Solano County Grand Jury
• 2023-2024
Solano County Emergency Rental Assistance Program: a Case Study
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 6 findings
F1
– After the county selected Option C in February 2021 as the method for Solano County residents to access state and federal emergency rental assistance, the county neglected to sufficiently support that decision with adequate staffing and timely resources.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1A
– Before accepting responsibility from the state for a new, time-limited program, the BOS confirm that realistic, adequate, and knowledgeable internal and contracted staffing will be provided along with support plans to ensure program success.
R1B
Solano County carefully consider the implications of a divided state/county program when they take on a support program. Among other requirements, choose programs aligned at all government levels in qualifications, timelines, and benefits.
F2
- During the first six months of Solano County ERAP, two critical county staff transitions occurred without sufficient transfer of legacy information from the exiting employee to the new person.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2A
- County Departments develop written and oral communication systems that include supervisors when a program manager is replaced. Human Resources should confirm these systems.
R2B
- Before an employee who is part of a special project leaves the county or project, have the computer “shared drive” information reviewed to see if there are unclear or incomplete files before the transition occurs.
F3
- Technology continued to be a problem throughout ERAP implementation, delaying needed assistance.
Related Recommendations (6)
R3A
- All technology issues be addressed and resolved by stakeholders before program implementation.
R3B
- When choosing software for a task, the county understand the needs of the program being implemented before selecting a software vendor. 14
R3C
- When working with a software vendor to implement a new program, confirm with all stakeholders using the product that necessary components of the software are available. All previous information needed for future reference by the program user be seamlessly migrated to the new system.
R3D
- When a new software system is required to implement a program with a flexible start date, allow sufficient time for complete field testing and training of all potential users before “going live.”
R3E
- The county value the contractor’s researched request for a specific software product.
R3F
- DoIT be consistently involved with users of new software.
F4
- ERAP program materials, including software forms, were not initially translated into Tagalog as mandated by the contract.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4A
- Ensure that all required translation materials are in place by the start of a program.
R4B
- During program implementation, ensure all materials, including software forms, are available in languages and formats to meet access needs.
F5
- Solano County’s agreement with Catholic Charities about the scope of work changed without mutually acceptable written amendments or modifications.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
- When a contract with an outside agency is signed, any future modifications about deadlines and service changes should be negotiated and signed before implementation of the modification. This could require a review by the county of its contract process.
F6
- County staff mistakenly applied regulations and deadlines related to ERAP federal funding.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
- Staff responsible for a specific program be educated about all aspects of the program and continue to monitor and communicate changing regulations.
Comments 1
-
CO1COMMENT 1 The Solano County ERAP has ended. Our intention in this report is to identify areas for improvement that could apply to future situations. The Solano County Civil Grand Jury recognizes that ERAP implementation occurred during challenging times. Choices made with good intentions resulted in an overloaded and understaffed program, impeding the goals and objectives of the program itself. Significant funding was provided across the country and especially in California, but the urgent need exceeded the amount available from the start. Federal funding was first approved for ERAP in early 2021, while many offices were not easily accessible due to COVID-19 restrictions. COMMENT 2 County staff with authority must be willing to truly listen to the concerns raised by community groups and agencies such as LSNC. This demonstrates a level of professional respect that should be extended to the contractors and subcontractors with whom the county works. Contractors are chosen after a careful review of their capabilities, and county personnel must listen, respond to, and value the recommendations of the subject matter experts with whom it contracts for services.