|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
City of Toronto Council and Committees |
|
 |
All Council and Committee documents are available from the City of Toronto Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@toronto.ca.
|
|
|
May 10, 1999
To:Audit Committee
From:City Auditor
Subject:Review of the Metropolis Project - Police Services - One Page Report
Attached is my One Page Report on Audit Services's recently completed report titled,
"Review of the Metropolis Project."
Jeffrey Griffiths
City Auditor
dl
Encl.
A:\MTRPOLIS.CVG
AUDIT SERVICES
ONE PAGE REPORT
Subject:Review of the Metropolis
Project
February 1999 |
Program Area Manager:
Larry Stinson
Director, Computing/ Telecommunications
|
Audit Team:
Jerry Shaubel
Gifford Chu |
Area of Responsibility:
Computing & Telecommunications
Toronto Police Services |
General Information/Highlights:
In 1991, the Metropolis (Metropolitan Toronto Police Information System) strategy was conceived to develop an
integrated computing environment to improve the efficiency, flexibility and effectiveness of the Service's
business systems in support of its Beyond 2000 policing strategy. Between 1992 and 1997, the former Metro
Council approved capital funding of approximately $60 million with the expectation that the project would
deliver a cumulative net benefit in excess of $90 million by the end of the year 2002.
|
Objectives and Scope:
The objective of this review was to determine, to the extent possible, whether the benefits realized from the
Metropolis project justified the expenditures incurred. The review included interviews with various staff from
Toronto Police Services and an examination of relevant records and documents covering the period 1992 to
1998.
|
Significant Issues:
- The audit could not definitively verify whether the benefits realized from the Metropolis project justified the
expenditures incurred.
- There is evidence that efficiency savings achieved through the Metropolis initiatives assisted the Police in
absorbing reductions in their annual budget of $65 million between 1993 and 1997.
- The benchmarks initially established did not allow for a proper evaluation of the project. Thus there is no
conclusive evidence that claimed actual dollar savings were actually achieved and, the stated value of
efficiency benefits appear overstated.
- Costs for internal resources were not reflected in the Metropolis cost/benefit analysis.
- The accepted method of presenting efficiency savings in the Capital Budget Submissions may have led
Council and the Board members to interpret such savings as opportunities for actual budget reductions.
|
Significant Audit Recommendations:
- Clear parameters be established at the beginning of each project, identifying the benchmarks to be used in
evaluating the success of the project.
- Any cost/benefit analysis performed in support of projects include both external as well as internal costs.
- Where projects are approved on the basis of efficiency savings, a plan be established outlining how staff
redeployments will be achieved, and a reporting process be developed to identify such redeployments.
- City of Toronto Budget Division clarify to all Departments, Agencies, Boards & Commissions, that the
Impact on the Operating Budget section of the capital budget submissions be restricted to actual budget
reductions.
- Future submissions to Council and the Board clearly identify the types of benefits to be realized (i.e. actual
dollars vs efficiency savings).
|
Management Response:
- Generally concurs
- Disagrees
|
Follow-up Review Date by
Audit Services: November 1999
|
|
|
|
Please note that council and committee documents are provided electronically for information only and do not retain the exact structure of the original versions. For example, charts, images and tables may be difficult to read. As such, readers should verify information before acting on it. All council documents are available from the City Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@toronto.ca. |
|