School Board Audit and Budget Advisory Committee - Regular Meeting

Good morning. I'm going to start by introducing ourselves. I'm going to start with John.

Good morning. Good afternoon. John Goodman, Chief Auditor.

Walter Harvey, General Counsel.

Jose Bueno, Chief of Staff.

Good afternoon.

Father Sede, please introduce yourself.

Jerry Donatis, with GMRT CPA, representing Kevin Cabrera.

Juan Carlos Gonzalez, CPA, GMRT, appointed by Roberto Alonso School Board.

Julio Miranda, committee member.

Anna Huckemer, committee member. Chairman Watson, committee member.

My name is Christopher Norwood, member of the ABAC. I want to welcome especially the chairwoman of our school board for being here today as always. The second item on the agenda is approval of our minutes of the school board audit budget advisory committee meeting of July 30th, 2024.

Move it.

All those in favor?

Aye.

And then oppose the passage unanimously.

Mr. Chair. Yes, sir. Just quickly. I know we have two additions to the committee. Can we just have them to re-identify themselves and who they're representing?

Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. We have new membership?

Of the committee.

Committee.

I know they introduced themselves, but we just wanted to have the representative, what board member they're representing. Just for the record, I think it's important.

Okay, Jerry Donatis and this is my second meeting and I am representing District 6 Commissioner Kevin Cabrera.

Kevin Cabrera. That's what got my attention. Kevin Cabrera. And see- County Commissioner. Yeah, through the chair. Well, through the chair. Nobody caught that. And you're okay, but you're not okay. But I caught that when you said that, and I said, let me see if I'm hearing what I'm hearing. So we need clarification on what school board member you're representing.

Oh, sorry. Come on, Mr. Chair. Mr. Harvey. I know it is. I'm confusing my appointments. I'm representing Danny Espino. Yes. Thank you.

Yes.

No, you're right. Father Sid is an alternate, and I think now a member.

I am an alternate, I think.

Yes.

For Ms. Lucia Baez-Skeller. Okay.

Absolutely.

Thank you. I have been for several years now. Yes, sir. And I think this is my last meeting. Is it done?

Through the chair, probably, unless you come back as a full-time, you know, permanent ABAC member at some point.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. No problem. And thank you for understanding. That's what it resonated when you said Kevin Cabrera. I said I didn't hear that, but.

Right. No, no, no.

For the record, we want our records to reflect the representation accordingly.

Absolutely.

And you're a busy man. And thank you. Thank you for your service to the county and to the school board.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

The third item on the agenda is approval of the proposed Audit and Budget Advisory Committee meeting dates for 2025. Any discussion? Did these dates look okay for everyone?

Through the chair, yeah, these are the six ABAC meetings. They continue to be on Tuesdays. We tried to schedule them so they wouldn't interfere too much with the school board meetings and the school board committee meetings. So we did our best to schedule them in that fashion.

Any questions, concerns? Is there? Okay. Is there a motion to approve?

Yes. Moved and second.

Moved and second. All those in favor? Aye. And all opposed, it passes unanimously. We have a new ABAC member, Ms. Susie Caceres. Please introduce yourself. Thank you very much. The next item on the agenda is number four, Miami-Dade Public Schools annual financial report on our fiscal year in June 30th, 2024. Mr. Goodman.

Through the chair, Mr. Ron Steiger, CFO.

Good morning, Mr. Steiger. Good morning. Yeah, so number four is the presentation of our annual financial report for fiscal year ending June 30th, 2024. You know, it's always a good year for me when we end as anticipated, which is what happened. So there was no surprises at year end. Everything went well. Our ending fund balance increased. That was as anticipated and planned. We did some transfers onto ESSER grant at the end of last year, which freed up general fund reserves and general fund ended up going up. We did that to cover a liability that we have in 24-25. So everything's, you know, it's a good year. Let me just, you know, since I have the microphone, let me thank Daisy Naya who's behind me and who's our controller and her team. It's getting harder and harder each year to do this, especially with, you know, it's getting harder and harder to find accountants, frankly. And so we seem to be doing the same work or more with less people each year. between the months of July and August, Daisy's team puts in an incredible amount of work into this document and making sure we close year end on time and well. So I want to thank her and her team for doing that. But overall, this shows a picture of a district that while certainly facing financial struggles, what you saw in prior years was a decreasing fund balance, and like I told this committee over the prior years, we know that's happening, that's the plan, and it's supposed to level off, and that's what's happened. So we have leveled off. The decrease got smaller each year. We've now leveled off. It actually went up for some reasons, but the goal is to keep us healthy and where we are moving forward. With that, I'll take any questions, Mr. Chair.

Any questions? Hearing none, is there a motion to notice for informational purposes? All right. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Steiger. Item number five, internal audit report, selected school centers. Mr. Goodman?

Through the Chair, Ms. Tamara Wayne, CPA, Assistant Chief Auditor.

Good afternoon, through the chair. Our office is presenting the September school audit report, which includes the audit results of 40 schools and centers. For all schools and centers reported, the audit scope was two fiscal years ending June 30, 2024. And at five of these schools, there was a change of principal and administrator since the prior audit. Audit results were satisfactory, and the financial statements were fairly stated for all schools. Property inventory audit results were mostly satisfactory for schools that were completed, and I'm happy to report there are no audit findings to report for this group of schools. Our office and district administration are available to answer any questions related to this report.

Thank you very much, Ms. Wayne. Any questions? Is there a second? All those in favor? Aye. And unopposed, the item passes unanimously. Thank you very much Ms. Wayne. The internal audit, audit benchmarking of the district's health insurance program. Mr. Goodman?

Through the chair, we perform this audit slash benchmarking project in accordance with the 2324 approved audit plan. Some school board members have consistently voiced an interest in knowing more about the district's health insurance plans and its corresponding $400 million annual expense. The project compared our plan's costs, provision of services and other attributes, with five other South Florida government entities, including Broward and Palm Beach schools. We met extensively with the leadership of our risk and benefits management department, corresponded extensively with applicable staff from the benchmarked entities, and acquired substantial supporting documentation.

Thank you very much.

I'm not done, I just had to, pardon me. Health insurance provisions are complex and not perfectly analogous across benchmark entities. I am hoping our report encourages further contemplation by the administration and ultimately the board about any adjustments that could further enhance the efficiency and effectiveness. of the district's provision of medical insurance. Through the Chair, Mr. Luis Beluja, CESA District Director, served as the auditor in charge and will be presenting the findings. I may also call on Ms. Elvira Sanchez, CPA, CFE, Executive Director, to weigh in at some point. Good afternoon, Mr. Beluja.

Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Goodman, through the chair. Good afternoon to all the committee members and all those present. We compared the district's employee health plans with five other South Florida public entities, namely Broward County Public Schools, Palm Beach Schools, Miami Dade College, Florida International University, and Miami Dade County. On page six of the report, you will find the general definition of a fully insured program versus a self insured health plan. In a fully insured model, the employer pays a carrier to handle all aspects of the plan and the carrier assumes all risks. In a self-insured model, which is what we have here at Miami-Dade County Schools, the employer pays a carrier to manage the overall plan but retains control of plan design and is typically less expensive than a fully insured plan, and the employer assumes all the risk. Those are the differences between a fully insured and a self-insured plan. As you may have gathered from reading the report, the health insurance industry is complex. Every entity that we surveyed offers different plan designs, premiums, and provision of services that vary significantly. We selected monthly premiums as our initial and primary comparison point as this element is required across all entities for both employees and the governing boards. Exhibit 1 on page 13 shows a high-level snapshot of statistics and the various of the various entities benchmarks such as plant types, populations, and other attributes. If you move over to exhibit 2 and exhibit 4, they illustrate the lowest and the highest monthly employee premium costs respectively across all of the entities that we benchmarked. EXHIBIT 3 AND EXHIBIT 5 SHOWS A BREAKDOWN OF COMMON COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOWEST AND HIGHEST MONTHLY PLAN PREMIUMS PAID BY EMPLOYEES UPON ACTUAL USE OF THE IN-NETWORK PLAN SERVICES. FOR EXAMPLE, OFFICE VISITS, DEDUCTIBLES AND OTHER OUT-OF-POCKET MAXIMUMS AND OTHER COSTS. Exhibit 6 illustrates a breakdown of common costs associated with the highest monthly premium plans that are paid by employees upon plan use. The remainder of the report presents various observations and conclusions about the district's health plans. Specifically, we point out the use of salary bands, hiring date distinctions, and employee monthly premiums that are based upon salary from two years in arrears. We also point out individual stop loss, employee health plan selection populations, and Miami-Dade County Public Schools loss ratios for each of the three plans. Management and I are available to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions?

Yes, Dr. Gallin.

Yes, through the Chair. Looking at page 16. can you explain the uh detailed premium rate analysis that is here am i to uh conclude based on this particular analysis on page 17 actually it's 17. can you explain broward and dade county's comparison it looks as though broward's costs are significantly lower today county am i interpreting that correctly i'm reading it here

Through the Chair, may I have, Dr. Gallin, may I ask the administration to first respond to that and then we'll weigh in as well?

Through the Chair, I guess at the Chair's pleasure, yes. Yes, that's fine. He's the Chair. I'm good with whoever gives me an answer through the Chair.

Mrs. Steiger? Sure, I can take a stab at it, and I'm sure Lewis will have his thoughts if he needs them. So yeah, I think what I saw from Seventeen and from all of it is that our plans differ substantially between Broward, Dade. First off, the cost in Miami-Dade is higher, but more than anything, the plans are far more generous in Miami-Dade than Broward, which led to a different amount of premium. It was, what was one of the most interesting things in the reports to me was how much the, how much, I mean, they say that old line that, you know, the budget reflects your values, right? And it was incredible to me how much that is true in the case of health insurance where, you know, this is our second biggest expenditure, fringes, our second biggest expenditure after salaries. So we spend a lot of money making sure that our lowest cost plan are employees that get paid the least, whether it's through salary bans or through the plan design on our employees. what other districts call their high deductible plan. Their free plan to their employees are high deductible plans. Ours is the opposite. Our free plan is a low deductible plan, right? We basically have a bankruptcy and protection plan. And yeah, that led to a much higher premium, much higher, actually where it really differs, where the, you can see it's almost the exact same amount for what the employees pay. Right, so our employees pay almost the same amount that Broward employees pay, but the board here pays substantially more than the Broward board. And that's, to cover the increased cost in Miami-Dade, but we have, instead of passing those costs along to our employees, we actually have a more generous plan, which increases the cost by quite a bit, and the board pays the difference.

Thank you very much. Subhulua?

Yes, thank you. Through the chair, Dr. Gallin, one of the things that is important to note is not just to focus on premium. If you move over to exhibit 3 on page 19, you'll be able to take a look at the provision of services. That's a term that is used to describe basically the costs that the employee is subject to at the time of receiving services. So if you look over, for example, on page 19, rather, if you look at the provision of services, the individual deductible in Miami-Dade is $150 as opposed to The second benchmarked entity is 2,500. And if you look at those numbers, it pretty much follows the same concept. So our provision of services are more favorable. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Through the chair, by the way, this first chart is relating to the lowest plan, the low plan, which is for us, it's called Sure-Fit. It's an HMO. And then we also benchmark the high plan for each of the entities.

Any other questions? Yes, sir.

Yes, through the chair. My question was, what was the reasoning behind the hiring date distinction?

Through the chair, I think that would be better answered by the administration.

Sure, yeah. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. So yeah, that's an interesting question. So there's, we spend our money on health insurance in two big ways. One is, like I said, to have a low cost plan that people can afford, right? And go to the doctor and not have to worry about getting a surgery that will bankrupt them. The second is, We have invested $90 million, this board invest $90 million annually in dependent subsidies. And this has been since I believe 2005, the board got involved in heavily subsidizing dependent care, both for spouses and children. So in 2018, As the cost of insurance was really going up, the board wanted us to take a look at potentially not harming any current employee, but is there a way to limit the exposure on the dependent subsidies without just moving forward and grandfathering all of our current employees into what we've always done? So that's what we did. So if you're hired after January 1st, 2018, your dependent subsidies are about 20% at the time, 20% lower than the dependent subsidies were for grandfathered employees. And the reason for that was we wanted to try to eat at the cost of dependent subsidies without harming the employees that we already had on board.

Thank you.

Just so I understand the context. First of all, the report is great. I love the comparative analysis because Mr. Harvey probably can attest in law school when we studied various laws of different states or different countries, it really allows you to contextualize that which you operate under. I'm just curious because I don't work for the school district and I'm just trying to understand. If you are a cafeteria worker, I assume you might want to take the Sure-Fit program, I guess, perhaps, but I don't know. But what does that person pay as opposed to someone who is a seasoned educator? Because I think that's the distinction that we're talking about with the low individual plan or whatever.

Yeah, so Lewis, do you have the salary bands broken out on any exhibits?

No, salary bands are not broken out.

I think it's on page 30, is it? Page 31. So on page 31, if you can see, let's say for sure fit, if you're just an employee only, you pay zero. Right, if you are a, if you're, and that's across all salary bands. So all salary bands, if you're short fit.

That's in this report somewhere?

Yeah, page 31. We have a free option open to all employees regardless of your income, right? Regardless of how much we pay you, you are free to go employee only on short fit. Now, if you are, if you are on, If you're on standard, you'll see that the employee pays $14 for salary band one, while on band five, you would pay $76. This is monthly, by the way. You'd pay $76 a month. If you went to OAP high, if you were salary band one for employee only, you would pay $34 per month, while salary band five would pay $112 a month. And this is for employees on or after January 2018, which would be exactly the same as before, because the only thing that changed from before and after 2018 was dependent subsidies. So those columns where it's not just employee only, that's where there's a change between before and after 2018. Thank you very much.

Dr. Gallin.

Yes, through the chair. On page 20. 9, the last sentence. Can you provide an explanation and discuss the impact of the stipulation of providing employee salary bands based on two years in their arrears on page 29? Can you discuss that and the implications for that apart from what other districts do and potentially the financial impact positive and negative to the district through the chair?

Yeah, sure, Mr. Chair, Dr. Gallin. So obviously, that's never the intent. The intent is to update it on the most updated salary each year. The issue is that during collective bargaining, as employees get higher salaries, that might move them from Band 2 to Band 3 or Band 3 to Band 4. And oftentimes, the unions during bargaining try to ask us to postpone that for one year or two years because If an employee got a raise but then moved from Band 3 to Band 4, saw a substantial increase in their health insurance costs, they wouldn't realize the benefit of that raise. So it's a decision we make at the bargaining table each year. We've never let it get beyond a couple of years. Then we update it. The plan for this session, since it's now two years in arrears, the plan is to update it and make everything refresh again. But it's an annual decision we have at the bargaining table on whether we hold employees, it is certainly a negative cost. It's not a major cost, but it's a negative cost on the board, and it holds employees harmless for the movement between bands.

Follow up, Mr. Chair?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, I understand you've articulated the intent. But what is the impact with respect to not squaring the realities of their salary with their premium costs? And I understand you say it may not be significant. We all kind of understand the current and the potential forecast of us financially as a district. So what five years ago may have been nominal, five years from now may be significant. So what will be the impact of not doing that? And maybe you can answer it and Mr. Belujar maybe can weigh in through the chair.

Yeah, sure. I can tell you from my perspective, It's bad practice. I'd prefer it updated every single year. I understand the political realities of working at the bargaining table and sometimes I don't always get everything I want. So if that's a sacrifice, I think that two years would be really the most I'm ever comfortable going into arrears because at some point you have to catch up. We can't hold things static forever. So the intent is that this bargaining session absolutely to make sure that we update it. Thank you very much.

Through the chair, Dr. Gallin. So just continuing along those lines, those thoughts, the effect of delaying, it has a delaying effect for the employee to contribute a higher amount. That's the end result. So it's a function there that's intended to protect the employee. Thank you. And we did not quantify that in this audit.

Yes, sir.

Yes, through the chair.

I'm sorry, go ahead. I have one more question. Yes, sir, Mr. Gowen. Through the chair. I'm sorry. Page 33. INDIVIDUAL STOP LOSS, ALTHOUGH CARRYING ISL HAS RESULTED IN A NET COST OF APPROXIMATELY $6.3 MILLION OVER THE LAST 14 YEARS. THE BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION HAVE OPTED TO MITIGATE THE RISK OF CATASTROPHIC CLAIMS USING THIS APPROACH. THROUGH THE CHAIR, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE IMPLICATIONS AND IMPACT ON THAT?

YEAH, SURE. MR. CHAIR, I CAN TRY THAT. Stop-loss is insurance for us, right? We're buying insurance on our insurance. Just in case someone pierces someone, an individual claim goes for a substantial amount, that overage then falls onto this insurance that we're buying, this individual stop-loss. It was very necessary when the plan was young. So when we've only had a self-insured plan for 14 years, I think it made a lot of sense for the preceding years as the plan matured. Personally, I am of the mind that the next time we go out with an RFP on this, I have less of an interest in individual stop loss. I know that's scary for some people because they're like, oh, my God, what if this is the year you get a $40 million claim? I understand that thought, but that's the point of having a reserve on this, right? It's to go almost self-insured. So I guess on this world, I'm a little... I side with the... I know that there's really not... And the audit department didn't really... make recommendations like a normal audit. In fact, I haven't had a chance to say I really very much appreciated the review. I thought it was great. I learned a lot. It's not anything I've ever had the time to go and do. So this was really useful exercise for me to compare us. And it was helpful for me on individual stop-loss to see that other big entities that are doing this that have been more mature Self-insurance plan they haven't bought individual stop-loss and that provides further confidence that I shouldn't have to moving forward either I mean, we'll see it's the decisions not made and the decisions not independently mine Certainly at the board's decision, but I think my moving forward I think of my recommendation would be to not have stop-loss either continue out through this but moving forward probably not I Thank you very much.

Dr. Gallin?

Mr. Gonzalez. Through the chair, just a quick question. I don't know if it has a simple answer, but as a business owner, I know that rates go up every year. And when you guys receive that or when the board receives that, what happens in terms, because I know like there's two choices. You charge more to the employees or you absorb the costs. Is there a methodology or is that done on a case by case, just out of curiosity?

Yeah, no, Mr. Chair, Mr. Gonzales, yeah, this is a really, that question gets at the heart of who we are as a district and how it's not one person's decision, right? It's not an individual business owner who makes that decision for their employees, right? The superintendent has conversations in executive session with the board, right? And in those conversations, we discuss, not just health insurance, but salaries too, right? And so a lot of these decisions on how much of our costing, we can't control the cost increase, right? We do the best we can. We have plan design, right? And so we can change plan design. We can work with the hospital. We are a big enough employer that we have some leverage with some of the bigger hospitals. But in the end, the cost increases for us is the same as it is for everyone else. So you ask a really great question that the answer is extraordinarily complex, that we look at salaries, we look at benefits, we look at everything, we speak about them internally, we talk about the ramifications. In the end, the superintendent has a conversation in the shade with the school board where we come up with a strategy, and then that strategy has to be tested out in collective bargaining with each of the different unions. And between all of that, we come up with a settlement on what is going to be passed along to employees, what the board's gonna pick up, and then how much funds do we have for a salary increase that goes along with that.

Yes, sir, Mr. Gonzalez. So, historically, is it a combination of the two, or is it normally we absorb the whole thing, or the employees absorb the whole thing?

And I know it's a... Yes, Mr. Chairman, I don't think I remember a world where the employee picked up the whole thing. That would be unique for us. But yes, there have been times that the board picked up the entire amount, and there have been times that we share that cost along with our employees, and that's determined in collective bargaining each year. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Any other questions? I have a question. Well, not a question. I guess it goes to Mr. Bulu how your observations, the observations in the report on page 28 and the three bullet points. Could you walk me through those three?

Sure. So through you. So we tried to break out the three distinct elements that we observed when we did this work. The first bullet refers to salary bands, which Mr. Steiger was referring to before on page 30 and 31. We were the only entity among the entities surveyed that employed a salary band approach. The salary band basically based on the employee's salary that would determine your premium. That's salary.

When you say only public, you mean the five?

The five that we benchmarked against. Right. Don't know if others are doing that, but only within the five that we tested. And then the hiring date distinction was what Mr. Steiger was comparing a little earlier. Those folks that were hired prior to January 1, 2018, pay a little less for the dependent subsidy is greater for those before January 1, 2018, as opposed to those that were hired after January 1, 2018. And the monthly premium basis is what we were also speaking of a little earlier, which is using the salary from two years in arrears. The second bullet is individual stop loss, as Mr. Steiger explained. It's something that's been in place since the beginning of the self-insurance program, and it's used to protect the district against catastrophic claims in a particular year. And essentially, ISL picks up the tab after, right now, as it stands right now, 1.5 million, it picks up the tab after that amount. And employee plan selections, that third and last bullet, we noticed that about 71% of the lowest-earning employees, which are qualified as making less than $55,000 annually, are enrolled in the district's two most expensive plans. And that would summarize it. I hope that explains it.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Any other questions? Mr. Goodman?

Through the Chair, I just wanted to recognize the risk management team, Mr. Steiger's risk management team, Mr. Michael Fox, Ms. Rosa Nova, and Mr. George Davila. And so we worked extensively with them, and they are filled with a lot of expertise and experience in this area it's a very complex area there's a lot of moving parts uh and i just wanted to recognize that a lot of work was put into this on on all sides and uh i would also point to uh page 34 i think this is something that should probably just be touched on a little bit today uh page 34 shows a breakdown of the employees and which uh of the three plans they're a member of okay and uh also the associated salary bands that they're in uh and if you couple that with on page 35 It shows what they call the loss ratios for the last two years. And I think we should have a little explanation of what the loss ratios are and what implications they might have for future determination of premiums and this type of thing. So through the chair, if I could ask the administration just to weigh in on that a little bit.

Mr. Steiger? Sure. Happy to do so. And Mr. Fox is behind me. So if I misspeak, he can come up to the podium and correct me. But the loss ratio is basically what those employees as a collective cost us versus how much premium we took in, both from the board and the employee side. So yeah, I mean the we some of this makes sense right so it would make sense that if you are if you know You have a comorbidity if you know that you're gonna be at the doctor quite a bit in a in any given year you are highly likely to select the most expansive plan, especially if you don't know what doctors you're gonna see that given year, because you know you're gonna be a heavy user of the insurance plan, so you're willing to pay more for that extra benefit. And there's always going to be employees that cost us more than we take in in premium revenue. So it doesn't surprise me that the employees that are the highest users of our insurance plan gravitate to OAP High. I would love to have, what I would love to see, and there is a reason why Sure-Fit is lower, especially as compared to OAP standard. And that's because the Sure-Fit rates are, the difference between OAP and Sure-Fit is that Sure-Fit has a narrower network, right? The plan design, as you can see, is more generous on Sure-Fit, right? Everything, in fact, I am a Sure-Fit. Me and my family are on Sure-Fit. And that's because our doctors are on Sure-Fit. So if your doctors are on Sure-Fit, you don't think you're going to have to go to any specialists. Sure fit really make if you're if you're a you know, an educated consumer sure fit is actually the plan that makes the most sense So because it has a narrow network Cigna is able to negotiate on our behalf negotiate excellent rates, right? so the same doctor is charging us less on sure fit than they are on OAP and It would be great if we can migrate some employees over onto Sure-Fit. The issue is some employees shouldn't be on Sure-Fit, right? If your doctors aren't on there, if you know that you're gonna need a specialist. Our goal is not to get, now if we got every single person on one plan, our loss ratio would be below 100, but not much below 100. It would be about that. We're not trying to make a profit here. We're trying to break even on our health insurance plan. So, The goal is to try not to get more people to choose one or the other. It's to try to have the right plan mix so that everyone has the plan that's right for them. Ideally, I would love to have a third, a third, a third enrollment in each, showing that we have offered plans that really speak to the diversity of the district in a well way. So if we looked at this prior to us going with this plan design, we had one plan design that was like at 5%, another that was at 70%, another that was at 25%. It didn't make sense. So when we redid the plans, we're actually much closer to where my platonic ideal would be. We are at 36, 39, 25. I would love to find more people to get that 25% on Sure-Fit higher. Yes, for our lowest paid employees, but not just, right? To find the right network that covers enough doctors at that lower price that we can really increase it. But until, you know, until such time that it's an expansive enough network that that it covers every major doctor i understand why people would choose the other plans um so i really feel like currently our plan design is worked as is intended and the goal each year is to make sure that our employees you know know sure fit well enough and are comfortable enough that there's not it there's not enough negative thoughts floating around like, oh, that's the cheap plan. And that might be ostensibly much worse just because of it, that the enrollment goes up. But overall, our plan distribution is roughly what we're happy with.

Thank you very much, Mr. Steiger. Any other questions? Dr. Gallin?

Yes, through the chair. First of all, I want to commend Mr. Goodman and Belua for this tremendous body of work. I would also like to actually commend Mr. Steiger and the superintendent, but Mr. Steiger specifically conceded to the fact that this exercise was an education for him. Through the chair, I think it's important that we acknowledge that which we don't know. I've had an opportunity for obviously for decades to be in the school system and I would say health care is one of those areas that we just concede to the quote unquote experts. But I think as we continue to look at efficiencies, economies of scale in our school district, employee benefits, comparative analyses that were done with five institutions including Dade County, as reflected in this report, it has been something that obviously obligates the board to be much more educated as well. So I want to again commend everyone and I hope that this serves as a foundation, as you said, for us to look at some of our quote unquote methodologies. I'm looking at some of the language here in the document, some of our approaches, some of our practices where we just kind of concede to CERTAIN CONCESSIONS DURING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING KNOWING THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT'S MAYBE NOT THE BEST PRACTICE. SO HOW DO WE SQUARE OUR PRACTICES TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE ALIGNED WITH BEST POLICY POSITIONS AND AGAIN GIVING SOME DEGREE OF DEFERENCE TO OUR EMPLOYEES BUT MAKING SOUND BUSINESS DECISIONS BECAUSE WE ARE Fiduciary as a self-insured organization, we have an even heightened degree of responsibility and accountability. So again, I'm looking at this document as being an opportunity for us to lean forward and to find a way forward to improve our cost mitigation in anticipation of some of the issues that we'll face over the next three to five years financially. Again, kudos to everyone. This has been a great exercise and I will take a deeper dive into this area to try to become an expert myself. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I want to welcome Mr. Steven Johnson, ABAC member to the meeting and also our superintendent. Welcome. Any other questions? I want to ditto what our school board member mentioned. This is extraordinarily informational. I've always heard about our plan. I always was told that we have a very good health plan in Miami-Dade Public Schools, but this really illuminates so much, and I love the comparative analysis because It shows that we're doing something different. It shows that the least of our employees are engaging in better health by overwhelmingly entering in a plan that's more expensive because the school district is paying, it's helping them pay for it. And so I think it's a, I hope this document becomes something that the whole community consumes as well. Mr. Goodman. Anything else?

No.

All right. Is there a motion? Second. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Passes unanimously. The next item on the agenda is item number seven, the Office of Management and Compliance Audits 2023-24 Annual Report. Mr. Goodman.

Through the Chair, this summarizes our audit activities for the 23-24 fiscal year. I'm prepared to address any questions or comments that the committee may have.

Any questions? Yes, ma'am.

If I can just make the comment that it's been a real pleasure working with you and your staff. Thank you.

Thank you, and likewise.

Any other questions? This is an action item.

Move it. Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Hearing none opposed, it passes unanimously. The next item on the agenda is item number eight, Office of Management and Compliance Audits, Audit Status Report, Information Report. Mr. Goodman?

This is the audit activities that have taken place since the last ABAC meeting. We are commencing an audit of food service, which is on our annual audit plan. So we're getting started with the planning on that. And we are also beginning the planning on another audit on our annual audit plan, ESAC and school recognition funds, which this committee, in crafting the annual audit plan, this committee had a lot of comments and input into that. The ESAC and school recognition funds is on there. So we're about to get started. We're getting started on those two audits right now. And through the chair, I'm prepared to address any questions or comments the committee members may have.

Any questions? This is for informational purposes. So we're going to move on to the next item on the agenda is old business. Progress update number four, education facilities impact these studies. Mr. Goodman?

Through the Chair, Mr. Superintendent, and Mr. Raul Perez.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee members. Included in your agenda packet was memo number four, which is an update on the progress related to the educational facilities impact fees. So just to give you some highlights, as it relates to the consultant's progress, who's preparing the draft study, the draft study should be received by the district September 30th. On October 7th, the technical advisory group, which was put together with district personnel and county personnel, will be reviewing that draft. That meeting is set for October 7th. The draft study tentatively is scheduled to be presented to the board at the facilities committee meeting in November. There will be two community meetings with the consultant. in mid to late November, and we should have the final study finalized and presented to the school board in December. After that, it will move towards the county's arena and to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. As it relates to our update on outreach efforts, we've held a virtual town hall meeting August 1st. We've also had three geographically diverse focus groups. They were held September 5th at Miami Jackson Senior, September 6th at South Dade Senior, and September 13th at Barbara Goldman Senior. We also have a virtual focus group scheduled for October 8th at 6 p.m. And of course, all the information and input that we're gathering from this community outreach effort will be shared with the consultant and will be included in the final study that will be presented to the school board. We continue to work with our school, I mean our county staff along with school district staff. It's been a very good collaboration. We have bi-weekly meetings and we look to have the presentation, I'm sorry, the presentation that we've provided for the focus groups and the town hall is included in the memo with your agenda packet so you can see the information that's being shared with the community and this concludes my update mr chair i'll if you have any questions i'll be more than happy to answer them thank you very much uh any questions or comments uh mr mr goodman

all right uh thank you very much i appreciate it um the next item on the agenda is uh new business uh is there a motion to adjourn thank you very much