By Patrick Tepoorten

Chisago County Health and Human Services (HHS) responded to the state Department of Human Services allegations of mismanagement in the Masters of Social Work (MSW) last week by calling in to question the methods used by the state and criticizing the media for what Director Mary Sheehan called ìa constant barrage of negativity.î

In a public discussion between the county board and Sheehan on Wednesday, June 28, the over $20,000 the county expects to return to the state was not mentioned. Instead, the discussion focused on the stateís handling of the matter.

ìWe are very disappointed with the adversarial tone of the review,î said Sheehan, who went on to note that a ìsimple phone callî from the state could have resolved many of the issues.

Commissioner Ben Montzka called into question the program in its entirety, and stated that, in previous descriptions of the program by HHS, it was assured that the majority of the cost of the MSW program was shouldered by the federal government.

ìIn paragraph five of the state report though, it implies an equal match,î he continued, and asked Sheehan to clear up the confusion as to what percentage the program is paid for locally.

Sheehan said she would respond to that question the next time she came before the board as she did not have the answer at that time.

Montzka also requested a recommendation from Sheehan as to whether the program should continue, at that time.

It was also suggested by Montzka that HHS is the only department that doesnít divide accounting between the department and the county auditorís office and added that, had the board known how expensive the program was it may not have supported it. He called for an outside audit function for the department going forward.

Sheehan addressed concerns presented by the board by stating her intention to conduct a peer review to be supervised by former social service directors and employees.

She said she would like to ìreach out to a retired social services directorî whom she did not name, ìand try to establish a contractual relationshipî for the completion of the review.

Sheehan concluded that a review would give her an ìunvarnished viewî of the department, whether or not it has the right staffing mix and accounting practices. Findings would be brought back to the board.

Desiring a public vote on the program, Montzka, at this point in the meeting, called for the public suspension of the program a second time. Like the first time though, the motion died for lack of a second. It was suggested by other board members that, since the program was already suspended by County Administrator John Moosey, suspension again would be redundant.

Moosey confirmed the programís status. ìThe program is suspended,î he said, but added that one person has been allowed to continue in the program due to contract language. ìWe would be in breach of contractî he explained.

Montzka asked Moosey when he had suspended the program and at the same time suggested that Moosey had overstepped by suspending the program ìwithout board approval.î

Moosey informed Montzka that the program was suspended in mid-May.

Sheehan said she was planning to meet with state DHS representatives on July 5 and hoped the meeting would straighten out some of the confusion. ìWe fully expect the matter to be fully resolved by the end of July,î she concluded.