dinapoli homless shelter report

7/24/2019 DiNapoli Homless Shelter Report

1/18

New York State Oce of the State Comptroller

Thomas P. DiNapoli

Division of State Government Accountability

Report 2015-S-23 February 2016

Oversight of Homeless Shelters

Oce of Temporary and

Disability Assistance


2/18

2015-S-23

Division of State Government Accountability 1

Executve Summary

PurposeTo determine whether the Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance (Oce) adequately

oversees homeless shelters to ensure they are operang in compliance with applicable laws,

rules, and regulaons. Our audit scope covers the period April 1, 2013 to August 5, 2015.

BackgroundThe Oce administers many important programs that assist the States low-income residents

and provides leadership, guidance, and support to county Departments of Social Services (Local

Districts) in the operaon of these programs. Through its Bureau of Shelter Services, the Oce

seeks to meet crical transional housing needs of the States homeless populaon esmated

at more than 80,000 and comprised of families, couples, and single adults while guiding them

to self-suciency. Larger-scale facilies including certain family shelters that accommodate

10 or more families and adult shelters that accommodate 20 or more individuals require

State cercaon. The Oce ceres and directly oversees these larger-scale facilies, and is

responsible for inspecng them and ensuring they meet certain standards, as established in New

York Codes, Rules and Regulaons. In contrast, the Oce has delegated authority for oversight

of smaller, uncered shelters to the Local Districts. However, the Oce remains responsible for

monitoring Local Districts oversight and inspecon of uncered shelters, and for ensuring they

meet minimum standards established by State and local laws and codes.

Key Findings The Oce does not suciently monitor State-cered shelters, nor Local Districts oversight of

uncered shelters, to ensure that inspecon violaons are addressed properly and mely and

that shelters are operang in compliance with applicable State and local requirements.

At both State-cered and uncered shelters, we observed a range of substandard livingcondions, the most egregious of which pose obvious and dangerous risks to shelter residents

health and safety. These included re and safety violaons, rodent and vermin infestaons, and

mold condions.We also found numerous examples of other unacceptable living condions,

including trash piles stored in a childrens play area; holes in walls, ceilings, and oors; worn

or mulated maresses; and a rooop-access door o its hinges, which could allow anyone

including children access to the roof.

Key Recommendaons Take necessary acons to complete all annual inspecons, and issue facility cercaons, within

the me limits prescribed for each shelter type.

Monitor Local Districts oversight acvies and obtain sucient documentaon to ensure that

the responsibilies delegated to them are adequately met.

Develop and implement a process to follow up on facilies with issues idened in prior

inspecons to ensure condions are remedied and acceptable.


3/18

2015-S-23


Agency ResponseAs is our normal pracce, we provided Oce ocials with a dra copy of this report for their

review and comment. However, ocials did not provide a wrien response, despite the addional

me we granted them to respond.

Other Related Audit/Report of InterestNYC Human Resources Administraon/Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance: Benet

Eligibility Assessment Process (2012-S-51)
http://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093014/12s51.pdfhttp://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093014/12s51.pdfhttp://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093014/12s51.pdfhttp://osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093014/12s51.pdf


4/18

2015-S-23


State of New York

Oce of the State Comptroller


February 12, 2016

Mr. Samuel D. Roberts

Commissioner

Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance

40 North Pearl Street

Albany, NY 12243

Dear Commissioner Roberts:

The Oce of the State Comptroller is commied to helping State agencies, public authories, andlocal government agencies manage government resources eciently and eecvely. By doing so,

it provides accountability for tax dollars spent to support government operaons. The Comptroller

oversees the scal aairs of State agencies, public authories, and local government agencies, as

well as their compliance with relevant statutes and their observance of good business pracces.

This scal oversight is accomplished, in part, through our audits, which idenfy opportunies for

improving operaons. Audits can also idenfy strategies for reducing costs and strengthening

controls that are intended to safeguard assets.

Following is a report of our audit of the Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance entled

Oversight of Homeless Shelters. The audit was performed pursuant to the State Comptrollers

authority as set forth in Arcle V, Secon 1 of the State Constuon and Arcle II, Secon 8 of

the State Finance Law.

This audits results and recommendaons are resources for you to use in eecvely managing

your operaons and in meeng the expectaons of taxpayers. If you have any quesons about

this report, please feel free to contact us.

Respecully submied,

Oce of the State ComptrollerDivision of State Government Accountability


5/18

2015-S-23


State Government Accountability Contact Informaon:

Audit Director: John Buyce

Phone:(518) 474-3271

Email:

[email protected]:

Oce of the State Comptroller


110 State Street, 11th Floor

Albany, NY 12236

This report is also available on our website at: www.osc.state.ny.us

Table of Contents

Background 5

Audit Findings and Recommendaons 7

Facility Inspecons and Cercaon 7

Living Environment 9

Independent Living Plans and Needs Assessments 14

Recommendaons 14

Audit Scope and Methodology 15

Authority 15

Reporng Requirements 15

Contributors to This Report 17
mailto:StateGovernmentAccountability%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=http://www.osc.state.ny.us/http://www.osc.state.ny.us/mailto:StateGovernmentAccountability%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=


6/18

2015-S-23


Background

The Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance (Oce) administers important programs

for the States low-income residents and provides leadership, guidance, and support to local

Departments of Social Services (Local Districts) in the operaon of these programs. Through its

Bureau of Shelter Services, the Oce seeks to meet crical transional housing needs of theStates homeless populaon esmated at more than 80,000 and comprising families, couples,

and single adults while guiding them to self-suciency. The Oce oversees the States network

of transional homeless shelters ranging from large former hotels, apartment houses, and

armories to smaller mul-family houses, specically designed housing units, and roadside motels

and is responsible for administering a system of supervision, inspecon, and enforcement to

ensure shelters compliance with applicable rules and regulaons, including New York Codes,

Rules and Regulaons (NYCRR) and Social Services Law. The Oces funding of shelter services

is administered through the Local Districts comprising the Department of Homeless Services

(DHS), which serves the ve boroughs of New York City, and 57 county oces throughout the rest

of the State.

Larger-scale facilies require State cercaon or approval. These include adult shelters that

accommodate 20 or more adults and adult-care facilies providing temporary residenal

services to fewer than 20 adults where such facility is operated by a social services district, as

well as certain family shelters that accomodate 10 or more homeless families. Family and adult

cered shelters each provide a range of services, which may include private rooms, access to

three nutrional meals daily, supervision, assessment services, permanent housing preparaon,

recreaonal services, informaon and referral services, access to health services, child care

services, and social rehabilitaon services. In general, shelters that serve fewer than 10 families

or 20 individuals do not require State cercaon or approval. The Oce maintains oversight

of cered shelters, and has delegated authority for uncered shelters to the Local Districts.The Oce is responsible for ensuring cered shelters meet certain standards, as established in

NYCRR, and for monitoring Local Districts oversight and inspecon of uncered shelters.

The Oce is required to inspect cered or approved shelters at least annually. Inspecon

components include health and safety issues; general facility management and nancial

condion; condion of grounds, buildings, and other property; qualicaons of the operators

and employees; compliance with laws and regulaons regarding residents rights; as well as the

provision of programs designed to promote self-suciency and enable residents to transion to

permanent or supporve housing. Shelters must correct any inspecon violaons within 30 days

or submit an acceptable plan for correcon if unable to resolve violaons within that me frame.

If the violaons are not remedied, the Oce has the authority to withhold all or a poron of the

reimbursement unl the issues are reced.

Local Districts are expected to inspect uncered shelters to ensure that they meet minimum

standards in the areas of, for example, construcon, life safety (e.g., re), and operaon, and that

they meet all State and local laws and codes. In addion, Local Districts that make hotel/motel

referrals must inspect those facilies at least every six months. Inspecons include a review of


7/18

2015-S-23


arrangements for hygiene, vermin control, security, furnishings, cleanliness and maintenance, and

compliance with local laws and codes. Local Districts are not required to report their inspecon

ndings to the Oce.

Currently, 157 State-cered shelters operate throughout New York State: 91 adult shelters and

66 family shelters. Only 17 of these shelters operate outside the New York City metropolitan area:12 serving homeless adults and the other ve serving homeless families. The Oce does not

track the number of uncered shelters operang in the State at any given point in me, which

can include hotel and motel rooms that are somemes used by counes on an as-needed basis.

This informaon is also not available from payment data, because Local Districts submit their

shelter reimbursement claims to the Oce as a total cost rather than itemizing costs for each

shelter used. For calendar year 2014, Local Districts submied approximately $1.1 billion in gross

claims to the Oce for homeless housing: $954.5 million for housing in New York City and $140.4

million for housing in the rest of the State.


8/18

2015-S-23


Audit Findings and Recommendaons

We determined that, in certain instances, the Oce needs to strengthen its monitoring of State-

cered homeless shelters and of Local Districts oversight of uncered shelters. We also idened

gaps in the Oces overall oversight eorts, which, together with our on-site observaons, leave

doubt as to whether cered and uncered shelters are operang in compliance with applicableState and local requirements.

We conducted site visits to a total of 39 facilies located throughout the State (20 cered

and 19 uncered), including 26 in New York City. In each case, we gave ocials and facility

operators less than 24 hours noce of our pending visit. We were accompanied by Oce

and/or Local District representaves, who assisted in idenfying condions both to us and

to facility management that needed to be addressed or corrected. While we did not observe

regulatory violaons during our visits that would necessarily require that a shelter be closed, we

did idenfy numerous issues that rendered living condions unacceptable at most of the shelters

both cered and uncered.

When we discussed our observaons with Oce ocials, they indicated they had already

instructed their representaves to provide wrien reports to the facilies specifying the

correcve acons to be taken to remedy unacceptable condions. They also stressed that it is

important to consider that, simply by virtue of the residents transient and temporary nature,

homeless shelters oen face an uphill bale in terms of the facility maintenance and upkeep

necessary to achieve and stay in compliance with State standards and regulaons. Furthermore,

they indicated shelter condions depend as much on residents investment in their temporary

living quarters as on the facility owners commitment to mely and diligent maintenance. For

example, they stressed that some residents maintain their shelter environment with care, while

others do not and somemes even abuse the property. Similarly, while many building ownersmay be conscienous about maintenance, others are less so and upkeep may be shoddy. They

also noted that, in regions where there is a higher demand for rooms (e.g., New York City), rapid

occupancy turnover in some cases only four to six hours may not allow sucient me to

provide the needed cleaning and repairs. Accordingly, ocials recognize that facilies which

pass an inspecon can soon thereaer become out of compliance and potenally remain out of

compliance unl the next annual inspecon.

While our observaons from site visits do not conict with these stated challenges, they also

point to the need for certain improvements in Oce processes and procedures to ensure that

homeless shelters are operang in compliance with State and local regulaons.

Facility Inspecons and Cercaon

State-Cered Shelters

During calendar years 2013 and 2014, the Oce was responsible for the direct inspecon and

cercaon of 157 adult and family shelters. Of those 157 shelters, ve were not due for an


9/18

2015-S-23


inspecon during our audit period: four that had recently come into service and one that ceased

operaons. Shelters that do not receive mely inspecons or cercaons pose a greater risk

that they may be operang with unhealthy or more severe living condions.

Based on our review of inspecon reports for the remaining 152 acve shelters, we determined

the Oce did not perform all the required annual inspecons mely. As a result, at various pointsin me over the two-year period, 31 shelters were operang without a current inspecon: two in

2013 and 29 in 2014. In addion, for 15 of the shelters that had been inspected and were cited

for violaons, the Oce didnt receive correcve acon plans or other suitable responses from

the shelter and the Local Districts in which they operate, as required.

We also found gaps in the Oces periodic recercaon of shelters. We reviewed operang

cercates for the 157 shelters from April 1, 2013 through March 31, 2015, and found that:

130 shelters were fully cered (or retroacvely cered) for the enre period;

15 shelters were not cered as of June 22, 2015, but were in the midst of the renewal

process; and 12 shelters had gaps in me without any documentaon to support they were cered

mely, although they were inspected annually; the average cercaon lapse for these

facilies was 342 days and ranged from 51 to 724 days.

Uncered Shelters

Although the Oce has delegated the direct oversight of uncered shelters to Local Districts,

as the administrator of the States shelter services program, it is sll responsible for ensuring

that Local Districts properly oversee the shelters in their regions, including conducng mely

inspecons. Based on our interviews with Oce ocials, we determined the Oce does nothave a formal process for monitoring Local Districts inspecon of uncered shelters and, in

fact, has established a paern of minimal involvement. For instance, according to Oce ocials,

the Oce does not collect, review, and approve the inspecon standards that are the basis of

Local Districts inspecons, nor does it have any means of monitoring Local Districts inspecon

acvity, such as inspecon reports or stascs related to facility occupancy, to ensure inspecons

are being done mely and violaons are corrected. Especially given the size and vulnerability

of the populaon served by uncered shelters and potenally at risk we believe the Oce

needs to acvely monitor the Local Districts oversight of uncered shelters to ensure they meet

minimum standards and provide a habitable environment.

In addion to our site visits, we made inquiries to a sample of 14 counes with populaons over200,000 (per the 2010 U.S. Census), and reviewed documentaon from DHS, to determine if

there were any uncered shelters operang in these areas that exceeded the capacity levels

that would trigger a requirement for State cercaon and inspecon. Our review idened six

uncered adult shelters operang at capacies ranging from 21 to 851 individuals that should

have been cered but were not, as presented in the following table.


10/18

2015-S-23


Because the Oce does not monitor Local District acvies in this area, or maintain up-to-date

records on uncered operaons, ocials were generally unaware that these facilies were

operang without the proper State cercaon and inspecon.

One of these facilies Bellevue 30th Street Mens Shelter (Bellevue) in Manhaan is owned

and operated by DHS, and can accommodate 851 homeless men. As a result, it must be a cered

shelter and inspected by the Oce annually. In this case, ocials indicated the facility actuallyis inspected annually but cannot be cered due to its inability to meet requirements. Oce

ocials stated that up unl 2004 Bellevue was cered; however, at that me its cercaon was

not renewed because its physical plant was in such poor condion, having deteriorated to such

a state that condions could not be addressed by a tradional plan of correcve acon. Further,

due to the size of the populaon served, ocials indicated that closing the facility is not a viable

opon since neither the Oce nor DHS has the ability to place over 800 individuals elsewhere in

the homeless shelter system.

In the interim, the Oce has withheld $25.9 million while sll connuing to inspect Bellevue on

an annual basis. Although Bellevue has made a number of upgrades since 2004, it has not yet

reached the level needed to regain its cercaon. Ocials stated that DHS has recently received

approval from the New York City Oce of Management and Budget to invest in the remaining

required upgrades and has submied a correcve acon plan.

Living Environment

As part of our eldwork, we visited 39 shelters located across the State. With the excepon of a

very few, the cered and uncered shelters that we visited were not in compliance with State

and local regulatory standards. For example, regulaons require that facilies keep all areas clean,

sanitary, and free of insects and rodents; that there be a tub or shower for every 15 residents and

one sink and one toilet for every 10 residents; and that all furnishings must be durable, clean,and appropriate to funcon. Among both types of shelters, we found squalid, unacceptable

condions, the most egregious of which pose obvious risks to health and safety. For example, we

found evidence of rodent and vermin infestaons at 16 shelters; re safety issues at 15 shelters,

including expired re exnguisher inspecons and re panels operang in trouble warning

mode; and mold growth in residents rooms at eight shelters. We found cered and uncered

facilies that were operang in a state of general disrepair, some of which had unique specic

issues that were remarkable either in scale or pervasiveness.

Facility Type of Shelter Location County Capacity

Bellevue Men Manhattan New York 851

Catholic Charities Men Syracuse Onondaga 112

Webster House Adult Poughkeepsie Dutchess 60

Dorothy Day Expansion Women Syracuse Onondaga 27City Mission Men Buffalo Erie 25

Orange County DSS Men Newburgh Orange 21


11/18

2015-S-23


Cered Shelters: Among cered

shelters, we found a host of

substandard condions in violaon of

State and local regulaons and codes.

These problems appear to stem from

neglect, improper or inadequatemaintenance, and poor management.

Notably, of the 47 most serious

issues we idened during our visits,

nearly half (22) had been previously

idened in the Oces most recent

inspecon report. Despite being cited

for these violaons, the facilies had

not corrected them, and the Oce

did not conduct any follow-up or take

further enforcement acons.

We also observed numerous instances

where cered shelters provision of

services was not in compliance with

State regulaons. For example:

Three shelters were understaed:

one family shelter had only 29 of the 32

approved full-me equivalent sta on

its roster, and two single adult shelters

had inadequate night shi coverage

(one sta vs. three required at one

locaon and two sta vs. four required

at the other);

Six family shelters had no laundry

facilies, even though at least one

washer and one dryer are required; and

Insucient bathroom and hygienefacilies: one shelter had 143 residents

sharing only four showers and nine

toilets as compared to the 10 showers

and 15 toilets required by code.

Trash piled in childrens play area(St. Johns Place family shelter, Brooklyn)

Torn, mutilated mattress(St. Johns Place family shelter, Brooklyn)


12/18

2015-S-23


Trash bag and duct tape ceiling repair(Jennie A. Clarke family shelter, Manhattan)

Restroom with broken tile and plywood patching the floor(Van Siclen Womens Shelter, Brooklyn)

Wall with water damage and unrepaired ho(Kingsboro Psychiatric Center,

Building 8 mens shelter, Brooklyn)

Shower fixture wall repaired with heavy-dutyplastic sheeting and duct tape

(St. Johns Place family shelter, Brooklyn)


13/18

2015-S-23


Uncered Shelters: Similar to cered

shelters, our site visits to uncered

shelters overseen by DHS and Local

District sta revealed a range of

unhealthy living condions in violaon

of both State regulaons and local lawsand codes, including:

Resident room overcrowding: three

shelters provided between 81 and

116 2 of space for two people, as

opposed to the minimum of 120 2

required;

Ingress/egress issues, including re

doors ed and/or propped open, a

rooop-access door not hinged to

door jambs, and doors that dont fully

open to allow the necessary egress; Uncovered walls and ceilings: missing

plaster, lathe, and drywall and peeling

paint;

Worn maresses with cracks and/or

small holes in the covering;

A high-rise facility with two of three

elevators out of service; and

Missing carbon monoxide detectors

in sleeping areas.

Out-of-service elevators(Bellevue 30th Street Mens Shelter, Manhattan)

Detached door allowing unsecured roofaccess (Community Housing Innovations

family shelter, Westchester County)


14/18

2015-S-23


Fire doors chained and padlocked open(Bellevue 30th Street Mens Shelter, Manhattan)

Missing ceiling(Bellevue 30th Street Mens Shelter, Manhattan)

Childrens toys in corner of moldy bathtub(Kingston Family Residence, Brooklyn)

Vents taped over to prevent vermin access

(Kingston Family Residence, Brooklyn)


15/18

2015-S-23


Independent Living Plans and Needs Assessments

One of the goals of cered shelters is to promote self-suciency and enable residents to

transion to permanent or supporve housing. Toward this end, families admied to a cered

homeless shelter are required to meet with a case worker and develop an Independent Living

Plan (ILP) within 10 days of admiance, and single adults are required to have a needs assessmentcompleted within 24 hours of admiance. The ILP and the needs assessment are tools used to

help shelter professionals understand the current and future needs of their residents, and provide

guidance in areas such as employment, child care services, self-suciency, daily living, and

most importantly permanent housing. To prevent unnecessary delay in residents transion

out of shelter living and toward self-suciency and to maximize shelters capacity to provide

temporary support for as many homeless families and adults as possible it is crical that the

ILP and needs assessment be completed within the required me frame. Among our sample of

20 cered shelters, we reviewed the meliness of needs assessments completed for adults and

ILPs for families. Among our ndings:

Of the 119 ILPs we reviewed at the 12 family shelters, 21 (18 percent) were not completed

mely, with lapses ranging from 2 to 509 days beyond the requirement.

Of the 79 needs assessments reviewed at the eight adult shelters, 21 (27 percent) were

not completed mely, with lapses ranging from 3 to 91 days beyond the requirement.

In New York City, the ability to complete needs assessments and ILPs mely is hampered by two

consent decrees the rst in 1981 and the second in 1983 that established the legal right

to shelter for the homeless. Ocials indicate this guarantee can be a disincenve for some

residents to parcipate in the needs assessments and ILP process, furthering protracng their

stay in shelters, and denying admiance for others who could benet from shelter programs.

Recommendaons

1. Take necessary acons to complete all annual inspecons, and issue facility cercaons,

within the me limits prescribed for each shelter type.

2. Develop and implement a process to follow up on facilies with issues idened in prior

inspecons to ensure condions are remedied and acceptable.

3. Use a risk-based approach to more frequently inspect shelters with a history of problems to

ensure condions remain acceptable.

4. Monitor Local Districts oversight acvies and obtain sucient documentaon to ensure

that the responsibilies delegated to them are adequately met.

5. Work with facilies to develop strategies that will assist in the mely compleon of needs

assessments and ILPs for new residents.


16/18

2015-S-23


Audit Scope and Methodology

We audited the Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistances oversight of homeless shelters.

Our audit covered the period April 1, 2013 through August 5, 2015.

To accomplish our objecve, we reviewed relevant laws, regulaons, and the Oces policiesrelated to its oversight of homeless shelters and the role of other agencies in this oversight.

We also became familiar with and assessed the Oces internal controls as they related to this

oversight. We reviewed case les and observed condions at a sample of 39 facilies selected

geographically across the State. We also reviewed the Oces records related to inspecon and

cercaon of shelters. We held numerous meengs with Oce ocials to gain an understanding

of their supervision pracces, and also met with the Oces inspectors. We communicated our

ndings to Oce management, and considered informaon they provided through September

21, 2015.

We conducted our performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government audingstandards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sucient,

appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our ndings and conclusions based on

our audit objecve. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our

ndings and conclusions based on our audit objecve.

In addion to being the State Auditor, the Comptroller performs certain other constuonally and

statutorily mandated dues as the chief scal ocer of New York State. These include operang

the States accounng system; preparing the States nancial statements; and approving State

contracts, refunds, and other payments. In addion, the Comptroller appoints members to

certain boards, commissions, and public authories, some of whom have minority vong rights.

These dues may be considered management funcons for purposes of evaluang organizaonalindependence under generally accepted government auding standards. In our opinion, these

funcons do not aect our ability to conduct independent audits of program performance.

Authority

The audit was performed pursuant to the State Comptrollers authority under Arcle V, Secon 1

of the State Constuon and Arcle II, Secon 8 of the State Finance Law.

Reporng RequirementsAs is our normal pracce, we provided Oce ocials with a dra copy of this report for their

review and comment. However, ocials did not provide a wrien response, despite the addional

me we granted them to respond.

Within 90 days aer nal release of this report, as required by Secon 170 of the Execuve

Law, the Commissioner of the Oce of Temporary and Disability Assistance shall report to


17/18

2015-S-23


the Governor, the State Comptroller, and the leaders of the Legislature and scal commiees,

advising what steps were taken to implement the recommendaons contained herein, and where

recommendaons were not implemented, the reasons why.


18/18

2015-S-23



Andrew A. SanFilippo, Execuve Deputy Comptroller

518-474-4593, [email protected]

Tina Kim, Deputy Comptroller


Brian Mason, Assistant Comptroller


Vision

A team of accountability experts respected for providing informaon that decision makers value.

Mission

To improve government operaons by conducng independent audits, reviews and evaluaons

of New York State and New York City taxpayer nanced programs.

Contributors to This Report

John F. Buyce, CPA, CFE, CIA, CGFM, Audit Director

Brian Reilly, Audit Manager

Bob Mainello, CPA, Audit Supervisor

Raymond Barnes, Examiner-in-ChargeThierry Demoly, Senior Examiner

Jerey Dormond, Senior Examiner

Thomas Sunkel, CPA, Senior Examiner

Marzie McCoy, Senior Editor
mailto:asanfilippo%40osc.state.ny.us%0D?subject=mailto:tkim%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=mailto:bmason%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=mailto:bmason%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=mailto:tkim%40osc.state.ny.us?subject=mailto:asanfilippo%40osc.state.ny.us%0D?subject=

dinapoli homless shelter report

Documents