Council favors proposed performance audit of Hawai‘i County R&D Department

The Hawai‘i County Council wants to know exactly what the Hawai‘i County Department of Research and Development is doing and if its resources are being used effectively.

Council members on Tuesday during a meeting of their Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs unanimously moved forward Resolution 539 with a favorable recommendation.

The measure requests the county auditor to conduct a performance audit of the R&D Department, with an emphasis on reviewing how its duties and responsibilities line up with the County Charter and code and keying in on the process for awarding discretionary grant funds along with determining how those funds impact the community.

It also wants to learn if the county’s economic objectives and needs are being met by the department through its workforce development initiatives.

The resolution was introduced by Puna Councilwoman Ashley Kierkiewicz and Council Vice Chairman Holeka Inaba.

“I’ve been on the council going on about 5 and a half years now and I’ve always been curious about the sort of very fluid nature of the Department of Research and Development,” said Kierkiewicz during Tuesday’s meeting. “I’ve been very curious about the additional kuleana [responsibility] that it’s been taking on over the last few years, kind of going beyond what’s articulated in the charter and county code.”

Some red flags were raised for her during the council’s recent budgeting cycle, particularly surrounding how resources are being used by the department. She was concerned after learning the department made no Innovation Grant awards this fiscal year.

Kierkiewicz also thinks there’s been a lack of transparency as to what exactly R&D is doing.

There’s so much the department has under its umbrella now that the council and community might not know about. She wants to elevate that through the proposed performance audit, which she hopes will make crystal clear, for any administration and the public, the responsibilities of R&D.

Inaba said the Research and Development Department has awarded grants to the Big Island community for a long time. The proposed audit is meant to get a handle on what the department does and how it uses its funding to make sure all of the county’s taxpayer dollars are being used properly.

He also wants to ensure good reporting and overall tracking practices for funds being awarded to R&D in specific.

“I’m very proud of the work that the members of my department are engaged in and continue to do for the people of the Island of Hawai’i and look forward to, assuming this passes through, working with the county auditor, who has a fine reputation,” said Research and Development Department Director Doug Adams.

When asked what his thoughts are about the proposed performance audit, Adams said he looks forward to learning through the audit process. It will be good for his department to see where it can improve.

He added later during the meeting that he and his staff will talk with the auditor about whatever he wants, including the policies the department operates with, under and is moving toward.

“I think it’s part and parcel of our mission to do that,” Adams said.

The resolution says differing interpretations of R&D’s role and functions have led to frequent operational changes, inconsistent priorities and difficulties in the general oversight and evaluation of the department fulfilling its duty to the people of Hawai‘i County.

County code describes the purview of the department to include sustainable agriculture, alternative energy, ecological education, business development, green housing and buildings and protection and biodiversity. It also designates a Sustainability Action Committee within R&D to serve in an advisory capacity.

The scope of the department, however, has expanded through the years to now include community needs of broadband access, filming, Hawaiian culture, climate change action, Indigenous science, health and well-being, early childhood resources, tourism, immigration and workforce development.

Hawai‘i County Auditor Tyler Benner has spoken with Adams about some of the criteria in Resolution 539 and told the council on Tuesday that they will be looking through “a pretty amazing breadth of information.”

Not only does the department have a total of 110 goals and objectives in its fiscal year 2024 program, the proposed audit would establish a long-term working model for whether R&D aligns and has aligned with the County Charter and code through time. He said these types of audits typically look at a period of about 5 years.

Puna Councilman Matt Kaneali‘i-Kleinfelder asked how the audit would look at the department’s budget. Benner said planning stages have not gotten to a point where he could drill into many specific testing criteria.

The description of the department, as with many others, is vague, making it difficult to determine if there is true efficacy being reached out of the dollars allocated to certain purposes. The analysis in the proposed audit would be largely qualitative in a number of areas, which means generally weaker criteria than a strict compliance audit.

But Benner thinks there are still many potential benefits that would come from the proposed review.

Hilo Councilwoman Sue Lee Loy suggested the proposed audit also take a closer look at investments made to R&D, such as special federal funding including eruption recovery funds, and what the return on those investments has been.

Hilo Councilwoman Jenn Kagiwada thinks it would be good to zero in on the department’s grant-making abilities. If they are working, are there tweaks that can be made to improve the county’s chances get those funds?

Kaʻū Councilwoman Michelle Galimba said it also would be a good time to look at redundancies in what R&D does compared to other county departments, such as the newly created Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity and Resilience, and the county’s departmental organization to determine if there are changes needed to help better achieve its goals.

Kierkiewicz said she would work with Inaba and Benner to see if the recommendations from her fellow council members could be incorporated into the performance audit and will likely amend the resolution before it gets to the council level to add a bullet to increase the audit’s scope to ensure those points are addressed.

Benner expressed some concern about the resolution’s language, as written, making it more limited instead of the comprehensive audit proposed. Kierkiewicz said she and Inaba will work with him to ensure the resolution that is potentially adopted is accurate and reflects the work his office would perform.

When she asked the county auditor what a good time frame is for a project such as the proposed audit, he said most of his colleagues would say a year.

While he and his staff work at an unprecedented pace, there are factors out of his control that can delay an audit’s completion. If push came to shove, Benner said 180 days would be reasonable.

However, he’d prefer more flexibility. Kierkiewicz had no qualms with that, saying she knows Benner is good for it.

“I look forward to seeing what comes of the audit and hope there’s some positive changes that we can affect, if any are needed, from the department level,” Kaneali‘i-Kleinfelder said.