Audit Committee
The full agenda, as filed
All 14 items in the clerk’s order. Each carries the city’s own words: the staff recommendation, what the body decided, and its status. Nothing below is written by us.
AU2.1adopted
2022 Audited Financial Statements - Consolidated City, Sinking Funds, and Consolidated Trust Funds
This report presents the City of Toronto's (City) Consolidated Financial Statements (Consolidated Statements), the Sinking Funds Financial Statements (SF Statements) and the Consolidated Trust Funds Financial Statements (TF Statements) for the year ended December 31, 2022. All City financial statements are prepared in accordance with Public Sector Accounting Standards (PSAS) established by the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) of the Chartered Professional Accountants (CPA) of Canada. Management is highlighting the following items in relation to the City's financial statements: · The City's tangible capital asset balances detailed in the City's Consolidated Statements contain corrective adjustments recommended by the City's external auditors, KPMG LLP (KPMG), during the 2022 year-end audit; · The City experienced reductions in government transfers despite the sustainment of pandemic and economic recovery related costs; · The City's 2022 Consolidated Statements have incorporated only those entities significant to the City's overall financial position and performance; and · The SF Statements recognized a temporary unrealized loss of $180 million as a result of market performance in 2022. The City's external auditors, KPMG, are responsible for providing an opinion on the fair presentation of the above financial statements in accordance with PSAS. KPMG has issued an unqualified audit opinion on the City's 2022 Consolidated Statements, SF Statements, and TF Statements. The Audit Committee is responsible for adopting the financial statements prior to City Council's approval.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council approve the 2022 Consolidated Financial Statements in Appendix B to the report (June 23, 2023) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and Controller. 2. City Council approve the 2022 Sinking Fund Financial Statements in Appendix C to the report (June 23, 2023) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and Controller. 3. City Council approve the 2022 Consolidated Trust Funds Financial Statements in Appendix D to the report (June 23, 2023) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and Controller.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Controller recommend that: 1. City Council approve the 2022 Consolidated Financial Statements in Appendix B to this report. 2. City Council approve the 2022 Sinking Fund Financial Statements in Appendix C to this report. 3. City Council approve the 2022 Consolidated Trust Funds Financial Statements in Appendix D to this report.
AU2.2amended
City of Toronto Audit Findings Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2022
At its meeting of June 29, 2020, in item 2020.AU5.7, City Council appointed KPMG LLP as the auditor licensed under the Public Accounting Act, 2004 responsible for annually auditing the accounts and transactions of the City and certain of its local boards and expressing an opinion on the financial statements of these bodies based on the audit. KPMG LLP presents the City of Toronto Audit Planning Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2022 for the 2022 audit of the consolidated financial statements for the City of Toronto.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council receive the City of Toronto Audit Planning Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2022 (June 23, 2023) from KPMG LLP for information.
AU2.3forwarded without recommendation
Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 31, 2022 - Agencies
The following 2022 Financial Statements and related documents for the year ended December 31, 2022 have been submitted to the Audit Committee for consideration: - Build Toronto - CreateTO - Exhibition Place - Heritage Toronto - TO Live - Toronto Atmospheric Fund - Toronto Community Housing Corporation - Toronto Parking Authority - Toronto Port Lands Company - Toronto Public Library - Toronto Seniors Housing Corporation - Toronto Transit Commission - Toronto Zoo - Yonge-Dundas Square
The Audit Committee forwarded this Item to City Council without recommendations.
AU2.4adopted
The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with the status of financial statement audits of the City's Agencies and Corporations for the year ended December 31, 2022.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council receive the report (June 21, 2023) from the Auditor General on the status of the financial statement audits of the City's Agencies and Corporations for the year ended December 31, 2022 for information.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council receive this report on the status of the financial statement audits of the City's Agencies and Corporations for the year ended December 31, 2022.
AU2.5adopted
A Review of the Procurement and Award of the Winter Maintenance Performance-Based Contracts
In December 2021, City Council approved the award of nearly $1.5 billion in contracts to provide winter maintenance services in 11 geographically based contract areas, over a 10-year term (i.e., seven years plus three optional renewal years). The five suppliers awarded contracts were selected through a negotiated request for proposals (NRFP) process. When it approved the award of the winter maintenance contracts, City Council also added a review of the City's NRFP process to the Auditor General's 2022 Work Plan. This report presents the results of the Auditor General's review of the procurement and award of the winter maintenance performance-based contracts. The objective of this audit was to assess whether the City's NRFP procurement process for the provision of winter maintenance services was conducted in a fair, open, and transparent manner, specifically: · Negotiated Request for Proposal Doc2970598171 (NRFP1) · Negotiated Request for Proposal Doc3136860258 (NRFP2) · Non-Competitive Procurement (NCP) The timeframes established for the issuance of the call document, evaluation of proposals, negotiations, and award, were based on a single NRFP being sufficient. Many of the challenges related to this procurement likely arose from the unexpected need for a second NRFP process (and subsequent non-competitive procurement). Taking into consideration the atypical circumstances surrounding this procurement, we conducted this review of the two NRFPs and NCP through the lens of identifying lessons learned and opportunities for continuous improvement for NRFPs going forward. For example, · Going forward, before adopting large-scale changes to its procurement and contracting approach for services, the City should consider testing out changes on a smaller scale and making adjustments based on the outcomes and lessons learned, where necessary. Overlapping procurements should also be avoided. · A key to successful performance-based contracting is conducting an effective evaluation of the suppliers' ability to deliver required services during the procurement process. Based on our review of evaluation guidelines and records, we identified areas where more guidance and training can be provided to improve the evaluation of suppliers' past experience and operational capability. · The flexible, non-binding NRFP format is an important tool that can allow the City to request and consider relevant information that supports the success of the contracts awarded through the procurement. Going forward, the City should ensure NRFPs solicit enough information to assess key risks impacting suppliers' capability to meet its requirements. · As a result of our audit, we identified several procurement-related policies and procedures that should be clarified or strengthened, particularly taking into consideration the impact of the non-binding/flexible NRFP format. The 16 recommendations in this report focus on continuous improvement and reinforcing and supporting the City's ongoing efforts to make NRFP process rules, technical proposal requirements, and evaluation criteria clearer, with the goal of keeping as many suppliers as possible through all stages of evaluation and achieving the best possible outcomes and value for the City.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to establish guidelines and / or criteria for client divisions to consider when implementing complex procurement strategies and / or significant changes to the approach for category management and strategic sourcing initiatives, and to test changes on a smaller scale such as through staggered or segmented approaches, where possible, in order to review lessons learned and address potential issues, shortcomings, and risks before implementing wholesale changes. 2. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions on avoiding concurrent or overlapping procurement processes where appropriate, and / or implement appropriate risk mitigation measures to address potential issues that may arise when running concurrent or consecutive procurement processes for the same or related services where there may be the same suppliers bidding for contracts where operational capability is a factor or evaluation criteria. 3. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions to document in the solicitation file the rationale for exercising reserved rights or discretion when conducting a negotiated request for proposal, and to record the rationale for exercising such rights or discretion in the project closeout report. 4. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide more guidance and / or training for client divisions identifying when it would be appropriate to: a. Implement a request for supplier qualification (RFSQ) process in advance of a negotiated request for proposal (NRFP) process, to address the risk of an insufficient number of suppliers meeting technical requirements and to increase the likelihood that more qualified suppliers submit pricing proposals. b. Cancel, review, and reissue an amended RFSQ and / or NRFP where an insufficient number of qualified suppliers meet the City's requirements or where concentrating risks with few suppliers is not appropriate or acceptable to the City. 5. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to review the process and form used for checking references, and establish formal procedures or guidelines for how references are to be used to validate accuracy of solicitation responses and how information from reference checks can be clarified with referees and suppliers. 6. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to review the standard process rules (or template) for negotiated requests for proposals and related evaluation criteria for past experience and reference checks, and enhance guidance and/or training for client divisions to ensure solicitation requirements and scoring guidelines for evaluation teams are sufficiently clear. 7. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review how affiliate relationships may impact the evaluation of a supplier's past experience and provide guidance to Purchasing and Materials Management Division staff and client divisions on how to evaluate. 8. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions and ensure that standard process rules (or templates) for negotiated requests for proposals and related scoring guidelines avoid the use of a two-pronged, multi-scenario approach for a given evaluation criteria / sub-criteria wherever possible; and, where the use of a two-pronged, multi-scenario approach is unavoidable, ensure evaluation criteria / sub-criteria is clear and all possible scenarios have been considered and incorporated in the scoring guidelines. 9. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide further guidance and / or training for client divisions to: a. Ensure that requirements in negotiated requests for proposals solicit enough information to enable the City to assess whether key risks impacting suppliers' capability to meet the scope of work and deliverables have been appropriately addressed or mitigated. b. Clarify the extent of information that can be requested by the City from a supplier or third parties to verify, clarify or supplement the information in a supplier's proposal response submitted to a negotiated request for proposal, when evaluating technical proposals and / or undertaking negotiations. 10. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide more guidance to client divisions on "value-added services" to be included in suppliers' technical proposal content requirements and evaluation criteria contained in negotiated request for proposal solicitation documents, to ensure the City is clear and consistent when communicating to suppliers what it is willing to negotiate and the range of alternatives it is willing to consider through proposals of "value-added services", (including through addenda containing questions and answers and in examples of value-added services provided within technical proposal forms). 11. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance and / or training to staff to make negotiated request for proposal process rules as clear as possible, and avoid or clarify process steps that may be interpreted inconsistently or cause supplier confusion. 12. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review procurement policies and procedures and integrate additional procedural guidance specific to the implementation of more flexible, non-binding procurement methods (e.g., negotiated requests for proposals). 13. City Council request the City Manager, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 195, Article 10, as well as the Pre-Award and Post-Award Bid Dispute Procedure, to make recommendations to City Council regarding changes to address or clarify the circumstances or criteria where an alternate senior City Official should be designated to review pre- or post- award bid disputes. 14. City Council request the City Manager to ensure the review of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 195, Article 10, as well as the Pre-Award and Post-Award Bid Dispute Procedure, to take into consideration any outcomes or recommendations related to the City Council-directed review of the potential for an Inspector General for the City of Toronto. 15. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to implement a policy or procedure which establishes the criteria for engaging an independent fairness consultant to monitor a procurement process. Documentation should be retained on file to support why a fairness consultant is or is not engaged before the issuance of such procurements. 16. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions to: a. Review, document, and retain in the solicitation file the reasons for significant variances between pre-solicitation estimates and actual contract values. b. Establish a baseline or perform a cost-benefit analysis when changing the sourcing strategy, procurement approach, or contracting model to better assess the actual outcomes achieved on new contracts.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to establish guidelines and / or criteria for client divisions to consider when implementing complex procurement strategies and / or significant changes to the approach for category management and strategic sourcing initiatives, and to test changes on a smaller scale such as through staggered or segmented approaches, where possible, in order to review lessons learned and address potential issues, shortcomings, and risks before implementing wholesale changes. 2. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions on avoiding concurrent or overlapping procurement processes where appropriate, and / or implement appropriate risk mitigation measures to address potential issues that may arise when running concurrent or consecutive procurement processes for the same or related services where there may be the same suppliers bidding for contracts where operational capability is a factor or evaluation criteria. 3. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions to document in the solicitation file the rationale for exercising reserved rights or discretion when conducting a negotiated request for proposal, and to record the rationale for exercising such rights or discretion in the project closeout report. 4. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide more guidance and/or training for client divisions identifying when it would be appropriate to: a. Implement a request for supplier qualification (RFSQ) process in advance of a negotiated request for proposal (NRFP) process, to address the risk of an insufficient number of suppliers meeting technical requirements and to increase the likelihood that more qualified suppliers submit pricing proposals. b. Cancel, review, and reissue an amended RFSQ and / or NRFP where an insufficient number of qualified suppliers meet the City's requirements or where concentrating risks with few suppliers is not appropriate or acceptable to the City. 5. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to review the process and form used for checking references, and establish formal procedures or guidelines for how references are to be used to validate accuracy of solicitation responses and how information from reference checks can be clarified with referees and suppliers. 6. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to review the standard process rules (or template) for negotiated requests for proposals and related evaluation criteria for past experience and reference checks, and enhance guidance and/or training for client divisions to ensure solicitation requirements and scoring guidelines for evaluation teams are sufficiently clear. 7. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review how affiliate relationships may impact the evaluation of a supplier's past experience and provide guidance to Purchasing and Materials Management Division staff and client divisions on how to evaluate. 8. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions and ensure that standard process rules (or templates) for negotiated requests for proposals and related scoring guidelines avoid the use of a two-pronged, multi-scenario approach for a given evaluation criteria/sub-criteria wherever possible; and, where the use of a two-pronged, multi-scenario approach is unavoidable, ensure evaluation criteria/sub-criteria is clear and all possible scenarios have been considered and incorporated in the scoring guidelines. 9. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide further guidance and/or training for client divisions to: a. Ensure that requirements in negotiated requests for proposals solicit enough information to enable the City to assess whether key risks impacting suppliers' capability to meet the scope of work and deliverables have been appropriately addressed or mitigated. b. Clarify the extent of information that can be requested by the City from a supplier or third parties to verify, clarify or supplement the information in a supplier's proposal response submitted to a negotiated request for proposal, when evaluating technical proposals and / or undertaking negotiations. 10. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide more guidance to client divisions on "value-added services" to be included in suppliers' technical proposal content requirements and evaluation criteria contained in negotiated request for proposal solicitation documents, to ensure the City is clear and consistent when communicating to suppliers what it is willing to negotiate and the range of alternatives it is willing to consider through proposals of "value-added services", (including through addenda containing questions and answers and in examples of value-added services provided within technical proposal forms). 11. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance and/or training to staff to make negotiated request for proposal process rules as clear as possible, and avoid or clarify process steps that may be interpreted inconsistently or cause supplier confusion. 12. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review procurement policies and procedures and integrate additional procedural guidance specific to the implementation of more flexible, non-binding procurement methods (e.g., negotiated requests for proposals). 13. City Council request the City Manager, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to review Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 195, Article 10, as well as the Pre-Award and Post-Award Bid Dispute Procedure, to make recommendations to City Council regarding changes to address or clarify the circumstances or criteria where an alternate senior City Official should be designated to review pre- or post- award bid disputes. 14. City Council request the City Manager to ensure the review of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 195, Article 10, as well as the Pre-Award and Post-Award Bid Dispute Procedure, to take into consideration any outcomes or recommendations related to the City Council-directed review of the potential for an Inspector General for the City of Toronto. 15. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to implement a policy or procedure which establishes the criteria for engaging an independent fairness consultant to monitor a procurement process. Documentation should be retained on file to support why a fairness consultant is or is not engaged before the issuance of such procurements. 16. City Council request the Chief Procurement Officer to provide guidance for client divisions to: a. Review, document, and retain in the solicitation file the reasons for significant variances between pre-solicitation estimates and actual contract values. b. Establish a baseline or perform a cost-benefit analysis when changing the sourcing strategy, procurement approach, or contracting model to better assess the actual outcomes achieved on new contracts.
AU2.6adopted
Contracted winter maintenance services are part of the City's snow and ice management plan that is designed to prioritize the safety and mobility of all road, sidewalk, cycle, and path users. Nearly $1.5 billion in winter maintenance contracts (over a 10-year term) were awarded in December 2021. This follow-up report addresses City Council's December 2021 decision for the Auditor General to review the terms of the new winter maintenance contracts (2022-2032) against previous recommendations, and to review current Transportation Services' contract management processes to hold winter maintenance contractors accountable to the contract terms. This report also provides the status of recommendations from two previous Auditor General's reports on the City's winter maintenance program: 1. Audit of Winter Road Maintenance Program - Phase One: Leveraging Technology and Improving Design and Management of Contracts to Achieve Service Level Outcomes (October 2020) 2. Winter Road Maintenance Program - Phase 2 Analysis: Deploying Resources (June 2021) The 26 recommendations in the Auditor General's 2020 and 2021 reports were made in the context of the previous (2015-2022) winter maintenance contracts. In our current follow-up review, we assessed whether management's actions, in the context of the new (2022-2032) contracts, addressed the intent of the previous recommendations - to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of contract management and divisional processes designed to hold contractors accountable to the contract terms. During our follow-up, we verified that 10 recommendations have been fully implemented and one recommendation is no longer applicable in the context of the new (2022-2032) contracts. Management is continuing work to implement 15 recommendations (in the context of the new winter maintenance contracts). Report Verified as fully implemented In progress (not yet fully implemented) No longer relevant / applicable Total Audit of Winter Road Maintenance Program - Phase One: Leveraging Technology and Improving Design and Management of Contracts to Achieve Service Level Outcomes (October 2020) 9 13 0 22 Winter Road Maintenance Program - Phase 2 Analysis: Deploying Resources (June 2021) 1 2 1 4 Total 10 15 1 26 The report in Attachment 1 provides the Audit Committee and members of City Council with the detailed results of our follow-up and management's action plan for recommendations that are not yet fully implemented. The report also details lessons learned from the first winter season (2022/23) of the new contracts (2022-2032) for Transportation Services to continue working on as they implement more robust processes, tools, and reporting, in advance of the second winter season. Our findings are summarized in the following three areas: A. Strengthening processes to consistently enforce payment criteria and apply liquidated damages B. Ensuring robust monitoring of contractor performance C. Continuing to implement systems and tools to improve efficiency and effectiveness of contract management Our report includes four new recommendations to highlight areas for continuous improvement when administering the current contracts going forward. Management has agreed to all four recommendations and management's response to these additional four recommendations is included in the report.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to ensure all substituted equipment have been approved through the appropriate change order process, and ensure in future years, where the contractor requests the use of substitute equipment, that the Division ensures that the proposed rate is reflective of existing contract pricing, or if no existing contract pricing is applicable, comparable contract pricing for what the equipment can deliver. 2. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to make the necessary updates to the Winter Maintenance Contract Administration Manual, provide continuing training, and ensure consistent and ongoing compliance over the duration of the contracts to ensure: a. Staff verify that equipment is at the designated City Depot in accordance with the contracted mobilization and demobilization dates for every winter season and retain sufficient and appropriate records of such verification; b. Staff appropriately determine instances where liquidated damages should apply and retain sufficient and appropriate records to support the Division's application of liquidated damages; and c. Staff perform the required field audits and retain sufficient and appropriate documentation of their observations to support the Division's application of price adjustments. 3. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to ensure activations for each winter event are accurately captured electronically to support monitoring contractor compliance with contract requirements on equipment activations and mobilizations. 4. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to implement a process to ensure all contractor deficiencies related to winter maintenance services are captured in a timely manner in a central system that facilitates monitoring effective contractor performance.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to ensure all substituted equipment have been approved through the appropriate change order process, and ensure in future years, where the contractor requests the use of substitute equipment, that the Division ensures that the proposed rate is reflective of existing contract pricing, or if no existing contract pricing is applicable, comparable contract pricing for what the equipment can deliver. 2. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to make the necessary updates to the Winter Maintenance Contract Administration Manual, provide continuing training, and ensure consistent and ongoing compliance over the duration of the contracts to ensure: a. Staff verify that equipment is at the designated City Depot in accordance with the contracted mobilization and demobilization dates for every winter season and retain sufficient and appropriate records of such verification; b. Staff appropriately determine instances where liquidated damages should apply and retain sufficient and appropriate records to support the Division's application of liquidated damages; and c. Staff perform the required field audits and retain sufficient and appropriate documentation of their observations to support the Division's application of price adjustments. 3. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to ensure activations for each winter event are accurately captured electronically to support monitoring contractor compliance with contract requirements on equipment activations and mobilizations. 4. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services Division to implement a process to ensure all contractor deficiencies related to winter maintenance services are captured in a timely manner in a central system that facilitates monitoring effective contractor performance.
AU2.7adopted
The Auditor General's 2022 Work Plan included a review of the City's Modular Housing Initiative. Modular housing units are a type of prefabricated, permanent housing that are constructed in a factory and then transported and assembled onsite. Modular housing represents an innovative opportunity to respond rapidly to Toronto's urgent homelessness situation and to reduce pressure on the City's shelter system. In April 2020, as an urgent response to the housing need for people experiencing homelessness, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to expedite action under the HousingTO Plan, City Council directed City staff to launch the Modular Housing Initiative to create 250 new modular supportive homes as quickly as possible. Our report draws attention to opportunities for the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division and the CEO, CreateTO to strengthen controls over modular housing contracts and costs, as well as enhance the quality of reporting to City Council, by: A. Better Project Planning Before Budget Preparation B. Strengthening Tracking, Monitoring, and Reporting of Project Costs C. Establishing Contract Management Policies and Procedures D. Strengthening Documentation of the Procurement Process E. Better Information and Analysis to Assess Overall Program Effectiveness
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, through the Executive Steering Committee for site selection, to: a. Perform subsurface investigation and due diligence on land / soil and infrastructure and servicing constraints prior to the final decision on site selection; b. Obtain from the Corporate Real Estate Management Division a cost-estimate analysis of site remediation to be included in the development of site budgets; and c. Provide the above information to the proponents in the request for proposal (or to the contractor early on in the project) to facilitate a more accurate price quote and project cost estimate. 2. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in the budget development process for future modular housing projects, to: a. Conduct a review to understand all cost elements (construction and non-construction) that would be expected to be incurred in preparing a site ready for operation; b. Include the above cost elements for budget development; c. Document assumptions used for the estimated budget numbers; and d. Clearly define which party is responsible for managing each cost item within the budget. 3. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to ensure the re-zoning is in effect before beginning construction of future modular units, to reduce the risk of potential delays and additional costs related to storage, transportation, and other costs that may be incurred in trying to re-purpose or sell the modules. 4. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to continue to discuss and negotiate with funding provider(s) more reasonable timelines for future modular housing projects. 5. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to improve reporting processes and transparency in the budget development process by submitting: a. An updated site-specific budget to City Council at the time of site selection, after conducting the necessary due diligence work, and in compliance with any funding agreements executed between the City and other orders of government or funder(s); and b. For City Council's approval, any financially material request(s) to increase the budget by modular housing project site and the rationale for the additional budget request(s). 6. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to report to City Council regularly on the progress of the modular housing projects. Such reports are to include, but not be limited to: a. Comparison of original timeline and actual schedules, with explanations for significant delays; b. Actual final costs for completed sites and projected costs for ongoing sites, compared with initial budgets, with explanations for any significant variances; and c. Details of funding being allocated or reallocated to cover the additional costs. 7. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division and the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, to: a. Clarify in writing, the roles and responsibilities for each of the parties involved in the modular housing project management process, ensuring they are clearly understood; and b. Develop and implement a process to ensure consistent financial data is shared and used by all parties for reporting purposes of modular housing projects. 8. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to revise the financial system coding (i.e. cost centres) to assign future budget and actual costs by site, in order to reflect the accurate budget and most up-to-date costs in the financial system. 9. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division to conduct a thorough review and reconciliation of existing costs in the system to ensure all costs incurred to date for Phase One and Phase Two modular housing projects have been captured and allocated to the correct accounts. 10. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to: a. Develop and implement a process for cost recording of modular housing projects to ensure all future costs (including all hard and soft costs) are captured and allocated to the correct site-specific cost centre and cost account; b. Perform timely and regular cost allocation to site-specific cost centres for future invoices that contain costs for multiple sites; and c. Develop a process to review the entries booked by other divisions in the financial system to ensure their accuracy and completeness. 11. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to develop formal policies and procedures and reporting templates for the purpose of tracking actual expenditures against initial budgets on a line-by-line basis (e.g. permit fees, manufacturing costs), on a project site basis and on an overall project basis. 12. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to ensure consistent compliance with the new change order process for all future modular housing projects by finalizing the development of the change control process and protocols, and including the following steps: a. Complete the negotiation of change order work on a timely basis and ensure work is not started until the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division approves the change order request; b. Obtain and review supporting documents from the contractor for each change order and require approval of change orders before payment is made; and c. Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the third-party contractor, if one is employed as the Payment Certifier or Contract Administrator on behalf of the City for both payment certification and the review and approval of change orders. 13. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division for Phase Two and future modular housing projects to: a. Develop and implement a process to review the process payment invoice to ensure it is accurate and reflects the updated work progress; b. Verify work progress through on-site inspections and document the review; and c. Ensure all file review questions and comments are adequately addressed, documented and retained. 14. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with City Legal Services, to: a. Assess whether the project management fees and markups were reasonably charged; b. Seek to recover any overpayment, if the project management fees and markups are not reasonably charged by the contractor; and c. Assess whether there is a need to amend future contracts for project management fees and change order markups in order to provide clarity on interpretation. 15. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with Chief Procurement Officer, for Phase Three and future modular housing projects to: a. Implement a vendor performance management process to address the unique requirements of modular housing projects; b. Summarize a list of key performance requirements and deliverables from the modular housing contracts; c. Monitor and evaluate the contractor's performance and quality of design and manufacturing throughout and after the completion of the project; and d. Identify, document, and resolve any contractor performance, design, and manufacturing issues. 16. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to finalize its project management processes, including but not limited to project cost tracking, progress payment invoice review, project close-out and contractor performance monitoring, and ensure compliance with those processes. 17. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, and Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, to develop, implement and comply with a standard file documentation and retention policy for the program, aligned with the City's policy on record retention. The policy should specify documents to be created and retained (and retention length), especially for any information supporting significant decisions made during the process. 18. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to develop a warranty management process, including actively monitoring any event(s) of repairs and damages on the modular housing buildings after building occupancy. 19. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to conduct and document on a timely basis, a more formalized lesson learned review after each modular housing project is completed, which should include: a. Inputs from all participating divisions of the project team; b. A review of contract design, procurement of the contractor, cost and budget management, contractor performance, and operations; and c. A consideration of lessons learned from past projects. 20. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to analyze and determine if it is more cost effective and quicker to build using modular construction, when compared with traditional methods, by: a. Tracking and monitoring overall costs, including the long-term maintenance and capital cost requirements of completed modular housing; and b. Obtaining more external benchmarking information as it becomes available.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, through the Executive Steering Committee for site selection, to: a. Perform subsurface investigation and due diligence on land/soil and infrastructure and servicing constraints prior to the final decision on site selection; b. Obtain from the Corporate Real Estate Management Division a cost-estimate analysis of site remediation to be included in the development of site budgets; and c. Provide the above information to the proponents in the request for proposal (or to the contractor early on in the project) to facilitate a more accurate price quote and project cost estimate. 2. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in the budget development process for future modular housing projects, to: a. Conduct a review to understand all cost elements (construction and non-construction) that would be expected to be incurred in preparing a site ready for operation; b. Include the above cost elements for budget development; c. Document assumptions used for the estimated budget numbers; and d. Clearly define which party is responsible for managing each cost item within the budget. 3. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to ensure the re-zoning is in effect before beginning construction of future modular units, to reduce the risk of potential delays and additional costs related to storage, transportation, and other costs that may be incurred in trying to re-purpose or sell the modules. 4. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to continue to discuss and negotiate with funding provider(s) more reasonable timelines for future modular housing projects. 5. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to improve reporting processes and transparency in the budget development process by submitting: a. An updated site-specific budget to City Council at the time of site selection, after conducting the necessary due diligence work, and in compliance with any funding agreements executed between the City and other orders of government or funder(s); and b. For City Council's approval, any financially material request(s) to increase the budget by modular housing project site and the rationale for the additional budget request(s). 6. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to report to City Council regularly on the progress of the modular housing projects. Such reports are to include, but not be limited to: a. Comparison of original timeline and actual schedules, with explanations for significant delays; b. Actual final costs for completed sites and projected costs for ongoing sites, compared with initial budgets, with explanations for any significant variances; and c. Details of funding being allocated or reallocated to cover the additional costs. 7. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division and the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, to: a. Clarify in writing, the roles and responsibilities for each of the parties involved in the modular housing project management process, ensuring they are clearly understood; and b. Develop and implement a process to ensure consistent financial data is shared and used by all parties for reporting purposes of modular housing projects. 8. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to revise the financial system coding (i.e. cost centres) to assign future budget and actual costs by site, in order to reflect the accurate budget and most up-to-date costs in the financial system. 9. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division to conduct a thorough review and reconciliation of existing costs in the system to ensure all costs incurred to date for Phase One and Phase Two modular housing projects have been captured and allocated to the correct accounts. 10. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to: a. Develop and implement a process for cost recording of modular housing projects to ensure all future costs (including all hard and soft costs) are captured and allocated to the correct site-specific cost centre and cost account; b. Perform timely and regular cost allocation to site-specific cost centres for future invoices that contain costs for multiple sites; and c. Develop a process to review the entries booked by other divisions in the financial system to ensure their accuracy and completeness. 11. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to develop formal policies and procedures and reporting templates for the purpose of tracking actual expenditures against initial budgets on a line-by-line basis (e.g. permit fees, manufacturing costs), on a project site basis and on an overall project basis. 12. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to ensure consistent compliance with the new change order process for all future modular housing projects by finalizing the development of the change control process and protocols, and including the following steps: a. Complete the negotiation of change order work on a timely basis and ensure work is not started until the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division approves the change order request; b. Obtain and review supporting documents from the contractor for each change order and require approval of change orders before payment is made; and c. Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the third-party contractor, if one is employed as the Payment Certifier or Contract Administrator on behalf of the City for both payment certification and the review and approval of change orders. 13. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division for Phase Two and future modular housing projects to: a. Develop and implement a process to review the process payment invoice to ensure it is accurate and reflects the updated work progress; b. Verify work progress through on-site inspections and document the review; and c. Ensure all file review questions and comments are adequately addressed, documented and retained. 14. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with City Legal Services, to: a. Assess whether the project management fees and markups were reasonably charged; b. Seek to recover any overpayment, if the project management fees and markups are not reasonably charged by the contractor; and c. Assess whether there is a need to amend future contracts for project management fees and change order markups in order to provide clarity on interpretation. 15. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with Chief Procurement Officer, for Phase Three and future modular housing projects to: a. Implement a vendor performance management process to address the unique requirements of modular housing projects; b. Summarize a list of key performance requirements and deliverables from the modular housing contracts; c. Monitor and evaluate the contractor's performance and quality of design and manufacturing throughout and after the completion of the project; and d. Identify, document, and resolve any contractor performance, design, and manufacturing issues. 16. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to finalize its project management processes, including but not limited to project cost tracking, progress payment invoice review, project close-out and contractor performance monitoring, and ensure compliance with those processes. 17. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in conjunction with the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, and Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, to develop, implement and comply with a standard file documentation and retention policy for the program, aligned with the City's policy on record retention. The policy should specify documents to be created and retained (and retention length), especially for any information supporting significant decisions made during the process. 18. City Council request the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management Division, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to develop a warranty management process, including actively monitoring any event(s) of repairs and damages on the modular housing buildings after building occupancy. 19. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to conduct and document on a timely basis, a more formalized lesson learned review after each modular housing project is completed, which should include: a. Inputs from all participating divisions of the project team; b. A review of contract design, procurement of the contractor, cost and budget management, contractor performance, and operations; and c. A consideration of lessons learned from past projects. 20. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to analyze and determine if it is more cost effective and quicker to build using modular construction, when compared with traditional methods, by: a. Tracking and monitoring overall costs, including the long-term maintenance and capital cost requirements of completed modular housing; and b. Obtaining more external benchmarking information as it becomes available.
AU2.8adopted
Auditor General’s June 2023 Status Report on Outstanding Recommendations
This report provides the results of our follow-up of selected recommendations for the first half of 2023, and a high-level summary of outstanding recommendations for all City divisions and its agencies and corporations. Since inception (January 1999) to May 31, 2023, the Auditor General has verified 83[1] per cent of recommendations as fully implemented or no longer applicable. The Auditor General follows up on the status of outstanding recommendations from her audits, investigations, and other reports on an ongoing basis to ensure management has taken adequate action. Implementing the Auditor General's recommendations lead to various benefits, such as, improved controls and more effective and efficient delivery of programs and services for the City. The resulting financial and non-financial impacts are reported in the Auditor General's Annual Report. As of February 28, 2023, there were 694 outstanding recommendations[2] and management reported 356 of them as fully implemented. We selected 128 recommendations management reported as fully implemented for review. Our follow-up focused on the following divisions that had a larger number of high priority recommendations: · Shelter, Support and Housing Administration / Housing Secretariat · Parks Forestry and Recreation · Transportation Services · Corporate Real Estate Management · Toronto Fire Services We concluded that of the 128 recommendations, 83 are fully implemented, 38 are not fully implemented, and 7 are no longer applicable (Figure 1). These recommendations are listed in Attachment 1. (See Figure 1 titled "Status of Outstanding Auditor General Recommendations"), in the Summary section of the report dated June 26, 2023 from the Auditor General Recommendations which management has reported as fully implemented but are not yet verified by the Auditor General are listed in Attachment 2 and Confidential Attachment 1. We will continue to review these recommendations in future follow-up cycles focusing mainly on high-priority recommendations in order to make the most efficient use of our resources. Recommendations that have a significant potential for savings, mitigate health and safety risks, or have been outstanding for more than five years are classified as high priority. Delays in implementing these recommendations results in the City missing out on the intended improvements in controls and more effective and efficient delivery of programs and services at the City. A total of 191 high priority recommendations that are not fully implemented are listed in Attachment 3 and Confidential Attachment 2. Management needs to expedite their implementation as more than 100 high priority recommendations have been outstanding for over five years (Figure 2). (See Figure 2 titled "Aging of High Priority Not Fully Implemented Recommendations"), in the Summary section of the report dated June 26, 2023 from the Auditor General Management actions to implement recommendations have resulted in various benefits to the City. These include service efficiencies, improving controls over contracted services, as well as preventing and correcting overpaid subsidy funds. In some areas we reviewed, further action is required to fully achieve the intended benefits of the recommendations. Noteworthy results from our follow-up are discussed in detail in the Comments section below. [1] The actual implementation rate at the date of this report may vary from this rate, when taking into account the recommendations reported by management as fully implemented that the Auditor General has not yet verified. In addition, reports published after the June 6, 2022 Audit Committee meeting to the current date are also not yet reflected in these statistics. [2] Reports presented to the Audit Committee after the June 6, 2022 meeting are excluded from this statistic as we typically provide management an appropriate amount of time before commencing the follow-up.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council direct that the confidential information contained in Confidential Attachments 1 and 2 to the report (June 26, 2023) from the Auditor General remain confidential in its entirety, as it involves the security of property belonging to the City or local boards.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council direct that the confidential information contained in Confidential Attachments 1 and 2 remain confidential in its entirety, as it involves the security of property belonging to the City or local boards.
AU2.9adopted
Investigation into Allegations of Wrongdoing Regarding Building Inspections of 2 Houses
This report summarizes an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing related to the construction of two large houses by one builder in Toronto. The complaint came to the Auditor General through the Chief Building Official (CBO) on April 20, 2021. The complainant alleged that the builder was not constructing the houses in accordance with the permits approved by Toronto Building Division (TB) and that the builder was making changes to the houses that were not in compliance with the Ontario Building Code (OBC or Building Code or the Code). The complainant said it was possible that inspectors were not catching these changes and was concerned that the houses, once complete, would not be safe. In addition, the complainant also alleged that the builder was fraudulently using the project architect's credentials to make changes. The last allegation was that the builder had connections at the City of Toronto who were in some way helping the builder to bypass the regular Toronto Building plan review and / or inspection process. The Auditor General's Office took these allegations seriously and conducted a review of the building files for the two houses, conducted more than a dozen interviews, contracted a structural forensics engineer, reviewed hundreds of documents, and conducted data analysis on building inspection information. Regarding the allegation of the builder not constructing the houses in accordance with the approved permits, we found that the builder made changes on-site during construction at the two houses without having the changes reviewed and subsequently approved by Toronto Building staff. Builders can make changes to the buildings they are constructing, but the Building Code Act (BCA) states that "material" changes cannot be made without approval from the Chief Building Official. A material change is not defined in the Building Code Act, but it is generally a larger or more significant change that would require approval from Toronto Building before construction occurs. Throughout this investigation, senior inspectors, the Chief Building Official and the structural forensics consulting engineer we contracted confirmed that most of the changes made to the houses in this investigation would be considered "material". For this file, we determined the following for each of the allegations: - Allegation 1 was substantiated - We were unable to determine a conclusion for Allegation 2 due to challenges in obtaining information - Allegation 3 was unsubstantiated - Allegation 4 was unsubstantiated More details about each allegation and our conclusions are included in the report. Further, while conducting this investigation, the Auditor General identified several other issues. These issues are similar to some of the findings from our recent performance audit report entitled "Building Better Outcomes: Audit of Toronto Building's Inspection Function" (the audit was being conducted at the same time as this investigation, was dated January 27, 2023 and was presented at the February 13, 2023 Audit Committee meeting). In parts of this report, we refer to our audit report for details and relevant recommendations (the audit report recommendations are also outlined in Appendix 5). The potentially wider-ranging issues we found in this investigation included: - A risk-based approach to inspections is not used - The importance of using powers to enforce compliance - Material and note-worthy changes were not identified through the inspection process - The inspection order is not always logical - The City-approved plans are not always used for inspecting Further details about each of these other issues are included in the report, along with recommendations for the Division.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to consider developing and implementing a risk-based approach to its processes, including inspections, and assignment of more experienced staff to higher-risk projects. 2. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to enhance and strengthen building code and enforcement training for both plan review and inspection staff, including key aspects that must be reviewed when a firewall is included as part of the building design and construction. 3. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to implement controls, including training and supervisory oversight, to ensure that: a. inspectors pass inspection stages in order; and b. when exceptions are required to passing inspections in order and are approved by a supervisor, clearly document the reasons for moving on to subsequent inspection stages. 4. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to provide training and supervisory oversight for inspectors on when to set a time limit on requested reports from professionals, as well as reasonable expected time limits. 5. City Council request the Chief Technology Officer, in consultation with the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to ensure that any necessary enhancements to system functionality and data fields are implemented to support better tracking of deficiencies, and also allow for builders/permit holders to access the status of their inspections, including any deficiencies that must be fixed before being passed to the next stage. 6. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to implement policies, procedures and training to ensure: a. inspectors retain all relevant plans and drawings for a project on file; b. inspectors clearly document which plans they used for their inspection work; and c. inspectors use the City-approved plans for their inspection work, and if also using other plans such as engineered wood drawings from a manufacturer, that they match them to the City-approved plans.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to consider developing and implementing a risk-based approach to its processes, including inspections, and assignment of more experienced staff to higher-risk projects. 2. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to enhance and strengthen building code and enforcement training for both plan review and inspection staff, including key aspects that must be reviewed when a firewall is included as part of the building design and construction. 3. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to implement controls, including training and supervisory oversight, to ensure that: a. inspectors pass inspection stages in order; and b. when exceptions are required to passing inspections in order and are approved by a supervisor, clearly document the reasons for moving on to subsequent inspection stages. 4. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to provide training and supervisory oversight for inspectors on when to set a time limit on requested reports from professionals, as well as reasonable expected time limits. 5. City Council request the Chief Technology Officer, in consultation with the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to ensure that any necessary enhancements to system functionality and data fields are implemented to support better tracking of deficiencies, and also allow for builders/permit holders to access the status of their inspections, including any deficiencies that must be fixed before being passed to the next stage. 6. City Council request the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building Division, to implement policies, procedures and training to ensure: a. inspectors retain all relevant plans and drawings for a project on file; b. inspectors clearly document which plans they used for their inspection work; and c. inspectors use the City-approved plans for their inspection work, and if also using other plans such as engineered wood drawings from a manufacturer, that they match them to the City-approved plans.
AU2.10forwarded without recommendation
Bob Gore, Robert Gore & Associates, Chartered Professional Accountants, reporting on the Auditor General's Office of the City of Toronto - Report on the Results of Applying Specified Auditing Procedures to Financial Information Other Than Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 31, 2022, and 2021.
The Audit Committee forwarded this Item to City Council without recommendations.
AU2.11adopted
The purpose of this report is to advise on the results of Request for Proposal (RFP) Doc3872102334 for external audits of the annual financial statement audits for the fiscal years 2023 to 2027 inclusive for City arenas, community centres and other entities (listed in Attachment 1), and to request authority to enter into an agreement with the recommended proponent, Grant Thornton LLP.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council grant authority to the Auditor General to enter into an agreement in the amount of $2,852,855 excluding all applicable taxes and charges, $3,223,726 including HST and all applicable charges, $2,903,065, net of HST recoveries, with Grant Thornton LLP being the highest ranked proponent that met all the requirements of the Request for Proposal for external audit services to perform the annual financial statement audits for the years ending December 31, 2023 to 2027 inclusive for City arenas, community centres and other entities listed in Attachment 1 to the report (June 22, 2023) from the Auditor General and Chief Procurement Officer, on the terms and conditions set out in Request for Proposal Doc3872102334 and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor. 2. The City Manager, in consultation with the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, Controller, Legal Services, and Board Chairs of the City's arenas, community centres, and other entities, assess the ability for these Boards to select and have a direct engagement with their own auditors, and perform a cost-benefit analysis to consider that approach under their governance frameworks.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General and the Chief Procurement Officer recommend that: 1. City Council grant authority to the Auditor General to enter into an agreement in the amount of $2,852,855 excluding all applicable taxes and charges, $3,223,726 including HST and all applicable charges, $2,903,065, net of HST recoveries, with Grant Thornton LLP being the highest ranked proponent that met all the requirements of the Request for Proposal for external audit services to perform the annual financial statement audits for the years ending December 31, 2023 to 2027 inclusive for City arenas, community centres and other entities listed in Attachment 1, on the terms and conditions set out in RFP Doc3872102334 and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor. 2. The City Manager, in consultation with the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, Controller, Legal Services, and Board Chairs of the City's arenas, community centres, and other entities, assess the ability for these Boards to select and have a direct engagement with their own auditors, and perform a cost-benefit analysis to consider that approach under their governance frameworks.
AU2.12adopted
The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with the 2022 audited financial statements of Community Centres and a status update on the outstanding 2022 and prior audited financial statements. The 2022 audited financial statements for the 10 Community Centres are presented to Audit Committee after approval by their respective Boards of Management. At this time, the audits of eight Community Centres have been completed, one was still in progress and another one had not yet started. Depending on when the remaining audits are completed, the Independent Auditor's Reports, accompanying financial statements and management control letters (where applicable) of those Community Centres will be presented at a subsequent meeting of the Audit Committee. This report also presents the 2021 Independent Auditor's Report and accompanying financial statements and management letter for Scadding Court Community Centre.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council receive the 2022 audited financial statements and management letters, where applicable, for the Community Centres in attachments 1 to 8 to the report (June 21, 2023) from the Auditor General for information. 2. City Council receive the 2021 audited financial statements and management letter of Scadding Court Community Centre in attachment 9 to the report (June 21, 2023) from the Auditor General for information.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council receive the 2022 audited financial statements and management letters, where applicable, for the Community Centres in attachments 1 to 8 to this report for information. 2. City Council receive the 2021 audited financial statements and management letter of Scadding Court Community Centre in attachment 9 to this report for information.
AU2.13adopted
The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with a status update on the 2022 and prior audited financial statements of Arenas. The 2022 audited financial statements for the eight City Arenas are presented to the Audit Committee after approval by their respective Boards or Committees of Management. At the time of preparation of this report, there were no 2022 audited financial statements available for Arenas. This is because the audits of the George Bell Arena and the McCormick Playground Arena were in progress, while the audits of the remaining six entities had not yet started. Depending on when the audits are completed, the Independent Auditor's Reports, accompanying financial statements and management control letters (if applicable) will be presented at a subsequent meeting of the Audit Committee. This report provides City Council with the 2019 audited financial statements for the Leaside Memorial Community Gardens Arena. The audit of the 2020 financial statements for the mentioned Arena was scheduled to start at the time of preparation of this report. The audits of the 2021 financial statements for the Leaside Memorial Community Gardens Arena and the North Toronto Memorial Arena had not started at the time of preparation of this report.
The Audit Committee recommends that: 1. City Council receive the 2019 audited financial statements of Leaside Memorial Community Gardens Arena for information attached to the report (June 21, 2023) from the Auditor General for information.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Auditor General recommends that: 1. City Council receive the 2019 audited financial statements of Leaside Memorial Community Gardens Arena for information attached to this report.
AU2.14adopted
Business Improvement Areas - Update on 2020-2022 Audited Financial Statements
The purpose of this report is to present the City of Toronto's (City) Business Improvement Areas' (BIAs) audited financial statements and management letters for approval. The below table summarizes the approval statuses associated with the BIAs' financial information: Number of BIAs: Fiscal 2020: Fiscal 2021: Fiscal 2022: Included in this report 21 84 14 To be included in future reports - - 70 Included and approved in previous reports (see Decision History) 61 - - Total number of active BIAs 82 84* 84 *: In 2021, two new BIAs, Lawrence Ingram Keele BIA and Willowdale BIA, were established, and the Toronto Entertainment District BIA changed its name to the Toronto Downtown West District BIA. The 2022 audited financial statements and management letters for 70 other BIAs are in the process of being prepared, audited, or awaiting approval of the respective BIA Boards of Management (Boards). All of the in-scope BIAs have received an unqualified audit opinion for their financial statements. Several BIAs received audit recommendations for minor internal control and process improvements that have been accepted by the respective Boards - these audit recommendations can be found in the attached management letters (i.e. Appendices A to DS).
The Audit Committee recommend that: 1. City Council approve the 2020, 2021, and 2022 audited financial statements and management letters of the Business Improvement Areas as attached in Appendices A to DS to the report (June 22, 2023) from the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture.
Staff recommendation as filed
The General Manager, Economic Development and Culture recommend that: 1. City Council approve the 2020, 2021, and 2022 audited financial statements and management letters of the Business Improvement Areas as attached in Appendices A to DS to this report.