Bollin pledges scrutiny of state health department contracts following auditor general report

The Michigan House of Representatives’ top appropriator said she intends to keep an eye on the state’s health department following the release of a report from the Office of the Auditor General looking into a department contractor, with the aim of ensuring that the department is managing public funds responsibly.

The auditor general’s most recent report examines contracts and grant agreements between the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and the Michigan Public Health Institute, a nonprofit the department established in 1990 to coordinate and promote health services research with the state’s public universities. 

Michigan House Appropriations Committee Chair Ann Bollin (R-Brighton) scrutinized that report on Friday.

In its evaluation, the Office of the Auditor General set three objectives: determining whether DHHS’s efforts to ensure the contracts and grants it provides to the institute are in line with state law and policy; examining whether the department is sufficiently monitoring those contracts and grants; and assessing whether the the department’s efforts to provide state lawmakers with information on Michigan Public Health Institute efforts as required by state law.

The auditor general determined the department’s efforts to follow state law when awarding grants and contracts to the institute were mostly sufficient, but deemed the department’s work in the remaining two areas insufficient.

In its first finding, the Office of the Auditor General said improvements were needed in how the department awards agreements to the institute, particularly those involving subcontractors. The report summary noted that in seven selected agreements with subcontractors, the subcontract information in the department’s grant management system accounted for less than 50% of the nearly $17 million the institute was awarded for those subcontracts.

The Office of the Auditor General also concluded DHHS needs to improve its monitoring of agreements with the institute, noting that the department frequently could not document the project info it reviewed when approving final project budgets, financial status reports and quarterly work plans. 

The report specifically notes that no documentation was provided for nearly 70% of the financial status reports it reviewed. It also raises concerns that department staff who were either affiliated with the Michigan Public Health Institute or previously worked there approved almost half of all financial status reports for payment to the institute.

The Office of the Auditor General further raised concerns around the department’s monitoring and evaluation of whether some indirect costs reimbursed to subcontractors were needed.

It was also determined that the Department of Health and Human Service’s reports to the Michigan Legislature consistently lacked required information on Michigan Public Health Institute projects, with some lacking that information entirely.

In a statement, Bollin said she had long raised concerns about the state’s relationship with the Michigan Public Health Institute and whether there are sufficient safeguards to ensure transparency and accountability. 

“The Legislature cannot provide meaningful oversight when required information is incomplete or unavailable,” Bollin said. “We need to have a transparent process that allows both legislators and the public to understand how funds are being spent and whether state agencies are complying with established requirements.”

Bollin said she would be monitoring both the audit’s finding and the Department’s response closely.

In a statement to the Michigan Advance, DHHS Public Information Officer Lynn Sutfin said that the department’s relationship with the institute is one focused on improving public health for Michigan residents and their collaboration allows the state to move quickly on issues like disease outbreaks and efficiently address emerging threats to public health.

“MDHHS is committed to continuous improvement and appreciates the Office of Auditor General’s role,” Sutfin said. “The information from the audit will be used to help inform future processes and department approaches.”