Ward during the press conference at 10:00am

From the Office of Andrea Horwath,

On Thursday, November 9, MPP Rosario Marchese at 1 p.m. will be introducing a private members bill for First Reading in the Ontario Legislature calling for new powers for the Ontario Ombudsman, including the authority to investigate child welfare and protection complaints.

The bill represents a complete overhaul of the Ombudsman’s Act to allow investigations into child welfare and protection, health care facilities and hospitals, school boards and municipalities.

There will be a press conference at 10 a.m. in the Queen’s Park Media Studio on the morning of Tuesday, November 9, 2010, in the Media Studio at Queen’s Park, 111 Wellesley St. West, to promote the bill, which represents a comprehensive approach to modernizing the role of the Ombudsman in the 21st century and improving openness and accountability to the public.

All are welcome to attend one or both events. To confirm or to obtain more information, please contact Sheila White, Executive Assistant to MPP Andrea Horwath, at 416-325-2777, or email Sheila at ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca.