BROWARD AUDIT – REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDERS
“OTHER” - VALIDATES WHAT IVBE REPORTED
The latest audit of Broward’s Facilities & Construction Management Department (FC&M) documents what we observed about two years ago and reported to the School Board. The words of the auditors speak for themselves. We reported that a new category, “Other” had been added to the reasons for higher costs to the change orders, and that most of the problems were because of safety to life items, as cited by the district’s building code inspectors. We opined that the consultants should be held liable for costs, not the taxpayers. We’re talking about just over $4.5 million tax dollars.
Excerpts from the audit: “…it was also noted that FC&M processed change orders to keep projects on schedule, without properly documenting the root cause of the work changes….has resulted in a lack of accountability of design professionals for identified errors and omissions…” “…It was also noted that a primary reason for the implementation of change order category “other” was disagreement by the Project Consultants when inspection reports conflicted with their code interpretations. Project Consultants would often refuses to sign change order forms noting “consultant error.”
Ernst and Young, outside auditors stated, “Use of the ‘Other’ category for classifying change orders by SBBC’s Facilities & Construction Management division represents a control weakness in the change order evaluation and approval process. The ‘Other’ classification provides no meaningful information about the nature or root cause of the change order and, in effect, creates a loophole whereby the party or parties responsible for the change work are relieved of accountability.” (emphasis mine)
It is not coincidental that this category was instituted a few months before two School Board members took the lead in disbanding the citizen-majority committee (Consultants Review Committee) that was demanding accountability from FC&M and an attorney for an architect along with two members of that committee vilified me personally.
There are 6 findings: Elimination of “Other” category; getting reimbursement from the consultants; standards for conflicts of interest e.g. an employee went to work for a consultant that received over $400,000 extra without School Board approval; instituting CM@Risk guaranteed maximum price reforms (the 2002 Grand Jury cited this problem); codifying processes for change orders; and eliminating maintenance requested change orders.
Most responses from FC&M are arrogant and insulting, demeaning the knowledge and abilities of the auditors and refusing to comply with or ignoring recommendations. There is an Audit Committee meeting Thursday, May 4, and a report from that meeting will be forthcoming.
Charlotte Greenbarg, President
IVBE, Inc.
