Summary of findings
| # | Topic | Rating5 | Management action plan | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial | ||||
1 |
Establish control to independently review the payment certificate calculation template(design effectiveness) |
Significant | Prior to each season, the Contracts Coordinator will prepare the adjusted rates for the applicable contract items based on the Consumer Price Index, Transportation component for Ontario.The Contracts Coordinator will submit thesenumbers to Finance for verification. | |
| Moderate | ||||
X |
Low |
|||
| Operational | ||||
2 |
Leverage existing real time GPS records to improve vendor performance monitoring(operating effectiveness) |
Significant | GPS will be used to establish an idle alarm which will indicate to the Technical Support person that a truck has not moved for 30 min. Any issues found are to be called into the Supervisor forimmediate action.The Technical Support person’s findings of their GPS analysis will be logged and documented several times throughout their shift. | |
| X | Moderate | |||
Low |
||||
| Compliance | ||||
3 |
Formally amend contract terms to minimize risk of potential contract dispute (design effectiveness) | Significant | Moving forward, any and all settlements and agreements that are contrary to the terms of the contract will be documented with explanation andbackup and formally agreed to by both parties. | |
| Moderate | ||||
| X | Low | |||
Management comments
While we generally agree with the findings in the audit, and are pleased with the results showing that we have an effective and efficient service, we have a few concerns. A review of the Municipal Benchmarking Network Canada (MBNC) shows Windsor as having the lowest cost for Winter Maintenance per Lane Km of all participating municipalities. While climate is a factor, the comparators indicate that our winter control service is among the most efficiently run. For each of the findings in the audit, Management has an action plan that has either already been implemented or will be implemented in the upcoming winter control season.
Under heading #2 “Effective Review of Supervisor Log Completion”, while we agree that there is an opportunity for improvement, we note that the Supervisor reports were completed, occasionally with non-uniform methods between supervisors. The call-in time is always written in the Supervisor logs as it is our basis for payment. We agree that sometimes it is not in the correct box and sometimes the Supervisor notes the call-in times in their handwritten notes on the reverse side of the page, however the information is still there, in all cases. We will look to improve the reporting. Secondly, when an event runs over multiple shifts/days, there is only one call-in time which is at the beginning of the event. If the event continues over such time periods, the Supervisor does not repeat this call-in time on the log as it is irrelevant over the course of the same event.
Given that the Supervisor on duty is Supervising 7-9 City staff, 6 Contractor trucks, further contractors for other snow related activities (sidewalk snow clearing, bust stop clearing etc., other residential clearing contractors), the Technical Support person, and additional City staff performing other duties. They are also expected to be on the road checking road conditions, answering phone calls and communicating via radio to City staff and Coco. They are simply at their limit of being able to provide an extremely detailed log of events unless there are more resources dedicated to assist them.
In order to comply with performance objective #2 significant additional resources would be required, which would not, in our opinion, add additional value. For Performance Objective #5, “Contractor Equipment Breakdowns”, it is an operational expectation that equipment will break down during the fulfilling of contract duties. This is accounted for in the contract. While additional spares could be required, the additional cost and value added would not change the measured criteria.
For performance Objective #7 while the contractor did have “no-shows”, they were penalized for every instance and the contractor was advised via meetings and phone calls. We will be conducting contractor evaluations and improve on the documentation for this objective.