The hits just keep on coming:
Rachel Schwartz, who has offered her services to the county unpaid, told the Champaign County Board that there are discrepancies. For example, the home reported spending $342,875 for contract rehabilitation services in fiscal 2007 on its unaudited expense report, but gave the state a $567,495 figure for the same expense.
Discuss.
Part of what's missing from the NG report are Schwartz's figures on Accounts Payable and Contract Rehab. The unaudited balance sheet showed $261,602 in payables, while the correct figure was a mere $1,437,732!
Schwartz stated that the contract rehab services of ONR, a Texas outfit, were costing the CCNH some $80,000 per month, and that the records indicated charges by the minute for services not received. Further it was suggested that this service should have been sent out for bids.
There appears to be not only gross incompetency but perhaps some chicanery as well. One member wanted to question Dr. Schwartz but the board rather nastily retained the gag order which prevents public dialog between public presenters and the board members. Seems that Schwartz's incriminating report was already more information than what the board wanted.
Goethe wrote that "Misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent." There can be no doubt that there has been much lack of understanding and a seemingly incredible degree of neglect, finally compounded by partisan trickery and malice as the group that is in control of the county board continues to circle the wagons and obscure the truth.
It really is time to "vote the
bastscoundrels out". There IS an election this November and many seats are up for grabs, including the seat of Pius Weibel, one ringleader of the county board gang who has presided over this fiasco.offered her services to the county unpaid
Based on my experience (BS and MS in Accy from the U of I), the county's paying the going rate for her services. Professors in accounting have little-to-no professional experience and many lack professional certification.
That's not to say that Professor Schwartz isn't correct in her assessment, but you really have to consider that the "consulting" is provided by a theoretician who rarely uses technical accounting or auditing. I'd prefer one of the "Lecturers" at the U of I to provide the service - many/most of the ones I knew taught in addition to running their own firms.
Having attended previous meetings, it's my understanding that Prof. Schwartz had a hand in writing the leading textbook used to teach medical accounting practice in the US. While her services have been offered at no cost to the citizens of Champaign County, we seem to be getting considerably more for that modest sum than we are for the $18,000 a month that the county board leadership committed us to with the MPA contract it so hastily signed.
What I'd like to know is how MPA is supposed to run the nursing home now. Write rubber checks?
Unlike previous posts about the nursing home that were based on my physically attending the meetings, I am basing these comments on the N-G report, which can be dangerous, I know. Whether Prof Schwartz has the practical experience alluded to, probably has little merit since the gaps that have been identified are so egregious. There are several bottom lines that I have previously focused upon:
1. There is STILL no complete accounting of expenditures and income for the CCNH. Rachel has not been able to obtain these materials let along others.
2. Decisions about the nursing home and the contract with MPA has been based on incomplete information. Again this is a fiduciary responsibility of the CB.
3. One needs to seriously ask why was it necessary to cut off any discussion concerning her presentation last night. This relates directly to the issue of CB transparency, which many have discussed in previous posts.
4. One still needs to ask, rhetorically, why would a company want a contract with the CB to manage the CCNH without complete financial disclosure previous to signing?
5. Members of the CB are not looking out for the health, safety, welfare of the county or the CCNH because the fiduciary responsibility is being circumvented.
6. The referendum to increase county funding for the nursing home is on the horizon. How can one support this when this is a longitudinal history of no fiduciary responsibility having been demonstrated?
7. Based on this case study, one might be wont to wonder whether there are other county issues where the CB did not demonstrate fiduciary responsibility?
This morning I was awakened to Al Nudo's voice assuring us that he is relieved that many of the school districts have stated a willingness to reduce property taxes related to the referendum increasing sales tax by 1% to generate building funds for school districts. First and just a reminder, once this 1% is passed it is there in perpetuity. It does not go away. Second, just because a district makes a claim today that property taxes will be lowered does not guarantee such in perpetuity. And more than likely will not be the case since the percentage chance that school districts will borrow against further income, the districts will become very accustomed to these revenues.
I mention this because it is so parallel to the CCNH situation in that it will be hard to track and the county board will have a fiduciary responsibility in setting whether the amount is the full 1%
Pattsi Petrie
Regarding the sales tax referendum, the property tax relief offered is negligible pi-in-the-sky. Whereas the sales tax is an enormous hike in taxation rate represented by a 1% tax on disposable income. Al Nudo presented an eloquent but definitely misleading discourse on the effect of the tax.
It is the responsibility of the people to see through the smokescreens and reject the tax increases if they will.
5. Members of the CB are not looking out for the health, safety, welfare of the county or the CCNH ...
"They ain't doing their job".
At the Democratic Caucus it was voted not to put the referendum on the fall ballot for the Nursing Home, so it is dead.
Let me point out the obvious since so many of you seem to be missing it. Just because this professor presents something as fact does not mean that is is in actuality. Many of her findings have already been discreditied if you had been paying attention. Some of you need to exercise a little caution before you jump on the bandwagon. Who is this woman and where did she come from? Why is she being given such credibility when she has not earned it? Give me a break! Remember, she was brought into this by some of the same county board members who many of you regularly criticize .
"Let me point out the obvious since so many of you seem to be missing it. Just because this professor presents something as fact does not mean that is is in actuality. Many of her findings have already been discreditied if you had been paying attention. Some of you need to exercise a little caution before you jump on the bandwagon. Who is this woman and where did she come from?"
I'm pretty sure she was introduced to this process by Tony Fabri, the County Auditor.
Anonymous--as Rachel previously posted she was not brought on board by ANY county board members. This is engagement is a solo act. (I am certain that Rachel will speak for herself). Second, you, too, need to be just as specific as you claim she ought to be. So exactly what facts have been misrepresented, by what other facts, by whom, how did "whom" get the data, and where was all of this published?
As has been stated several times on this blog, it is most disconcerting to have whoever posts anonymously or the several who do spout off comments, but not back them up. Though I must admit it is almost as disconcerting to me to have the alias postings. But I do respect that this is IP's blogs, his rules, and that all of us ought to abide by them or sign off.
Pattsi Petrie
At the Democratic Caucus it was voted not to put the referendum on the fall ballot for the Nursing Home, so it is dead.
I wouldn't be so sure about that Tex. I believe they have until August to make a final decision about ballot questions.
My experience, though admittedly not years and years, of attending Democratic caucus meetings and other such meetings is that what is stated, agreed on by vote, and agreed on by concensus does not necessarily play itself out as such during CB meetings. It is rather dismaying to witness such conversations and then watch the CB meetings. One can only guess that there is a lot of action, not in the public domain, during the two days between the meetings.
Pattsi Petrie
Anonymous 1:57--can you point out even one piece of data that I presented and you know to be wrong? If you can, let's see it!
The truth is that you can't, because everything I have presented is based on objective data (not opinions) that you can verify for yourself. A good place to start would be the cost reports that every nursing home in illinois is required to file, available at http://www.hfs.illinois.gov/costreports/. For data from the county financial report go to http://www.co.champaign.il.us/Auditor/finrpt.htm.
I know that the data I bring forward is disturbing, but it is what it is, and trying to discredit me or the data will not change the facts.
Then why doesn't Buffenbarger agree with your data? Are you saying that he is lying?
Anonymous--as Rachel previously posted she was not brought on board by ANY county board members.
I'm pretty sure she was introduced to this process by Tony Fabri, the County Auditor.
The story I heard is that Fabri sent a memo to board members about Dr. Schwart and that Rocket Richards presented the finance committee with extensive details about her background and subsequently made the motion to utilize her services. How did Rocket have all of this info prepared before the meeting? Fabri was a board member for several years and obviously works behind the scenes with Richards and board Dems. To say that Dr. Schwartz was not brought on board by ANY county board members is ridiculous.
And just because Pattsi posts something does not mean it is accurate. Little secret here--Pattsi has an agenda.
There are two groups with agendas here.
There are those who say that want to save the nursing home -- but who won't lift a finger to do so.
Then there are those who say that they want to save the nursing home and who actually are willing to make the commitments needed to do it.
The two groups cut completely across political party lines. The only group I've seen so far that is unambiguously and fully committed to saving the nursing home and taking the actions needed to save it are the Greens. They're not on the county board yet. Maybe they won't be.
The rest is a mess of good folks -- and weasels.
The county has hired a management firm that has experience successfully managing other county nursing homes. They can reconcile any discrepancies with reported numbers. Why is Rachel Scwartz involved in this process? What experience does she have with managing nursing homes? Her analysis is unnecessary and pointless. Let the professionals handle this. All I see is someone trying to get her 15 minutes. And I have to think it is relevant as anon stated above that she was recommended by two of the most partisan Democrats in the county (Fabri and Richards). I also know she is dating a hyper-partisan guy who has frequently attacked fellow Democratsfor not being partisan enough. And then she acts surprised when her motives are questioned. What is her agenda?
A caucus of the Democratic or Republican County Board Members has no legislative or legal standing. They are meeings in whch members of the party discus issues and attempt to come to a conscensus. There are no penalties for not following a caucus decision and members not standing with the majority on an issue are not compelled to vote against their personal opinions in Board or Committee meetings. There is no penalty for changing your mind after expressing yourself in a caucus meeting. Also,the caucus is not the only vehicle to put a question on the agenda. Ralph Langenheim
What Schwartz has illustrated is that Fabri is completely incompetent as Auditor. Sure he called the News-Gazette and said "contract nursing is costing alot of money". Well gee whiz that is certainly news. What Fabri should have been doing is calling for outside Auditors to come in and get this situation under control, but instead he had to get called on the carpet by the Counties outside Auditors for not doing his job. The latest anlaysis frankly isn't worth the paper it's printed on if the Democrats on the board aren't willing to act on it and do something except blaming the very administration they control.
Anonymous 4:55P--it is no secret that I have strong opinions about the CCNH situation, all developed after doing research, attending many meetings, and speaking out in public. To have an agenda implies that I have power to try to implement said agenda. It is obvious that I do not have this power--I am not a county board member; I am not a CCNH BOD member; I am not a power person in the Democratic party; but I am a county tax payer who is watching my tax dollars being wasted and misused. So my opinions are directly related to what is happening fiscally and why. As a citizen of the county, I have the right to speak out of these issues.
Also I have the courage of my convictions to sign my name to my posts and not sign my posts--anonymous.
Pattsi Petrie
Why is Rachel Scwartz involved in this process? What experience does she have with managing nursing homes? Her analysis is unnecessary and pointless. Let the professionals handle this
Professional managers can't make informed decisions if they are getting bad data. How much money did the CCNH lose last year? - I am not sure anyone really knows at this point.
I am still waiting for the rationale behind the accounting for AP, and appreciate Ms. Schwartz for bringing the issue to our attention.
"Professional managers can't make informed decisions if they are getting bad data."
So you don't think the management contract includes examining the accounting systems and accounts payable? You've got to be kidding.
I am sure the management company will look into the accounting procedures. But I am not sure it was a foregone conclusion that they would have until the issues were raised by Ms. Schwartz.
"But I am not sure it was a foregone conclusion that they would have until the issues were raised by Ms. Schwartz." Again, please tell me you're not serious.
We are serious. The only thing we know for sure is that there has been gross mismanagement, gross incompetency, gross negligence, and huge losses. The Dems on the county board who run things seem to be the villains in this fiasco, and maybe the Republicans who have held their peace are somewhat accountable for it as well.
One would assume that the county board and administrators were attendant to matters, but that assumption would lead to a error, so one should not assume anything at this point without a careful array of the facts.
The best way to avoid the "media circus" is for the players to make a full disclosure of the situation. They are public servants. The next event in the media circus should be "holding their feet to the fire". "Throwing them to the lions" will have to wait until November.
In regards to the nursing home, we NEED a media circus.
This stuff needs to be heard, and heard often. Who started the accounting policies? Does/did Buffenbarger understand the policy and approve of it? What has been in the public auditor's management letters in prior years, and who saw them?
I don't care whether it is a U of I professor, a board member, the county auditor, or the management company raising the ruckus, this stuff needs to be public, and widely publicized.
Well, we've let the professionals handle this up to now, and look at the mess we've got. The County should bow to the inevitable, sell the nursing home, and move on to issues that they're competent to address--and that's no insult to them--I wouldn't expect the County, under current conditions, to be able to run the nursing home and even break even.