2006-01-AU Audit of the County of Hawai‘i's Recycling and Diversion Grants Program

Home

C HAPTER 2 GENERAL FINDINGS lack of a cohesive plan have been detrimental to DEM's ability to effectively implement its goals. As a result, the County has been confronted with: • Reactionary rather than proactive planning and management of the County's solid waste streams. • Delayed implementation of cost effective alternative solutions such as waste -to- energy technologies which has accelerated the closure of the South Hilo landfill and severely limited interim options and solutions. • Delayed implementation of user - friendly recycling and reuse facilities throughout the County. • Increased costs for facility construction due to delays in decision- making. • The Updated ISWMP lacks an accompanying "working plan" which clearly delineates the detailed tasks required to attain the County's solid waste management goals, assigns responsibility and timelines for completion of tasks, and establishes a mechanism for regular and frequent progress review. • DEM experienced increased program costs, reduced program options, and other economy -of- scale issues related to the County's geographical location, the size of its land area, and its population distribution. • DEM assumed ongoing recycling and diversion programs and contracts from the Department of Public Works in 2000, including: o Deteriorated solid waste facilities caused by funding shortfalls in the 1990's. • Existing programs and contracts deficient in reporting requirements and control mechanisms. • DEM experienced difficulties inherent in the establishment of a new department with new personnel. • DEM experienced transitional problems due to implementation of a new county -wide financial accounting system (FRESH) by the Department of Finance in 2004. • DEM would have benefited from greater assistance from other County departments with specific knowledge and expertise in the preparation of procurement and contract documents to determine whether: o Contracts were exempt from County and State procurement laws. o Non - profit and for - profit entities were both eligible for grant awards. a Sufficient provisions were included to ensure: ■ Program effectiveness and efficiency. ■ Reliability and validity of data. ■ Compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and provisions of contract and grant agreements. ■ The County's right to audit and its enforcement authority. 12