DCRA Performance Questions CY2013 - Council of the ...dccouncil.us/.../event_testimony/DCRA_Performance_Q… · Web viewPerformance Oversight Questions. ... (Word), and a standalone

Government of the District of Columbia

Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs

Agency Responses to FY2012 and FY2013 Performance Oversight Questions

Council of the District of ColumbiaCommittee on Business, Consumer, and Regulatory Affairs

Vincent B. Orange, Sr., Chairperson

February 7, 2013

John A. Wilson Building1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20004

1

I. AGENCY ORGANIZATION

1. Have there been any organizational changes within the Department since last year’s performance review? If so, please provide a complete, up-to-date organizational chart for each division within the agency including, either attached or separately, an explanation of the roles and responsibilities for each division and subdivision.

Please include a list of the employees (name and title) for each subdivision and the number of vacant positions.

Please provide a narrative explanation of any organizational changes made during the previous year.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 1 – Agency Organization.

2

II. PERSONNEL

2. Please provide a complete, up-to-date position listing for your agency, which includes the following information (list the information by program and activity): Title of position Name of employee or statement that the position is vacant, unfunded, or proposed. Date employee began in position Salary and fringe, including the specific grade, series, step of position, and funding

source (local or federal) Job status (continuing/term/temporary/contract)

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 2 – Personnel.

3. Please provide the number of FY12 full-time equivalents (FTEs) for the agency, broken down by program and activity. Please also note the number of vacancies at the close of FY12, by program and activity, and current vacancy information. For each vacant position, please note how long the position has been vacant and

whether or not the position has since been filled. How many vacancies within the agency were posted during FY12 and FY13, to date?

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 3 – FTE Information.

4. Please provide a description of any changes in the personnel process within the agency since FY 2011 and the agency’s relationship with the DC Department of Human Resources to ensure that human resource needs are met.

Response:

DCRA maintains a productive relationship with DCHR and has had no new changes to procedure.

5. Has there been any change in the agency’s employee performance evaluation process since last year? If so, please explain.

Response:

There have been no changes to the employee evaluation process since last year.

6. Please list all employees detailed to or from your agency, if any. Please provide the reason for the detail, the detailed employee’s date of detail, and the detailed employee’s projected date of return.

3

Response:

During FY12, one employee was detailed from DCRA to the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (Jennifer Boss), one employee was detailed from DCRA to Office of Boards and Commissions (John McFarland), and one employee was detailed to DCRA from the Office of the Attorney General (Catrina Jones).

7. Please provide the Committee with: A list of all employees who receive cell phones, personal digital assistants, or similar

communications devices at agency expense A list of all vehicles owned, leased, or otherwise used by the agency and to whom the

vehicle is assigned. A list of employee bonuses granted in FY12 and FY13, to date, if any A list of travel expenses, arranged by employee A list of the total overtime and workman’s compensation payments paid in FY12 and

FY13, to date.

Response:

1. For agency cell phone information, please see the attached Exhibit 4 – Agency Cellphones.

2. For agency vehicles, please see the attached Exhibit 5 – Agency Fleet.

3. No agency employees received any bonuses in FY12 or FY13, to date.

4. For travel expenditures, please see the attached Exhibit 6 – Travel Expenditures.

5. For a list of overtime expenditures and workman’s compensation payments paid in FY12 and FY13, to date, please see the attached Exhibit 7 – Overtime Expenditures.

4

III. BUDGET

8. Please provide a chart showing your agency’s approved budget and actual spending, by program, for FY12 and FY13, to date. In addition, please describe any variance between fiscal year appropriations and actual expenditures for FY12 and FY13, to date.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 8 - Budget.

9. Please list any reprogrammings, in or out, which occurred in FY12 and FY13, to date. For each reprogramming, please list the total amount of the reprogramming, the original purposes for which the funds were dedicated, and the reprogrammed use of funds.

Response:

Please see the chart below.

FY 2012Transferred

From:Transferred To: Amount Reason

DCRA Office of Planning $50,000 To finalize a multi-year contract that was

delayed for months and the final cost was

much higher than anticipated.

DCRA Taxicab Commission

$25,000 To transfer budget authority for the Public

Vehicle for Hire Consumer Service

Fund.DCRA Office of the Tenant

Advocate$100,000 To support the

agency’s office space build-out.

DCRA Office of the Tenant Advocate

$75,000 To support the agency’s emergency housing assistance

program. DCRA Public Service

Commission$60,000 To support the

agency’s space planning in

collaboration with DGS.

FY 2013

5

Transferred From:

Transferred To: Amount Reason

n/a n/a none n/a

10. Please provide a complete accounting for all intra-District transfers received by or transferred from the agency during FY12 and FY13, to date.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 9 – Budget Intra-District.

11. Please identify any special purpose revenue accounts maintained by, used by, or available for use by your agency during FY12 and FY13, to date. For each account, please list the following: The revenue source name and code The source of funding A description of the program that generates the funds. The amount of funds generated by each source or program in FY12 and FY13, to date Expenditures of funds, including the purpose of each expenditure, for FY12 and

FY13, to date

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 10 – Special Purpose Revenue.

12. Please provide a list of all projects for which your agency currently has capital funds available. Please include in this list a description of each project, the amount of capital funds available for each project, a status report on each project, and planned remaining spending on the project.

Response:


Project Name Description Funds Available

Project Status Spending Plan

IT Systems Modernization

This project funds the continued, multi-year implementation of a variety of mission-critical information technology systems

$1,685,707 FY 2013 capital funding will allow for the integration of these systems with other District government IT systems to share data on a

Remaining funds will be used to support the CPMS (Comprehensive Property Management System) project.

6

involving District licensing, permitting and inspection functions.

real-time basis.

Vacant Property Revitalization

This project funds the abatement of critical life and safety issues in residential and multi-dwelling units throughout the District of Columbia.

$1,036,370 DCRA continues to pursue recovery of outlays through the imposition of special assessments and liens against properties when owners fail to repay remediation costs.

Remaining funds will be used to abate housing code violations.

13. Please provide a complete accounting of all federal stimulus funds received and/or carried over for FY12 and FY13, to date.

Response:


FY 2012Description Budget Actual Variance CommentsARRA Grant

$128,173.90 $94,031.96 $34,141.94 DCRA is a sub-recipient to these ARRA grant funds from DDOE. These funds will not carry-over into next fiscal year. FY 2012 was the end of the term of this grant.

FY 2013Description Budget Actual Variance Comments

7

N/A $0 $0 $0 No new federal grants funds received.

14. Has the agency taken additional steps since last year to reduce the following during FY12 and FY13, to date? Space utilization Communications costs Energy use

Response:

DCRA continues to monitor its fixed costs budget and identify ways to reduce expenses and gain efficiencies. On March 22, 2010, DCRA opened its doors for business at the newly constructed Waterfront facility (110 4th Street, SW), which is LEED Silver. In an effort to maximize space utilization efficiencies at the new facility, DCRA has partnered with the District Department of Transportation, DC Water, the Department of Health, the Historic Preservation Office, and the Department of the Environment to provide additional on-site permitting functions/services. The agency will continue to monitor any reductions and efficiencies through the fiscal year.

15. Please provide the agency’s fixed costs budget and actual spent for FY11, FY12, and FY13, to date. Please include a narrative description of any substantial changes in these costs.

Response:


FY 2011Category Budget Actual Variance Comments

Energy, Telephone, Rent, Security, Occupancy

n/a n/a n/a All fixed cost categories were removed from

agency’s budget and placed in a “paper” agency

in order to centralize

services and create

efficiencies.


Energy, n/a n/a n/a All fixed cost

8

Telephone, Rent, Security, Occupancy

categories were removed from



services and create

efficiencies.


Energy, Telephone, Rent, Security, Occupancy

n/a n/a n/a All fixed cost categories were removed from



services and create

efficiencies.

16. Please list and describe all fines and fees that the agency collects. Include FY12 and FY13 totals collected for each. Also indicate the last time that these fees/fines have been adjusted or increased.

Response:


FY 2012 FY 2013Category Description Amount

CollectedAmount

Collected as of 1/31/13

Last Increase

Permits Fees collected for all building permit applications.

$29,585,641 $8,493,548 10% technology surcharge added in FY2011 BSA

Corporations All corporate registration filing fees collected.

$12,585,206 $2,037,301 10% technology surcharge added in FY2011 BSA

Civil Infractions Fines issued for $487,298 $381,868 n/a

9

building license and building code violations.

Wharves & Markets

Fees assessed for registering weighing devices within the District.

$360,576 $45,735 10% technology surcharge added in FY2011 BSA

Re-inspection Fees

Fees collected when inspectors have to inspect properties to determine if building code violations have been abated.

$22,955 $8,760 FY2010 BSA

Rental Accommodations

Rental accommodation fees are paid for each rental unit ($43 biennially) in the District.

$3,865,778 $262,853 FY2009 BSA

Proactive Inspections

Fees charged for every multi-unit rental property with 3 or more units.

$1,125,150 $78,617 FY2010 BSA

Vacant Property Fee collected for registration of vacant property within the District.

$135,868 $25,000 FY2011 BSA

Special Assessment

Owners of properties, known as nuisance properties, that are in violation of DCRA codes or regulations, are assessed a fee for cost incurred by the District in cleaning up the property.

$1,062,257 $270,050 n/a

Basic Business License

The application fee and the

$12,390,164 $2,621,452 10% technology surcharge added

10

renewal fee for Basic Business Licenses is collected into this account.

in FY2011 BSA

Occupational and Professional Licensing

Various professions must pay license fees to do business in DC.

$6,045,128 $525,782 FY2009

Illegal Construction

Funds obtained from the penalties and fines assessed for illegal construction are deposited into this fund.

$1,079,001 $0 n/a

Green Building Fee

Funds obtained from a percentage of building structure permit fees are deposited into this fund.


Enhanced Surveyor Fee

Fees charged for consultation with Office of Surveyor staff and expedited services.


Corporate Recordation

Fund

Filing and enforcement fees for Limited Cooperative Assoc, Trusts, expedited services fees.

$1,257,168 $317,729 n/a

17. Please identify all legislative requirements that the agency lacks sufficient resources to properly implement.

Response:

The agency has no legislative requirements that lack sufficient resources.

11

IV. AGENCY PROGRAMS AND POLICIES

18. Please list each policy initiative of your agency during FY12 and FY13, to date. For each initiative please provide:

A detailed description of the program The name of the employee who is responsible for the program The total number of FTE’s assigned to the program The amount of funding budgeted to the program

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 11 – Policies.

19. Please describe any initiatives your agency implemented within FY12 and FY13, to date, to improve the internal operation of the agency or the interaction of the agency with outside parties. Please describe the results, or expected results, of each initiative.

Response:

The following is a list of agency initiatives from the FY 2012 Performance Plan that were either fully or partially achieved and will be reported as such on our agency Performance Accountability Report which is still in DRAFT format pending final approval.

INITIATIVE: Launch an online system for new BBL applications. The Business Licensing Division (BLD) will initiate a soft launch of its online system in October 2011. The new system design will allow a select group license categories (those which don’t require an investigation or inspection) to be processed, approved, paid for and issued online. DCRA will begin its testing of the new online system October 2011. Completion Date: June 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Business Licensing Division (BLD) launched the new business online license application in January 2012. Initially, thirteen categories were implemented into the online system for Basic Business License (BBL) processing. The new online system provides businesses the opportunity to apply for BBLs online and has reduced the need for customers to utilize the walk-in service.

INITIATIVE: Enhance the basic business license renewal process . The Business License Division (BLD) will enhance its renewal process by increasing the categories available for online renewals. At present, there are approximately 165 license categories of which approximately 65 can currently be renewed online. By enhancing the online renewal process, more than 50% of BLD’s license categories will be renewed online. The enhancements require DCRA’s Office of Information Systems (OIS) for completion. DCRA will begin its outreach efforts beginning October 2011. Completion Date: June 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s BLD successfully completed an initial launch of an online application

12

submission process in January 2012. Also, BLD has extended business renewal services to renewal applicants online.

INITIATIVE: Reduce the number of basic business licensing categories. The Business Licensing Division (BLD) will analyze and reduce the number of current basic business license (BBL) categories. Categories with little to no active licensees will be eliminated, and active or future licenses will be required to obtain a general business license. The goal of the initiative will be to reduce customer confusion over BBL categories, and to align the BBL program with the current marketplace in the District. Categories for elimination will be identified by December 30, 2011. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved . DCRA’s Business Licensing Division (BLD) has begun to implement changes to the number of Basic Business License (BBL) categories. BLD has conducted meetings to begin the process of elimination and identified potential changes required through legislative and administrative review. Currently BLD is drafting changes for the necessary reviews of identified categories slated for reduction.

INITIATIVE: Expand the availability of online application services for occupational and professional licensing. The Occupational and Professional Licensing Division (OPLD) will expand its online license submission process. At present, there are 19 total license programs encompassing over 130 licenses types; 7 license programs are online for new application submission. OPLD will expand the availability of online new and renewal license application services to five (5) additional programs, which will provide customers with a more efficient and streamlined license application, supplemental documentation and payment submission process. Completion Date: September 30, 2012. AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Occupational and Professional Licensing Division (OPLD) successfully expanded the online application services to five (5) additional programs. These programs will provide customers a more efficient and streamline license process. Additionally, OPLD has expanded new applications online from five (5) to seven (7) for FY12.

INITIATIVE: Expand “Train-the-Trainer” sessions for facilitators and develop workshop sessions for customers. In FY 201l, DCRA Small Business Resource Center (SBRC) began its “Train-the-Trainer” series that provided in-depth overviews of business licensing and special events processes. In FY 2012, the SBRC will expand its series of “Train-the-Trainer” sessions with subject matters centered on corporate registration and assist the Corporations Division with outreach of its new regulations through the SBRC. Additionally, the SBRC will develop educational workshops on business compliance topics to educate future and current business owners looking to do business in the District of Columbia. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Small Business Resource Center (SBRC) has held at least one workshop each quarter to expound on business and regulatory processes within the District of Columbia.

13

The SBRC has successfully celebrated the one year anniversary with keynote speaker Mayor Vincent Gray. In attendance was Deputy Mayor of Planning and Economic Development, Victor Hoskins, Councilmember Yvette Alexander, and the Mayor’s Cabinet members.

INITIATIVE: Implement the new Business Organization Code.In accordance with the new corporation code approved by the D.C. Council, the Corporations Division will move forward with implementation plans. Deliverables include a statement of work for IT application upgrades and a vendor contract award; revised rules and regulations, modified forms and procedures, updates to DCRA’s website; and outreach plans. Full integration of program changes dictated by the legislation will be a multi-year effort distributed throughout FY 2012 and FY 2013. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved . DCRA’s Corporations Division has successfully implemented the new corporate law – Title 29 of the DC Code – and completed regulations for the new corporate law. Corporations initiated and participated in many successful events as a part of outreach to the public regarding the new law. In preparation of enactment of the new law, Corporations has successfully modified back office and web systems, reviewed, added and modified the Technical Amendment Bill to enhance the new legislation. Additionally, Corporations implemented over 35 online services and processed 35,000 online transactions this FY collecting over $6.6 million online.

INITIATIVE: Establish an octane quality testing program. Implementing a gasoline octane program will not only align the District with the surrounding jurisdictions but will play an integral role in generating revenue via civil infractions from businesses found to have violated regulations. Potential revenue will be generated from this program as this will be a base year for program. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s Weights and Measures Division has designed an octane quality testing program that was accepted in FY12. Discussions regarding logistics of the program criteria are underway and a full implementation of the program will be completed in FY13. The program is projected to bring in over $20,000 in revenue the first year and will align the District of Columbia with all local jurisdictions. The Office of Weights and Measure has a 90% success rate due to the proactive renewal registration mail out and has successfully inspected all Pharmacy balances meeting the mandate for a semi-annual inspection.

INITIATIVE: Implement Online Construction Permit Intake (OCPI) to enhance the permitting process and to reduce paper applications.In FY2011 the permitting division created system requirements for the OCPI intake application. In FY2012, the application will be updated to reflect the new requirements for Flood Hazard, Lead Abatement and Storm Water Management. Sharing the new requirements with customers and training staff to communicate the changes will require coordination between the Permit Division, Zoning Division, Office of Information Systems and Communications Division. Staff will be trained on the changes to the forms

14

and this will be implemented beginning December 2011, when the new forms will be issued in the center. Outreach and training will continue until March 31, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved . DCRA’s Permit Operations Division launched the Online Construction Permit Intake Process (OCPI) in the spring of 2012. Currently 100% of all building permits are submitted online utilizing DCRA’s Permit Center kiosks or personal computers for customers who wish to start the permit process from the comfort of their home.

INITIATIVE: Support the Mayor’s Green DC initiatives.Using the yet to be completed Mayor’s GreenDC initiative as a guide, DCRA will work to build a relationship with the US Green Building Council, obtain green building and sustainable building systems training for staff , or support a Department of the Environment’s solar panel installation program by expediting reviews for program participants. Final green effort will be determined after review of the Mayor’s initiative. Completion Date: September 30, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Permit Operations management team held a meeting with the US Green Building Council to gain further understanding of their process and to establish a more connected working relationship. In addition, the division, in partnership with the agency, conducted a well-attended and successful Green Symposium in September of 2012 to highlight and convey the Mayor’s Green Initiatives.

INITIATIVE: Create a unified inter-agency plan review and approval process.The permit center is intended to be a single point of entry for permit applications to DCRA, DDOE, OP, DC Water and DDOT. In FY11, DCRA co-located staff from the Department of Fire and EMS and expanded the presence of the Department of the Environment staff within the permit center. In FY 2012, the agency will continue consolidation efforts by working to locate staff from the Department of Health and DC Water within the permit center. This initiative will include coordination between other agencies, an interface between other agency systems and Accela and publicly published timeframes for plan review from each agency. The completion of this initiative will be based on a commitment from each District agency. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. In January of 2012, DC Water moved to DCRA’s site. To date, The DC Department of Health (DOH) has been unable to locate staff to send to DCRA due to budgetary constraints. We are currently working with our sister agency to finalize the review time frames.

INITIATIVE: Improve the permit application and review processes. The division will streamline the permit application process for simple jobs by generating visual, user friendly handouts for decks, single family dwellings and 2-unit flats conversions, and occupancy capacity placard applications. Guides will be available in the permit center and online, and will be finalized and posted by January 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved . DCRA’s POD created a number of handouts including, but not limited to: 1 and 2 Family

15

Dwellings, Capacity Placards, Permit Guide, Plans Submittal Guide, and How to Obtain a Construction Permit. These handouts are currently on display in the Permit Center for customers to use. Additional handouts are being crafted.

INITIATIVE: Post the surveyor’s records online for public availability.The Surveyor’s Office maintains two centuries of land records, but digital copies are not publicly accessible. The division will work with the Office of Information Services to move an existing internal digital image database onto a publicly accessible website. Completion Date: February 28, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s POD ongoing initiative requires infrastructure through DCRA IT systems which continues to be reviewed and explored by the agency. Due to budgetary constraints, we were unable to proceed with this initiative. However, the surveyor’s records are available online through the Surveyor’s Office via the DCRA Intranet. Additional funding has been requested to assist with completion.

INITIATIVE: Revise Home Occupation Permit process as the new EHOP starts.As low impact business offices operated out of a home are approved as an Expedited Home Occupation Permit or EHOP through immediate on-line permits, the volume of the remaining Home Occupation Permits [HOP] is set to decrease. This HOP form needs to be revised, the process monitored as more resources can be devoted to process the HOPs in a faster manner. The present ten day time frame is proposed to be reduced to five business days. Completion Date: December 31, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s Office of Zoning Administrator (OZA) has revised and greatly improved the HOP form from previous versions utilized over the past 5+ years. Monitoring of the process is ongoing and the subject of a FY13 OZA Key Performance Measure (KPI). Reallocation of staff across divisions mandates the timeframe for HOP reviews to remain at the ten (10) day standard.

INITIATIVE: Create and implement inspection checklists for each type of inspection. Institute criteria and create checklists that provide a roadmap of how to conduct each type of inspection. Training of staff in the use of these checklists will help to increase the quality and consistency of ICA. Completion Date: March 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s Inspection Division successfully developed a checklist for the different phases of each trade for use during inspections early in the fiscal year. However, these checklists were eventually deemed unnecessary and the training on their use was not pursed.

INITIATIVE: Increase illegal construction enforcement. Citizens of the District are not always aware of the permits required for the scope of their construction work. DCRA will increase permitting requirement education while simultaneously increasing illegal construction inspections. The division will reassign the Illegal Construction Unit (ICU) function from Specialty Inspections Program to the

16

Construction Inspection Program. This will allow for cross-training of construction inspectors to recognize and cite instances of illegal construction. In addition the ICU inspectors will be assigned to a geographical area of responsibility to better respond to complaints of illegal construction. Completion Date: December 31, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Illegal Construction Unit (ICU) was transitioned into two construction inspection managers. The benefits provide each construction inspection manager the flexibility to assign their ICU inspector to a particular area. ICU inspectors can now perform area surveys for illegal construction in addition to answering complaints. Also, the cross training that has occurred has allowed non-ICU inspectors to recognize and cite illegal construction while on normal inspections, which frees up the ICU inspectors.

INITIATIVE: Increase inspector knowledge of sustainable construction and energy efficient building materials and methods.The District’s Green Building Act of 2006 establishes high-performance building standards for the planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance of building projects. We will establish criteria for ICA inspectors to become certified in Green construction methods to include, but not limited to, US Green Building Council's LEED certification or International Code Council’s International Green Construction Code. ICA will develop a standard operating procedure to implement inspection requirements of the Green Building Act. Inspectors will receive training in Green Building plan review and inspection procedures. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. In accordance with the District’s Green Building Act of 2006, DCRA’s Inspections Division has been able to host several Green/Sustainable Construction training sessions throughout the year. Notable sessions include: “The Practice of Sustainable Design for Homes” by CertainTeed, “LEED Webinar”, “2012 International Energy Conservation Code – Fundamentals”, “Developing Green Building Ordinances and Programs”, “Prospect Solar – Solar Panel Installation”, and numerous ASHRAE Green & Sustainable building design courses.

INITIATIVE: Increase the role of the Proactive Inspection Unit The Proactive Inspections Unit conducts regularly scheduled housing code inspections on rental units throughout the District. The capabilities of the Proactive Inspection Unit makes it ideal to take on the responsibility of performing Capital Improvement inspections, tenant requested building wide inspections, and inspections requested by the District Rent Administrator. The Proactive Inspection Unit will take over the responsibility of performing these large scale residential inspection tasks. Completion Date: December 31, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved . DCRA’s Proactive Inspection Unit has fully taken over the responsibility of Building Wide Inspections. Over the last fiscal year, no requests have been made from the rent administrator’s office or for capital improvements inspections. A notable accomplishment by the Proactive Unit Inspections team was the inspections of Marbury Plaza as a tenant requested building wide project.

17

INITIATIVE: Increase Housing Inspection Capacity One of ICA’s primary responsibilities is to respond to requests for inspection of substandard housing conditions. We will increase the capacity of inspections by using processes developed in the Proactive Inspection Unit (shifting data input duties from inspectors to administrative staff). At present, the inspectors perform their own data input for each inspection, and spends more than half of their day on administrative tasks. By moving the administrative function away from highly skilled and paid inspectors to an administrative support person, the inspector should see an increase in the amount of time available to him or her to inspect. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. Utilizing processes developed in the Proactive Inspection Unit, DCRA’s ICA has shifted all data entry for the creation of Notices of Violation to Administrative staff. Under the new process, inspectors have been able to reduce the wait time for an inspection to no more than two days.

INITIATIVE: Create, revise and implement procedures for all steps of Third Party inspections process.To expedite the inspection process, DCRA offers permit applicants an option to hire non-government inspectors (third party inspectors) to inspect their work. By implementing certification and auditing functions, DCRA has improved the quality and raised the industry standard of third party inspectors’ performance. In the past this was done unilaterally, and met with much resistance from the Third Party Inspection agencies.

Facilitate the creation of Third Party Inspection Agency Advisory Board (TPIAAB), an informal board comprised of nine (9) approved third party inspection agencies that will provide feedback and a different perspective to the Inspections Division with relation to the Third Party Inspection Program. Completion Date: October 31, 2011.

Create and implement, with the recommendations from the TPIAAB, a step-by-step method for DCRA to administer discipline to Third Party Inspection Agencies that violate provisions of the Third Party Inspections Procedures Manual. Completion Date: November 30, 2011.

Create and implement a procedure to establish the process and documentation for third party inspection oversight and review. This will also involve procedures for auditing the Notice of Intent to use third party inspections. This process will also require the creation of forms to record all review activities. Completion Date: March 31, 2011.

Revise, with the recommendations from the TPIAAB, with the Third Party Inspections Procedures Manual.

Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. The Third Party Inspections Agency Advisory Board (TPIAAB) was successfully created and has met several times over the course of the year. Meetings were productive and assisted in producing the Third Party Inspection Disciplinary Criteria and new Third Party Inspections Manual (TPIM). Several new forms have been created that assist in the

18

auditing of the third party inspections. Field audits of Third Party Inspection jobs, as well as clearer direction from the new TPIM, backed up with a reasonable disciplinary program have led to a more reliable Third Party Inspection Program.

INITIATIVE: Develop a Special Inspections Program.There are several critical areas of construction regulated by the International Building Code (IBC) where special inspections are required. These include: steel construction, concrete construction, soils, sprayed fire-resistant materials, etc. Develop, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17 of the IBC, a Special Inspection Program Guide to help all parties involved in the program to understand the requirements and provide an efficient process that will allow Building Code Requirements to be satisfied without causing delays in the construction process. Completion Date: March 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA partnered with area engineers and inspection agencies to develop a comprehensive manual laying out the procedure to be used when special inspections are required for a construction project. The developers and construction firms constructing new buildings now have a clear process of what needs to be done for projects requiring special inspections.

INITIATIVE: Increase the inspection capacity of the Boiler and Elevator Inspectors. The elevator and boiler inspectors have a single administrative support person to assist with the scheduling of their inspections. By hiring at one more administrative support person to assist with the scheduling and data entry the inspectors will be able to spend additional time in the field performing inspections and ensuring the safe operation of these critical systems. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved . DCRA’s Inspections Division has hired one new elevator inspector and one new boiler inspector to help ease the inspection/administrative pressure. The division continues to explore the opportunity of hiring a dedicated administrative person to assist with the necessary paperwork and data entry. Special Inspection projects are being planned for both elevator and boiler sections that will include verification of licenses and added safety checks.

INITIATIVE: Enhance lien placement and collection processes. Utilize Accela to run 30-60-90-120 day delinquency reports and send enforcement letters on a weekly basis, thus improving the rate at which the agency places liens on properties and sends the property owner a bill. The rate of revenue collection will increase with consistent review of reports from Accela. It is unknown what the increase in collection will be, but the information will be reviewed and analyzed so accurate data can be utilized by the still to be formed D.C. Centralized Collection Bureau. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s Enforcement Division has successfully sent letters improving the rate in which the Department placed liens on properties and billed owners. However, the Enforcement

19

Division was not able to utilize Accela to consistently run 30-60-90-120 day delinquency reports. This issue is being reviewed by the division and will continue into the next fiscal year.

INITIATIVE: Re-engineer the Civil Infractions Management through a unified NOV/NOI.Currently, a property owner receives a Notice of Violation (NOV), and only if they fail to correct the violations, they are issued a Notice of Infraction (NOI) which results in fine being assessed. In FY 2011, DCRA began a pilot program with a new unified NOV/NOI in conjunction with the legislative elimination of the need for the issuance of a second NOI. The pilot began with a unified trash and grass notice and citation. In FY12, DCRA will explore other notices that could result in more timely case adjudication and voluntary compliance, as well looking at the schedule of fines to determine whether current fines are appropriate for the violation. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved . DCRA’s Enforcement Division determined that it was not feasible, during the fiscal year, to expand the new unified NOV/NOI to other notice categories. Focus has instead been shifted to exploring the combining of certain Enforcement and Vacant Building processes, in order to eliminate duplicate operations and to improve efficiency in the division.

INITIATIVE: Enhance the system to administer and manage blighted properties. Enhance the blighted property identification process and fully incorporate it into the vacant property registration and appeal system. For FY12, this entails tweaking the current blight system in Accela and creating a separate ‘blight” cap and process in Accela that runs parallel to the “vacant” process. In addition, we plan to get all blight appeals before the deputy director within 10 days of receipt of appeal. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s Enforcement Division has successfully enhanced the blighted property identification process to fully incorporate it into the vacant property registration and appeal system. Slightly changing the blight system in Accela has allowed the process to run parallel to the vacant process. Specifically, the blight system is now incorporated into the RVP cap with its own process flow.

INITIATIVE: Utilize alternative abatement processes. This was a FY11 initiative that had to be shifted to FY12. Competitively solicit a general contractor to handle routine maintenance abatements, such as non-emergency patch and repair; i.e. broken doors, securing gutters, broken windows, etc.; thus eliminating the need for the Department to manage a host of small contractors and reducing costs and increasing efficiency. Completion Date September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. While progress has been made towards the establishment of a general contractor to handle routine maintenance abatements, a final determination has not been made on the

20

elimination to the smaller contractors. DCRA’s Enforcement Division will continue to analyze this process and continue the exploration of an alternate abatement process into FY13.

INITIATIVE: Develop Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process in DCRA’s enterprise system, Accela.This initiative will require a transfer of all processing and data/documentation retention from current manual process – which uses a mix of Outlook, share drive folders (Word), and a standalone Access database – to Accela. The benefits of a centralized system include searchability, open access to FOIA request files for more employees, automated numbering of new requests, and vastly improved and easier performance data reporting. Anticipated completion date: December 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA has successfully transferred all processing and data/documentation retention into Accela. The new process has been established, completed, and is operational. To date the process has optimized FOIA accessibility and searchability for employees and improved performance data reporting.

INITIATIVE: Conduct an analysis of the condition of all fleet vehicles. In FY 12, Support Services will complete an analysis of all fleet vehicles currently in use to determine their age, mileage and condition. Support Services will also review fleet maintenance records and make a determination of the expected remaining life of the vehicles in DCRA’s aging fleet in conjunction with DPW. The office will provide its analysis to the agency with recommendations on vehicle replacement and acquisition needs for FY 12 and beyond. Completion Date: July 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA has successfully analyzed the condition of all fleet vehicles determining their age, mileage and condition. In conjunction with DPW, a report has been processed regarding the maintenance records and life expectancy of the vehicles. The recommendation to add additional vehicles to the fleet was submitted and accepted, allowing for six (6) additional vehicles.

INITIATIVE: Create a records accession policy and plan for the agency.This initiative involves Increasing efficiencies associated with managing the location and ability to locate approved building permits by developing and implementing a plan to archive boxed approved building permit applications for the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009. Improve cost efficiencies by removing the remaining DCRA documents stored in private facilities and process those documents to either be destroyed or sent to the Federal Records Center. Completion Date: September 30, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Partially Achieved. DCRA’s Records Room has successfully accessioned FY2005, 2008, 2009 and 2010 documents (issued building permit applications and architectural drawings). FY2006 and 2007 documents have been properly identified and the next steps will be to complete a

21

box list for the documents and begin the process to accession them to the Federal Records Center.

INITIATIVE: Implement new system to accept online plan submission and reviews.DCRA will launch a new system that will allow customers to submit their construction permit related drawings and supporting documentation through the internet. The system will allow customer to submit their documents 24 / 7, and will provide real time communication with the customer and discipline review team members. This system will be fully integrated with DCRA’s enterprise application CPMS (Comprehensive Property Management System). Targeted Completion Date: October 31, 2011.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved . DCRA’s OIS successfully implemented and launched a new system to accept online plan submission and reviews in two phases. Phase I included roughly 60% of permits and Phase II integrated the remaining permits. A small number (1-2%) of permits are not eligible for integration into the Comprehensive Property Management System (CPMS) requiring a face-to-face interaction for permit issuance.

INITIATIVE: Implement new system to fully process business license issuance online.DCRA will launch a new system that will allow the complete processing of a select group license categories (those which don’t require an investigation or inspection) to be processed, approved paid for and issued online. The system will also include new business license categories such as General Business Licenses - GBL, as well as online application submission for the non-simple renewal license types. The system will be fully integrated with CPMS. Phase I will be completed January 1, 2012, Phase II completion date is May 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s OIS has successfully launched a new system allowing the complete processing of a select group of license categories (those which don’t require an investigation or inspection) to be processed, approved, paid for, and issued online. Initially delayed due to the necessary Accela upgrade, OIS has integrated the system with CPMS with the capability to include new business license categories and online application submissions for the non-simple renewal license types.

INITIATIVE: Implement Upgraded Corporations system. Implement upgrades and new functionality to the agency’s Corporations web based system that will allow applicants to submit registration information and all required application paperwork via the internet. These upgrades will include functionality to work with all major web browsers. The system will also incorporate improvements that address the changes to corporation code that was recently approved by DC Council. Completion Date: February 29, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. DCRA’s OIS completed two separate upgrades to the Corporations system. The new functionality allows applicants to submit registration information and all required paperwork via the internet on all major web browsers. In addition, the upgrades reflect the successfully implemented new corporate law approved by DC Council.

22

INITIATIVE: Develop online systems to facilitate communication with Third Party Review companies. Implement a web based application that will allow approved third party review companies to submit plan review to construction permit application and approvals online. The system would integrate with the CPMS system to ensure only valid companies, permits and work is performed, and that approval is granted by DCRA in a timely manner upon receipt of documents and reports. Completion Date: May 31, 2012.AGENCY RESPONSE: Fully Achieved. Currently active for one (1) year, OIS successfully implemented the web based application allowing approved Third Party Review companies to submit plan review to construction permit application and approvals online. Integrated with CPMS, the online system ensures only valid companies, permits, and work is performed. Approval is granted through DCRA in a timely manner upon receipt of documents and reports.

20. Please provide a list of all studies, research papers, and analyses (“studies”) the agency prepared, or contracted for, during FY12 and FY13, to date. Please state the status and purpose of each study.

Response:

DCRA has successfully analyzed the condition of all fleet vehicles determining their age, mileage and condition. In conjunction with DPW, a report has been processed regarding the maintenance records and life expectancy of the vehicles. The recommendation to add additional vehicles to the fleet was submitted and accepted, allowing for five (5) additional vehicles. DCRA’s Weights and Measures Division has designed an octane quality testing program that was accepted in FY12. Discussions regarding logistics of the program criteria are underway and a full implementation of the program will be completed in FY13. The program is projected to bring in over $20,000 in revenue the first year and will align the District of Columbia with all local jurisdictions. The Office of Weights and Measure has a 90% success rate due to the proactive renewal registration mail out and has successfully inspected all Pharmacy balances meeting the mandate for a semi-annual inspection. DCRA’s Vacant Building Enforcement (VBE) has successfully instituted a pilot program incorporating Ward ANC Commissioners to assist with identifying more vacant buildings. Additionally, VBE has a goal of identifying more vacant properties in FY13 with an operative to routinely keep vacant and blighted buildings secure and free from excessive trash/grass. Utilizing processes developed in the Proactive Inspection Unit, DCRA’s ICA has shifted all data entry for the creation of Notices of Violation to Administrative staff. This efficiency upgrade increases the amount of time available to inspectors to perform inspections.

23

DCRA is committed to supporting the Mayor’s Green DC initiatives. To date, DCRA has hired a Green Program Coordinator and continues to develop the Green Building Fund. The Green Building Fund will provide DC agencies and public/private non-profit/for-profit organizations the opportunity to streamline administrative green building processes, improve sustainability performance outcomes, build capacity of development and administrative oversight professionals in green building skills and knowledge, institutionalize innovation, overcome barriers to achieving high-performance buildings, and to continuously promote the sustainability of green building practices in the District.

21. If applicable, please explain the impact on your agency of any legislation passed at the federal level during FY12 and FY13, to date.

Response:

None are known at this time.

22. Please list all regulations for which the agency is responsible for oversight or implementation. Please list by chapter and subject heading, including the date of the most recent revision.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 12 – Agency Regulations.

23. Did the agency meet the objectives set forth in the performance plan for FY12? Please provide a narrative description of what actions the agency undertook to meet the key performance indicators or any reasons why such indicators were not met.

Response:

In FY12, the agency had the following key performance indicator results:

22 Fully Achieved; 14 Partially Achieved; and 4 Workload Measure Only.

24. Please list and describe any ongoing investigations, studies, audits, or reports on your agency or any employee of your agency, or any investigations, studies, audits, or reports on your agency or any employee of your agency that were completed during FY12 and FY13, to date.

Response:

24

Due to the sensitive nature of Office of the Inspector General inquiries and investigations, and of internal investigations, we respectfully suggest that these matters be discussed directly with the Committee Chair in a private meeting. All applicable materials can be provided at that time.

25. Have there been any changes in the electronic databases maintained by your agency that you identified and described last year? If so, please include the following: A detailed description of the information tracked within each system Identification of persons who have access to each system, and whether the public can

be granted access to all or part of each system The age of the system and any discussion of substantial upgrades that have been made

or are planned to the system

Response:

The DCRA Office of Information Services (OIS) Systems and Databases are as follows:

1. Accela – Comprehensive Property Management System (CPMS)

CPMS uses an enterprise version of SQL Server and previously used ORACLE until the end of FY12. The servers and database are housed at the OCTO Data Centers. This system keeps all agency permitting, inspections, and enforcement data.

CPMS is used by all agency employees and customers in all business areas. There are currently 10 publicly-accessible web-based applications that either pull or provide information to Accela.

In FY12, DCRA processed more than 158,000 transactions in Accela. CPMS was implemented in 2007 and has been consolidated into centralized

implementation to provide access to other District government agencies.

2. FileNet – Imaging Repository and WorkPlace

a. FileNet is an enterprise Document Storage and Retrieval system that has an ORACLE database as the backend. The system is the agency’s digital document repository and currently houses almost 4,000,000 documents. This system stores and indexes all permanent scanned records for the agency.

b. The system is used by all agency and sister agency employees that need to retrieve DCRA information. The system is also accessible to certain web-based applications. In FY11 and FY12, we added or scanned more than 810,000 new documents into the DCRA FileNet repository.

c. The system was implemented in 2000 and last upgraded in 2007.

3. PIVS – Property Information Validation System

a. The system is a custom developed web application that allows DCRA and sister agency employees to query DCRA information by property address. The system

25

retrieves all DCRA information as well as OTR, ROD, MAR, GIS and other data and also creates reports in PDF and HTML formats. The system includes various links to other information including Google Street View, Bing Maps, Real Property information, etc. The system has an MS SQL Server database backend.

b. There are two versions of the system currently in production: 1) An intranet web-based version available to all DCRA and DC government-connected computers; and 2) An internet public version of the system that allows all customers and internet connected users to query DCRA data based on a property address. The system receives, on average, more than 9,000 unique hits each month.

c. The system was developed by DCRA and is maintained and updated as needed. The system uses DCRA-developed web services to retrieve information from DCRA, OTR, OCTO, DDOT, ABRA, GIS, etc.

4. SSRS – SQL Server Reporting Services

a. The system is built on MS SQL’s enterprise server architecture. It consists of pre-programmed SQL queries and reports that provide summary and raw data for all the agency business areas KPI reporting. The system is updated on a daily basis with data from all agency systems.

b. The system is used by all DCRA business areas and management to track performance measures and produce reports. The system is also used to generate queries and views to share information with OCTO and other District agencies.

c. The system was recently upgraded to the latest version of MS SQL software.

5. Selectron – Interactive Voice Routing (IVR) System

a. A stand-alone system that processes customer requests and status reports for scheduling building inspections. The system is integrated with CPMS/Accela and can automatically schedule inspections or provide the results of an inspection 24 hours a day. The system has SQL database and reporting module.

b. The system is available to all customers that want to schedule a permit-based inspection or retrieve the status of a permit-based inspection. In FY12, the system processed more than 14,000 inspection scheduling requests and received approximately 56,000 calls.

c. This system was recently upgraded to the latest version of MS SQL and Selectron core system.

6. ProjectDox – Online Plan Submission

a. A stand-alone web-based application that allows building permit applicants to submit building plans online. The system utilizes email messaging to notify customers, reviewers, and other users of status changes, permit process progress and updates Accela and other DCRA systems in real time. The system has its own SQL server database and reporting modules.

b. The system is available to all applicants that submit their plans via ProjectDox. c. Project Dox was launched in March 2012 and has processed 34 project filings.

26

7. Vending – ID Card System

a. A stand-alone application that process and houses all street vendor business licensing information. The core system is a custom programmed system that has an Oracle backend database.

b. The system is used by DCRA business license staff to issue and process all vending licenses and identification cards. There is no public-facing application, but the information and results are posted to DCRA’s internet.

c. This system has been in production for 5 years and has a yearly maintenance and support control.

8. Corporations and Trade Names

a. The Corporations Division has a combined corporations and trade name application called CGov 360 which uses SQL database. The application launched in December 2010.

b. The system is being used by Corporations Division staff and customers. The public online portion of the system is called CorpOnline and was launched in May 2011. Customers are able to form/register new corporate entities, reserve trade names, file biennial reports, request good standing certificates, and perform business searches.

c. The second generation of CGov 360 and CorpOnline was launched in January 2012. The application has been configured to incorporate the District’s recently enacted Corporations Code.

9. Various web-based systems: TPIA / OSPI / OPPI / OCPI /OSUB/OSR

a. There are multiple standalone applications that provide industry partners and agency customers facilities to apply for, process, and query different types of permits and documents. All the systems either query or provide information to DCRA’s CPMS / Accela system. Each system has its own backend database, but the reporting is integrated into SSRS.

b. Since FY12, all business license categories can be renewed online.c. The systems are all publicly available online and don’t require any special

software or configuration. In FY11 and FY12, DCRA processed more than 19,000 construction-related permit applications online.

These various IT systems were developed in-house with current programming technologies. The systems are the property of DCRA and are maintained by DCRA’s OIS staff.

26. The agency has worked with a number of stakeholder communities as a means of increasing public transparency and communication, including partnerships in the building industry, non-profit housing advocates, community associations, and ANC’s. Has the agency built on those efforts to bridge new partnerships and, if so, what has been the

27

feedback these partners have given regarding the agency’s efforts, as well as the agency’s opinion regarding what might be done to improve upon them.

Response:

The agency has created and utilized several partnerships with both public and private sector stakeholders to increase its outreach to customers and District residents.

Small Business Resource Center

DCRA’s Small Business Resource Center (SBRC) provides workshops and one-on-one technical assistance to customers seeking assistance on how to successfully navigate the District’s regulatory environment. The SBRC was launched in FY 2011 and conducted 134 one-on-one training sessions with current small business owners and business entrepreneurs. In FY 2012, the SBRC conducted 459 received technical assistance trainings through both one-on-one sessions and group workshops.

Through the SBRC, DCRA has established partnerships with both the private sector and District and federal government agencies. These partnerships play a critical role in providing small business education assistance to SBRC customers so that they can start their businesses as quickly as possible.

SBRC Private Sector Partners: SBRC Federal & District Gov’t Partners:D.C. Chamber of Commerce Foundation Internal Revenue ServiceD.C. Women’s Business Center Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationD.C. Small Business Development Center Network

D.C. Department of Small and Local Business Development

D.C. Bar Pro Bono Program D.C. Department of the EnvironmentWashington Area Community Investment FundLatino Economic Development Corporation

The SBRC is a prime example of DCRA moving aggressively towards streamlining business regulatory processes, enhancing transparency and communication, and providing good customer service to the District’s small business community.

Citywide Business Compliance Initiative

In July 2012, DCRA launched the Citywide Business Compliance Initiative (CBCI). The CBCI is a multi-agency effort that included the Department of the Environment, the Metropolitan Police Department, the Department of Health, the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, and the Offices of Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs and African Affairs.

28

The CBCI had several goals. First, it was geared to educate business owners, consumers, and residents on the requirements of properly operating a business in the District. Second, it forged stronger inter-agency relationships that allowed agencies to work seamlessly and more efficiently in addressing the regulatory issues impacting service delivery and how local businesses serve their communities. As a result of this effort, a total of 284 businesses in Wards 1, 4, 7, and 8 were visited. In total, 122, or 43% of all businesses inspected, were found to be out of compliance with District licensing laws.

In Ward 1, 99 businesses were inspected and 50 were found out of compliance (50% rate of noncompliance).

In Ward 4, 171 businesses were inspected and 26 were out of compliance (15% rate of noncompliance).



As a result of the CBCI’s findings, DCRA launched a two-month business license amnesty program in November 2012. The amnesty program allowed customers who were out of compliance to obtain business licenses and corporate registration without paying late fees or penalties. More than 1,185 businesses took advantage of the amnesty program to come into compliance with District requirements.

Georgetown Off-Campus Student Housing Initiative

DCRA’s business license investigators worked with Georgetown University to conduct inspections of 157 off-campus student rental housing units, including townhouses, basement apartment units, and apartment buildings. The rental housing inspections were to ensure that the off-campus student housing units were properly licensed and passed safety inspections. As a result of this initiative, 62 rental properties came into voluntary compliance with District licensing laws, 18 were determined to be owner-occupied, 10 were issued fines for operating without a rental housing business license, and the remainder had insufficient evidence of being rented to students.

27. What has the agency done in the past year to make the activities of the agency more transparent to the public?

Response:

DCRA has expanded the use of social media such as Twitter to increase customer knowledge of DCRA regulatory authority, rulemaking, relevant pending legislation, and outreach events and initiatives. In conjunction with the GradeDC initiative, DCRA intends to continue these advancements of social media.

29

Maintaining its commitment to transparency, DCRA re-launched, in January 2013, the PIVS website, providing access to information on DCRA permitted and regulated activities by specific address, with an enhanced user interface, allowing easier use of the data provided. The DC-government internal version of PIVS received the same interface makeover and some additional data (weights and measures, zoning enforcement).

The agency continues to enhance its suite of electronic applications; users can now apply for nearly every type of business license online, and a number of which are also issued online. Building permit applications are now available online as is the review status of the application once it has been submitted. In this coming fiscal year DCRA will be rolling out Accela Citizen Access, the public-facing implementation of the enterprise permitting and licensing application. Citizen Access will offer additional online transactions to the citizen.

28. Please identify ways in which the activities of the agency and information retained by the agency could be made more transparent.

Response:

DCRA conducted numerous informal “Brownbag Lunch” training sessions with target audiences of other District agencies, Council staff, Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners, and nonprofit/advocacy organizations. The training sessions helped familiarize outside organizations with DCRA’s core roles and responsibilities. Each session highlighted a particular DCRA division, including building inspections, business licensing, construction permitting, and DCRA’s customer service systems.

In FY13, DCRA will be launching a mobile, smart phone-enabled version of PIVS to allow public access to all business license and construction permit information searchable by property address.

29. Please identify any statutory or regulatory impediments to your agency’s operations.

Response:

There are no current statutory or regulatory impediments to the agency’s operations at this time.

30. Please identify all recommendations identified by the Office of the Inspector General or the D.C. Auditor during the previous 3 years. Please note what actions have been taken to address these recommendations.

Response:

Due to the sensitive nature of Office of the Inspector General inquiries and investigations, and of internal investigations, we respectfully suggest that these matters be discussed

30

directly with the Committee Chair in a private meeting. All applicable materials can be provided at that time

31

V. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

For each Board/Commission within the agency’s purview, please answer the following.

31. Please provide a list of the Board’s/Commission’s current members. For each member, please provide the following: The member’s name The Ward, agency or organization the member represents Who appointed the member When the member’s term expires Attendance record

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 13 – Boards Membership.

32. Please provide a list of the Board’s/Commission’s meeting dates, times, and locations for FY 2012 and FY 13 to date.

Response:

For the Construction Codes Coordinating Board, please see the response to Question 94.

For the Occupational and Professional Licensing Boards:

Board of Accountancy: meets on the first Tuesday each month at 9:30 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Architecture and Interior Designers: meets every six weeks at 9:30 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Barber and Cosmetology: meets on the first Monday of each month at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Boxing and Wrestling Commission: meets on the second Tuesday of each month (recess July and August) at 7:00 p.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Funeral Directors: meets on the first Thursday of each month at 10:00 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Industrial Trades: meets on the third Tuesday each month at 10:00 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Professional Engineering: excluding August and one other month that varies from year to year, the Board meets on the fourth Thursday of each month at 9:30 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Real Estate Commission: meets on the second Tuesday each month at 10:30 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

Board of Real Estate Appraisers: meets on the third Wednesday each month at 10:00 a.m. at DCRA, 1100 4th Street SW.

32

33. Did the Board/Commission receive funds in FY 2012? If so, please provide the following: The amount of the funding The source of the funding A list of all expenditures A description of how these funds furthered the Board’s/Commission’s mission

Response:

The Construction Codes Coordinating Board did not receive any funding in FY12.

For the Occupational and Professional Licensing Boards, please see the attached Exhibit 14 – OPLA FY12 Funds. Additionally, funding is received from professional licensing fees, examination fees, reinstatement fees, inactive status fee, and verification of records fees. These funds cover expenditures, travel, and seminar registration fees, supplies, testing sites and test development, annual and regional conferences, and printing of annual report, computers and printers.

34. Please describe the Board’s/Commission’s activities in FY 2012.

Response:

In FY 2012, the Construction Codes Coordinating Board worked on drafting the 2013 D.C. Construction Codes. This included the coordination of 11 Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs) that met on a near-weekly basis to discuss Codes amendment proposals and make it recommended adoptions to the Board. The Board deliberated on the proposals and promulgated a proposed rulemaking with the 2013 D.C. Construction Codes on December 7, 2012.


Board of Accountancy:

Regionally, the Board continues to foster a good relationship with Greater Washington Society of CPAs (GWSCPA), keeping channels of communication open and active so that both organizations can increase their ability to serve the accounting profession. In June 2012, Chairman Michael Cobb spoke at the GWSCPA annual meeting.

The Notice of Final Rulemaking of the Accountants Peer Review Requirements legislation took effect on May 18, 2012. The new regulations are in DCMR Title 17, Chapter 25.

The “Accountant Mobility Act of 2011” unanimously passed through the City Council and received mayoral approval. The legislation became law on October 1, 2012.

33

Board of Architecture and Interior Designers:

The District was well represented at the NCARB Annual Meeting held in June 2012, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Board voted to send Chairman McGhee to the NCARB Annual Meeting as the Delegate Member for the District of Columbia. Architect Genell Anderson also attended. Board Liaison Leon Lewis attended the Member Board Executive meeting preceding the NCARB Annual Meeting.

In the Spring of 2012, Chairman Ronnie McGhee attended the NCARB Region 1, 2, 4, and 5 meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, from March 23 – 24, 2012, as the delegate from the District of Columbia.

The NCARB Fall Region 2 Meeting was held November 2012 via teleconference for the fourth time.

The Board conducted one forum on April 20, 2012, to discuss District of Columbia Municipal Regulations relating to the DCMR 3403.1(A) “Licensure by Examination.” A major issue was the proposal to drop the requirement of a National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) accredited degree to be eligible to take the Architectural Registration Exam (ARE). This is currently a structured review process that ensures a minimal level of knowledge in applicants. It also facilitates parity in assessing applicants with varied credentials from multiple jurisdictions. This forum was attended by representatives from Howard University, The Catholic University of America, the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), and the American Institute of Architects (AIA). The Board voted to keep the requirement.

The NCIDQ Annual Meeting was held in Alexandria, Virginia during November 2011. Mr. Walter Gagliano participated as an official delegate to NCIDQ from the District of Columbia. Board Liaison Leon Lewis also participated in this meeting.

The Staff continues to check the Disciplinary Data Base maintained by NCARB before presenting a candidate for licensure for Board approval. Initials and/or comments on the envelope of the application document the Disciplinary Data search results.

The Board continues to go green by accepting the credentials of architect applicants via NCARB electronically, reducing the amount of paper and expediting the approval process for applicants. Similarly, the Board’s Newsletter is being made available electronically, reducing paper and labor and resulting in financial savings. The Board is currently in the process of collecting e-mails from licensees to effect e-mail alerts regarding newsletters, legislation and regulations, and other licensee information.

Representatives of the Board of Architecture and Interior Design will continue to meet with representatives of the Board of Professional Engineering to discuss issues of “incidental practice,” and a review of the laws governing practices of both professions has started.

34

Board of Barber and Cosmetology:

The Board presented its 6th Annual 2012 District of Columbia Board of Barber and Cosmetology Practitioners Forum, “Shift to the Next Level” on June 18, 2012 at Gallaudet University’s Kellogg Conference Center. Council Chairman Kwame Brown and Councilmember Muriel Bowser greeted and offered warm wishes and success those attending the Forum on behalf of the District’s City Council.

Board Chairman Derek Davis and Board Member Vera Winfield, attended the National Association of Barber Boards of America’s (NABBA), 86th Annual Conference in Louisville, Kentucky, from September15-21, 2012, where Mr. Davis was elected as 1st Vice President of NAABA, upon completing his term as 2nd Vice President.

Chairman Davis, Board members Anwar Saleem and Dr. Richard DeCarlo, attended the 2012 National-Interstate Council of State Boards of Cosmetology (NIC) Annual Conference, “Communication is Key” in Salt Lake City, Utah, August 23-27, 2012.

The Notice of Final Rulemaking of the Barber and Cosmetology’s “Continuing Education Requirements” took effect on September 30, 2012. The regulations are located in DCMR Title 17, Chapter 37.

Regulations of Tattoo and Body Piercing Artists legislation passed successfully on August 17, 2012. This law set requirements that included licenses for Tattoo Artists, Apprenticeships and Instructors.

The Board finalized the “On-Site Inspection Compliance Report” which will be used to monitor shops/salons to ensure compliance with District and federal laws.

Board members received annual training from The Council of Licensure, Enforcement, and Regulations (CLEAR). The following topics were presented: Foundation of Occupational and Professional Regulations, Roles and Responsibilities of a Board Member, Competence and Standards, Administration Rulemaking, and Professional Discipline, which address licensing disciplinary issues, enforcement, a strong enforcement process and brought ideas to improve the management of the Board.

Boxing and Wrestling Commission:

The Commission’s activities include issuing permits for amateur boxing events; the Commission supervised amateur Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) events; regulating professional boxing and MMA events and issuing permits for professional wrestling events.

The Commission co-sponsored the 2012 Mayor’s Cup /2nd Annual Dr. Arnold W. McKnight Amateur Boxing Invitational, Kickboxing and Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) Exhibition, in conjunction with the Department of Parks and Recreation on Saturday, August 11 at the Harry Thomas Recreational Center Community Day. Mayor Gray greeted and offered remarks to those attending; Council Member Orange offered greetings on behalf of the City Council. The

35

event was designed to commemorate Dr. Arnold W. McKnight for his longevity and countless efforts on behalf of the DC Boxing and Wrestling Commission, where he served as the chairman for over 11 years.

On May 12, 2012 the Commission was proud to recognize it officials that have served it for 25-years. It awarded the officials service awards for their dedication and commitment to making the Commission during a Professional Boxing Event at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center.

With a full complement of Commissioners, continued to forge partnerships with sister agencies such as Department of Parks and Recreation and the Washington Convention and Sports Authority in an effort to promote the District’s assets as incentives for promoters to host events.

The Commission was represented at The Association of Boxing Commissions Annual Conference, July 23 to July 25, 2012, at the Hilton Clearwater Beach, in Clearwater, FL. In attendance were Chairman Scottie Irving, Deputy Commissioner Alfred Grant and Commission Administrator S. J. Brown.

The Commission inspected all of the heavily used licensed gymnasiums and training facilities for boxers in the city. It donated needed boxing equipment and supplies to local amateur gyms throughout the city. Further, it supported amateur boxing by purchasing trophies and a ring for annual events.

The Commission provided boxing training by securing the expertise of the Yamasaki Brothers, internationally recognized referees and trainers to hold Mixed Martial Arts training for Commission officials.

The Commissioners received annual training from The Council of Licensure, Enforcement, and Regulations (CLEAR). The following topics were presented: Foundation of Occupational and Professional Regulations, Roles and Responsibilities of a Board Member, Competence and Standards, Administration Rulemaking, and Professional Discipline, which address licensing disciplinary issues, enforcement, a strong enforcement process and brought ideas to improve the management of the Commission.

Board of Funeral Directors:

The Board put on its Practitioners Forum on November 16, 2011 at Gallaudet University’s Kellogg Conference Center. Licensees received information regarding the individual license renewal process, basic business license renewal, continuing education requirements, funeral home establishment inspection process, parking regulations, vital records protocol and pre-need regulations.

The Chief Medical Examiner’s Office reviewed with the Board, new ‘release of remains’ rules. The document “Requirements for Conducting Business with the DCOME” was made available on the Funeral Director’s website. Fines will be assessed for continued violations. Also, the Board encouraged its funeral director and funeral home establishment licensees to place particular emphasis on properly reviewing decedents and completing paperwork before the release of bodies as a result of meeting with the DCOCME.

36

In partnership with DCRA’s Computer Testing Division, the Board reviewed its current DC Funeral Licensure Examination, voted to remove all non-legal and non-regulatory questions and formed an exam review committee to completely update exam questions its DC Funeral Law tests.

During FY2012, the Board continued monthly meetings to review, discuss, approve, reject or defer applicants seeking licensure through examination, reciprocity, funeral home establishment, and courtesy card applications. The Board also adjudicated complaints against funeral licensees.

The Board met with the Maryland Funeral Board to discuss issues around requirements placed on non-resident Maryland license holders.

The Board began review of Title 3, Chapter 30, pertaining to Funeral Directors for revision.

The Board conducted a practical funeral exam at University of the District of Columbia in April 2012.

Chair Lynn Armstrong Patterson attended the Annual Conference of the International Conference of Funeral Examining Boards in Little Rock, Arkansas.

The Board conducted an audit to ensure continuing education requirement compliance of licensees.

Board of Industrial Trades:

Chairperson Robert Smith annual testimony to the Committee of Public Services and Consumer; chaired by Chairperson Yvette Alexander on the Board annual activity.

In accordance with the “Electricians Equality Act of 2012,” the Board is presently processing applications to qualified individuals.

Board of Professional Engineering:

On March 9, 2011, Chairman Eugene Bentley addressed the Committee of Public Services and Consumer Affairs and gave testimony to the Council and Chairperson Yvette Alexander during the Performance Oversight Hearing.

In partnership with DCRA’s Computer Testing Division, the Board reviewed its current DC Land Surveyors Licensure Examination, voted to update all questions and formed an exam review committee to completely update exam questions for its DC Land Surveyors tests.

Real Estate Commission:

Published and implemented final regulations to DCMR Title 17, Chapters 26 and 27.

Offered seminars and co-sponsored educational opportunities for licensees on a quarterly basis with other DC government agencies and private organizations.

37

950 licensees attended a Commission-sponsored seminar, where internet registration was provided. The iPod touch units where used to scan bar codes on the tickets that were printed. The tickets were collected at the end of the seminars to verify completion of the course.

Updated a reference/study guide containing significant provisions of D.C. real estate laws for public usage.

Board of Real Estate Appraisers:

● Continued to serve as an active member for various associations and organizations.

● Continued to update regulations governing real estate appraisers to meet federal, Appraisal Subcommittee, and Appraisal Foundation requirements, including the licensure of Appraisal Management Companies.

● Continued to update information on the District of Columbia Appraiser Web-site.

● Continued to monitor several pre-licensing and continuing education providers.

● Continued to offer Board-sponsored continuing education courses to update licensees on District of Columbia laws and regulations.

● Continued to offer appraisers online renewal. ● Continue to use a contract review appraiser to issue appraisal reports on

complaints received, which has been very productive.● Continued to develop newsletters for licensees. ● Continued to attend the Association of Appraiser Regulatory Officials

(AARO) meetings to interface with other appraiser regulatory officials and to gather new regulatory information and meet with federal officials.

● Board continued to receive their annual training from The Council of Licensure, Enforcement, and Regulations (CLEAR).

● New Licenses issued for the Fiscal Year October 2011-September 2012 total 102

● The Board approved 10 schools and 228 classroom and online courses for the fiscal year 2012.

● The Board responded to several Appraisal Foundation (Appraisal Qualification and Appraisal Standards Boards) Exposure Drafts for the purpose of offering input on proposed licensure requirements regarding the regulation of real estate appraisers.

35. Please describe the Board’s/Commission’s three biggest accomplishments in FY 2012.

Response:

The Construction Codes Coordinating Board’s biggest accomplishment was drafting the proposed 2013 D.C. Construction Codes. The proposed rulemaking would adopt the following codes published by the International Code Council (ICC), as amended, as the District of Columbia Construction Codes: the 2012 edition of the International Building

38

Code; the 2012 edition of the International Residential Code; the 2012 edition of the International Fuel Gas Code; the 2012 edition of the International Mechanical Code; the 2012 edition of the International Plumbing Code; the 2012 edition of the International Property Maintenance Code; the 2012 edition of the International Fire Code; the 2012 edition of the International Energy Conservation Code; the 2012 edition of the International Existing Building Code; the 2012 edition of the International Green Construction Code; the 2012 edition of the International Swimming Pool and Spa Code; and the 2011 edition of the National Electrical Code (NFPA 70) published by the National Fire Protection Association.



In March 2011, the Board sent letters to larger and medium size CPA firms located in the District of Columbia, reminding them that a DC CPA license needs to be held by individuals doing certified public accounting work in DC.

Regarding its affiliation and membership with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA), the Board responded to requests for information and feedback from NASBA by completing surveys so that the Board’s position regarding issues that affect the accounting profession are taken into account.


Conducted a forum comprising representatives of Howard University, The Catholic University of America, the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), and the American Institute of Architects (AIA) to discuss District of Columbia Municipal Regulations relating to DCMR 3403.1(A) “Licensure by Examination.” The Board voted to keep the requirement as is maintaining standards consistent with the protection of the health, safety and welfare of District residents and consumers.

Participated at the National Council of Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ) Annual Delegates Meeting comprised of over 35 member jurisdictions, which allowed the District of Columbia attendees the opportunity to provide annual state reports on the regulation of interior design in the District of Columbia.

Participated at the NCARB Annual Meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. State reports on the regulation of architects were provided by the DC attendees.


The Board presented its 6th Annual 2012 District of Columbia Board of Barber and Cosmetology Practitioners Forum, “Shift to the Next Level” on June 18, 2012 at Gallaudet University’s Kellogg Conference Center. Council Chairman Kwame Brown and Councilmember Muriel Bowser greeted and

39

offered warm wishes and success those attending the Forum on behalf of the District’s City Council.

The Notice of Final Rulemaking of the Barber and Cosmetology’s “Continuing Education Requirements” took effect on September 30, 2012.

Regulations of Tattoo and Body Piercing Artists legislation passed successfully on August 17, 2012. This law set requirements that included licenses for Tattoo Artists, Apprenticeships and Instructors.


The Commission cosponsored the 2012 Mayor’s Cup /2nd Annual Dr. Arnold W. McKnight Amateur Boxing Invitational, Kickboxing and Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) Exhibition, in conjunction with the Department of Parks and Recreation on Saturday, August 11 at the Harry Thomas Recreational Center Community Day.

On May 12, 2012 the Commission was proud to recognize it officials that have served it for 25-years. It awarded the officials service awards for their dedication and commitment to making the Commission during a Professional Boxing Event at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center.

The District of Columbia Boxing and Wrestling Commission continued to forged partnerships with sister agencies (Department of Parks and Recreation), hosting the Dr. McKnight Invitational, and authority/ commissions (Washington Convention and Sports Authority), the Convention Center was the site that saw a major title match between Amir Khan and Lamont Peterson, and Mr. Peterson winning the match. The Commission continued its working relationship with the Verizon Center, Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) held its first ever Mixed Martial Arts Event in Washington, DC.


The Board met with the Maryland Funeral Board to discuss issues around requirements placed on non-resident Maryland license holders.

The Board conducted a practical funeral exam at University of the District of Columbia in April 2012.

Chair Lynn Armstrong Patterson attended the Annual Conference of the International Conference of Funeral Examining Boards in Little Rock, Arkansas.

The Board conducted an audit to ensure continuing education requirement compliance of licensees.


Electrical Waiver applications were processed for qualified electrical journeyman after the approval of the 2011 Electricians Equality Act.

40

The Electrical committee partnered with the University of the District of Columbia, Community College to develop National Electrical Code Classes for applicants applying for a DC Apprentice or Journeyman Electrician licenses.


In February 2012, Chairman Dr. Eugene Bentley attended the NCEES Presidents’ Assembly, in Atlanta, GA. Four Board members attended the NCEES Northeast Zone Interim Meeting, held in Dover, Delaware, April 3 -5, 2012. Board member Howard Gibbs served as the Northeast Zone Vice-President. The Board also attended the NCEES 91st Annual Meeting held in St. Louis, Missouri, August 22 - 25, 2012.

Vice Chair, Howard Gibbs attended the NCEES Exam Policy meeting for Engineering Committee. A proposal to switch to computerized testing format (CBT) was accepted at the NCEES 91st Annual Meeting. On January 2014 the computerized engineering exam (CBT) for Fundamental Engineering (FE) will go live.

A roster of all licensed Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Engineer Interns and Land Surveyor Interns was produced in the spring.


The Commission reviewed 102 complaints, where prompt action was taken against violators, where disciplinary actions were imposed to protect the public. The Commission held four Guaranty Fund hearings, where the public was able to recover monies lost in real estate transactions.

Created an electronic communication system containing a data base of over 11,000 District of Columbia licensees for the purpose of disseminating significant regulatory alerts to licensees. This system has enhanced the Commission’s ability to notify licensees immediately of trends involving illegal practices that will result in disciplinary actions, and other important information on regulatory requirements.

The Commission approved 51 educational providers to offer 1,012 continuing educations courses.

The Commission sponsored nine (9) mandated continuing education courses, where over 950 real estate licensees were in attendance.

The Commission supported the efforts of staff person Leon Lewis in becoming only the second African-American to become President of the worldwide Association of Real Estate License Law Officials.


The Board published final regulations amending Chapter 23 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations to reflect recent changes to industry

41

standards and to clarify existing requirements implemented by the Appraisal Foundation’s Appraisal Qualifications Board.

The Board co-sponsored two Historic Preservation seminars on the campus of Gallaudet University during May 2012, where each appraiser received training on Historic Preservation laws, Historic Districts, Historic Sites and Development Opportunities.

The Board participated in the spring and fall Association of Appraiser Regulatory Officials meetings and conferences.

36. Please describe the Board’s/Commission’s goals in FY 2012 and the plan/timeline for completion?

Response:

The Construction Codes Coordinating Board’s goal in FY12 was the drafting of the proposed 2013 D.C. Construction Codes. The proposed Codes were promulgated in December 2012. We expect the proposed Codes to be submitted to the Council in Spring 2013.



Enforcement - Identify cases of illegal practice and track the complaint cases sent to investigations until cases are resolved.

Communication – Strengthen communication with licensees via more frequent publication of electronic e-mail.

Communication with other Boards – Continue to participate at the regional and national levels with NASBA.

Operational – Prepare and publish operational procedures for the Board. Resolve the Mobility impact on the District. Invite Global delegations meetings.


Reciprocity – Perform yearly review of the Member Board Requirements for the Practice of Architecture and Interior Design to prevent impediments to reciprocity.

Practice – Develop and publish law provisions and regulations requiring licensure and enforcement standards for professional architecture corporations.

Discuss with appropriate organizations the need for the regulation of Landscape Architects.

Post-licensure Competency – Develop system to monitor Continuing Education for both Architects and Interior Designer.

42



Communication with other Boards – Continue to participate at the regional and national levels with NCARB and NCIDQ.

Continue discussions with the Board of Professional Engineering to resolve issues of “incidental practice”.


One of the Board’s projected goals for FY2013 is to host a Practitioner’s Forum in June of 2013 for its licensees to obtain information and continuing education units required for license renewal.

To approve continuing education programs for providers and licensees which would assist the licensees in meeting their continuing education requirements needed to renew licensure in upcoming renewal cycles.

To implement a monitoring program where board members visit barber shops and salon on a proactive basis to assure that barbershops/salon are providing a safe environment and offering the best service to all clients in the District of Columbia.

To implement effective programs to benefit our students in DC public schools.


To continue to increase the number of DC revenue-generating Boxing, Wrestling, and Mixed Martial Arts events;

To advance the Commission’s interaction with the Washington Convention Sports Authority, the Department of Parks and Recreation, tourism and media assets of the city to bring increasing publicity to its professional and amateur events in the city and to create a vibrant advocacy for DC youth participation in amateur boxing and martial arts.

To inspect all amateur gyms in the city where amateurs train to compete, ensuring safety and compliance.

Provide various Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts training opportunities to its officials by such as seminars, mini-clinics and debriefings to improve the Commissions operations and executions during events.


To develop an effective mechanism to monitor Funeral Home Establishments compliance with city laws, rules and regulations.

To develop a systematic procedure for compliance verification to ensure that non-renewed licensees or unlicensed individuals are not conducting activities for which a license is required.

43

To contract with the International Conference Funeral Service Examining Board (ICFSEB) to administer a computerized examination.

To develop a system on the website, which would contain information about disciplinary actions, approved pre-licensure and continuing education schools and courses.


Board Members will receive the necessary training through educational conferences to benefit from the advancements in the trades.

The Board is currently updating the 17 DCMR to keep up with changes of the industries.

Discussions will include new examinations for the trades to coincide with the new DC construction codes.

The Board will include discussions for continuing education requirements and reciprocity agreement between the neighboring states in.






Review of professional engineering disciplines listed in the municipal regulations.


Finalize FY-2012 Real Estate Guaranty and Education Fund budget and continuous accounting of funds.

Sponsor continuing education for all real estate licensees on legislation and regulatory requirements, fair housing developments, and financial issues with real estate transactions.

Published twice-yearly newsletters.


To publish newsletters twice-yearly for licensees. To conduct seminars for licensees to ensure compliance with the Uniform

Standards of Professional Appraisal Practices and rules and regulations governing appraisers in the District of Columbia.

44

● Develop and publish rules and regulations requiring the licensure of Appraisal Management Companies consistent with federal requirements.

● Complete the resolution of complaints expeditiously consistent with federal requirements.

● Continue to meet with various jurisdictions as well as Associations to keep abreast of current issues.

● Develop regulations requiring the licensure of Appraisal Management Companies.

37. What challenges does the Board/Commission face?

Response:

The Construction Codes Coordinating Board faces the challenge of expeditiously reviewing and incorporating all public comments received in response to the December 2012 proposed rulemaking on the 2013 D.C. Construction Codes into a republication and transmittal to the Council.



To find individual/s willing to commit their time and expertise to the Board so that we may operate with a full Board.



Greater engagement with school graduates aspiring to registration.


To expand the Barber and Cosmetology programs in the District of Columbia Public Schools and to increase coordination between the Board, OSSE’s Career and Technical Education State Office, the Commission on Career and Technical Education, and the District Career and Technical Education Taskforce activities.



There is a need for a sufficient number of affordable facilities for promoters to host events and to provide incentives or the availability of favorable rates for publicly owned facilities that promoters can use for events.

45

Additional support for amateur contestants competing locally, regionally and nationally that would assist with their lodging, travel and the demand for supplies and equipment.

The Commission’s mission would be enhanced by an even closer working relation and partnership with the Washington Convention and Sports Authority and other city-owned media/promotional outlets to advertise promoters’ events.


The Board is recruiting for Board members to represent the Elevator Maintenance. The Board has three openings one for an Elevator Maintenance, Contractor and an Investigator.

38. How does the Board/Commission represent and solicit feedback from residents? Please describe: What has the Board/Commission learned from this feedback? How has the Board/Commission changed its practices as a result of such feedback?

Response:

For the Construction Codes Coordinating Board, the drafting of the proposed 2013 D.C. Construction Codes was an intensely collaborative effort, through the Board’s Technical Advisory Groups, which were comprised of subject matter experts from business, industry, nonprofit organizations, and residents. The proposed Codes were published in the D.C. Register as proposed rulemaking, giving all interested parties an opportunity to comment.


All Boards/Commissions regularly survey their applicants, licensees and attendees of public meetings to gain feedback to assess their efforts and to determine areas that need improving or attention. The Boards/Commissions review all statements and comments and take them into consideration when drafting statutory and regulatory amendments. Regulations are currently being considered and correspondence is acknowledged by the Boards/Commissions based on the public statements and comments.

39. Please provide a copy of all official correspondence sent by the Board/Commission.

Response:

This question is not applicable to the Construction Codes Coordinating Board.


46

47

VI. BUSINESS LICENSING AND CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING

A. OCCUPATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING ADMINISTRATION

40. Did the agency implement any changes to the professional licensing process in FY 12 and FY 13, to date? If so, please provide an explanation of the changes on the procedures from application to renewal issuance.

Response:

For applications, instructions, and forms, visit the DCRA website: www.dcra.dc.gov Licensing/Registration Professional Licensing

o Choose license category from the license list Look under Online Services/Publications & Forms

o To review new license instructionso To review new license applications

Look under Online Services (for those Boards/Commissions online)o To submit new license applicationso To Upload required documentso To pay by credit/debit card using a secure system

For Boards not yet online, submit the fee, notarized applications, forms and all required documents to:

Pearson VUEDepartment DC- OPLAMetro-Plex I, Suite 2508401 Corporate DriveLandover, MD 20785

Pearson VUE forwards applications to the respective Board/Commission via courier or change of “status” in database:

§ 47-2853-10 (1) : Promptly issuing and renewing licenses or certification or registering those person who meet the standards established by the Boards for each regulated profession or occupation except that where is a question as to whether an applicant is qualified, that question shall be referred to the appropriate Board for resolution. Upon resolution of the question, the Mayor shall promptly take such action as the Board determines is appropriate.

• All approved applications are logged onto an excel spread sheet or access database by licensing category.Information log contains:

• Batch number, last name, first name, license prefix example (CO- first Class) date received, date approved, and notes. Approved applications for processing by Administration or Board

• All approved applications for examination are forwarded to the Examination Coordinator.

48

http://www.dcra.dc.gov/

• All approved applications for endorsement, temporary licensure, apprentice, reinstatement, and contractors are forwarded to Licensing and Certification for processing.Deficiency Letters to applicants

• Deficiency letters are issued to applicants who fail to provide complete information.

• Applications that are deficient for information will receive a deficiency letter informing them of the deficiency.Letter reads: Please provide the required information within 15 days so that the application can be processed. If information is not received within 15 days, the application will become invalid for failure to submit the required information.

When the required information is received, the information is reviewed for completeness and the application is reviewed for the second or third time to complete the process.

If the information is not received in a timely manner the application data is closed and entered into a excel spreadsheet or access data base for recording reference, and then forwarded to Licensing and Certification Unit to update the database records.

Renewals

At least 90 days before the license expires, OPLA shall send to the person licensed, by first class mail to his or her last known address, a renewal notice that states:

The date on which the current license expires The date by which the renewal application must be received for renewal to be

issued prior to expiration; and The amount of the renewal fee.

For applications, instructions, and forms, visit the DCRA website: www.dcra.dc.gov Licensing/Registration Professional Licensing

o Choose license category form the license list Look under Online Services

o Click Renew License Complete the online renewal, pay the fee, and provide any changes.o Email confirmation sent or Print the confirmation pageo Return all required documents to Pearson VUE

41. Please describe any changes you have made or anticipate making to the professional licensing process since last fiscal year, and include the efforts you have taken to inform the public of these changes.

Response:

49

http://www.dcra.dc.gov/

We seek to provide each of the Boards and Commissions with updated websites, access to online licensing systems, and all required forms. During this fiscal year, we have made great advancement toward implementing Appraisers, Funeral Directors, Architects and Interior Designers, CPA’s, Real Estate and Elevator Maintenance on the online licensing system. Announcements were sent to licensees via USPS mail and electronic means as well as posted on the respective websites.

42. How have you expanded the agency’s online services over the past fiscal year? What new online services are being offered?

Response:

The web-based license database allows users to initiate a wide range of licensing transactions online, with 24/7 access. Previously, all business was conducted in person, over the telephone, or by mail. Now individuals can apply for new licenses or renew existing ones, change demographic data, request a letter of certification, and much more at their convenience. The system even allows the general public to search for licensees so they can be sure that their architect, plumber, accountant, or whomever they hire – is fully licensed.

43. How does the agency track applications for professional licenses?

Response:

All applications are tracked within our database, which is a secure, web-based system.

44. Please provide the committee with the number of businesses/individuals that are licensed in each professional and licensing category.

Response:

In FY12, the following numbers of individuals were professionally licensed:

License Category LicenseesAthlete Agent 6Accountancy 3,587

Appraiser 736Architect 2,877

Asbestos Worker 1,718Barber 677

Boxing & Wrestling 434Cosmetology 5,705Electrician 3,477

Funeral Director 387Interior Design 325

Plumber 1,062

50

Professional Engineer/Land Surveyor 5,673

Real Estate 11,262Refrigeration/Air 1,853

Steam/Other Operating Engineer 5,469

Tour Guides 1,338TOTAL LICENSEES 46,586

45. How many professional licenses were revoked in FY12 and for what reasons?

Response:

No professional licenses were revoked in FY12.

46. What amounts of fines were issued in FY12 for violation of the rules governing professional licensure? What kinds of violations were committed? How much was actually collected?

Response:

The following violations were issued fines in FY12:

Violation Amount of Fine Amount CollectedD.C. Official Code 47-2853.17 (13) (1) Aided in the unauthorized person in the practice of an occupation & (2) Failed to properly supervise an individual in his employment

$2,000 $2,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.17 (a) (9) Submitted appraisal reports that were improperly developed and misleading

$5,000 $5,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.02 (a) 2001 Continue to practice while his or her license is expired

$750 $750

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.22 Licensee failed to comply with the terms of listing agreement for the leasing of certain properties in DC

$500 $500

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.22 Licensee failed to comply with the terms of listing agreement for the leasing of certain properties in DC

$750 $750

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.193 (a) (4) (2001) Failed to exercise ordinary care in representing a landlord of lease

$500 $500

51

properties in DCD.C. Official Code 47-2853.197 Failed, within reasonable time, to account for or to remit any money, valuable document which belongs to others

$1,000 $1,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.197; and Title 17 Licensee failed to comply with the requirements for advertisements by real estate person

$2,500 $2,500

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.17 The sum of errors and defects noted by the review appraiser resulted in a report under review that was improper

$1,000 $1,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.17 Practice professional engineering while license was expire

$500 $500

17 DCMR 2316.1 Licensee shall conduct all appraisals in conformity with the current edition of USPAP

$750 $750

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.02 (a) (2001) Licensee who continues to practice professional engineering while his or her license is expired

$1,000 $1,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.02 (a) (2001) Licensee who continues to practice professional engineering while his or her license is expired

$1,000 $1,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.48 (2001) Licensee practice as a CPA while the license was expired

$2,000 $2,000

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.17 and or Chapter 30 & 31 of Title 17 of the DCMR. Respondent failed to submit any certificates of completion of continuing education credits, as is required

$500 $500

D.C. Official Code 47-2853.02 (a) (2001) Licensee practice professional engineering while his or her license is expired

$1,000 $1,000

TOTAL $22,750 $22,750

47. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the professional licensing division. Include: A breakdown of the percentages by licensee category;

52

A description of the most common complaints; A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers.

Response:

Received a call from a licensee that she answered her screening questions and received her confirmation by e-mail from [email protected]. That her license has not renewed. She has called to complain and faxed over her documents showing her confirmation and stated that her broker has also called but no one has returned their calls. That she is very upset that no one has responded to her or her broker in reference to her license not renewing. After researching the copy of confirmation notice that was faxed over, it was found that the confirmation ID #716127 was from the renewal transaction status of the 2009 renewal cycle. Under this confirmation #718127, it's date of Tue. 8/24/2009 is reflected on the confirmation ID notice. She was informed that she will have to reinstate her license and informed her of the need items to reinstate.

A licensee requested a copy of a letter of certification to be sent to the State of Maryland. License was issued incorrectly as reciprocity for broker license due to the fact that he answered screening question #6 "yes". However, he was license as "Sales Agent” not as a "Broker" in Maryland". Once the exam history checked; the application type was changed to exam, letter of certification was re-printed and mailed.

An applicant stated that he had been informed that his application had been closed due to missing documentation. He had been sent 3 notices over a period of more than 90 days, but failed to submit the missing documentation. Therefore his application was closed. He further complained that the final notice he received stated that he had until that day to submit the required documentation; however on the date of his arrival to PV office, he still did not have any of the required documents.

A licensee was closed as a result of missing CE's that were not submitted prior to the expiration of his Appraiser license. He did not believe that he was required to reinstate because he had an additional 60 days to complete the CE without having to reinstate. He was referred to the board.

An applicant stated that she had been out of the country from 2009-2011 and did not renew her Real Estate license. She was informed that she must take 30 CE's and submit a reinstatement application. She stated that she was not responsible for taking CE's while she was out of the country and would contact the board regarding this issue.

An applicant was contacted regarding a response to screening question A. She answered no to the question, which is an indication that she owes over $100 to the DC government. She was asked to provide a written explanation regarding this debt, at which time she stated that she had answered the question incorrectly and that we should make the correction to her application. She was told that she must submit a notarized letter indicating that she had answered the question incorrectly. She asked what specifically should she write in this letter and she was informed that we could

53

not tell her specifically what to write, but to state what she had communicated to the representative that her response was incorrect. She was also asked to provide a written update of her address as mail had been returned as undeliverable. She said that her address had not changed and that we should resend the letter to her current address. She became upset when told her license would not be renewed unless we received her letter of explanation and an updated address. License was renewed upon the submission of the letter requested.

B. BUSINESS LICENSING DIVISION

48. Did the agency implement any changes to the business licensing process in FY 12 and FY 13, to date? If so, please provide an explanation of the changes on the procedures from application to renewal issuance.

Response:

DCRA’s Business Licensing Division (BLD) launched its online business license application in January 2012, initially with 13 business license categories that could be processed online. Currently, all business license categories can have their applications submitted to DCRA via its website and all business licenses can also be renewed online.

49. Please describe any changes you have made or anticipate making to the business licensing process since last fiscal year, and include the efforts you have taken to inform the public of these changes.

Response:

DCRA’s Business Licensing Division (BLD) has begun an internal review aimed at reducing and consolidating the number of business license categories. These changes may entail legislative or administrative changes and the goal is to streamline the business licensing process.


Response:

DCRA’s Business Licensing Division (BLD) launched its online business license application in January 2012, initially with 13 business license categories that could be processed online. Currently, all business license categories can have their applications submitted to DCRA via its website and all business licenses can also be renewed online.

51. How does the agency track applications for licenses and renewals?

Response:

54

All business license applications and renewals are tracked via the Accela system.

52. What is the average wait time for application processing, and what has the agency done to decrease the wait time?

Response:

Different business license categories require different amounts of time to be processed. Some license categories, such as the General Business License, can be processed immediately online, while others, such as a Restaurant License, require additional reviews from other District agencies.

In the past year, we amended the Secondhand Dealer License to allow many license holders to qualify for a General Business License. This greatly simplified and expedited the license application process – as well as reduced the business license cost for the customer. In our review of the existing business license categories, we seek to move additional license holders into the General Business License category to as to streamline and fast-track their applications.

53. What action to the agency take to address concerns raised by the Committee last concerning complaints from individuals who received inconsistent or incorrect information provided by the agency regarding an investigation that is conducted by a third party, such as a failure to explain a change in its policies, requirements, or processing time, which results in significant delay?

Response:

The Business Licensing Division does not utilize third parties to conduct investigations.

54. How many business licenses were revoked in FY12 and for what reasons? What continuing review does the agency conduct of each licensee for failures to pay fines, for example?

Response:

In FY12, no business licenses were revoked by DCRA. However, several hundred license investigations have been conducted to ensure businesses are operating with the correct business license and are not operating outside the scope of their business license. Failure to pay fines assessed by DCRA is handled by DCRA’s Enforcement Division.

55. What amounts of fines were issued in FY12 for violation of the rules governing business licensure? What kinds of violations were committed? How much was actually collected?

Response:

55

In FY12, the DCRA Regulatory Investigations Section issued 232 Notices of Infraction with a total fine assessment of $647,500. Most citations were issued for violations such as operating without a business license, operating a violation not allowed by the zoning regulations, and afterhours trash truck noise violations.

56. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the business licensing division. Include: A breakdown of the percentages by business license category; A description of the most common complaints; A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers

Response:

The Business License Division (BLD) receives complaints for the following general reasons: 1) licensee did not receive mailed license or invoice; and 2) Division staff provided inconsistent information to customer.

BLD has put all of its license categories online. Currently, we offer the opportunity for applicants to submit and print a new application online in 13 of our simple license categories. Customers have the ability to submit an initial application, pay the applicable fees, and receive the printed license in the same transaction.

We expect that as our business license streamlining initiative moves forward, we will see fewer number of customer complaints due to an overall simplification and fast-tracking of the license application, review, and issuance process.

57. What has been done to streamline business licensing with District agencies?

Response:

As we move all business license processes to the Accela system, we will also be giving access to the other District agencies that are involved in the license application review and approval process. This will streamline the licensing process by allowing each relevant agency to review the license application electronically in real time, rather than having to move folders of paperwork from one agency to another.

In the past year, we amended the Secondhand Dealer License to allow many license holders to qualify for a General Business License. This greatly simplified and expedited the license application process – as well as reduced the business license cost for the customer. Additionally, it removed the need for a criminal background check and fingerprinting to be done at the Metropolitan Police Department. This change allowed many small businesses operating as used book stores or vintage clothing stores to save a significant amount of time and money.

56

Our internal review of the number of business license categories will further help streamline the business licensing process.

C. CORPORATIONS DIVISION

58. Describe any changes in the process of persons seeking corporate documentation since FY2012. Since the agency rolled out 16 online services in FY2011, how has the user population responded to the availability of the new services now available? Please cite positive and negative feedback.

Response:

The Corporations Division has increased its online options and currently offers more than 30 online services to the public. Since launching our web-based Corp Online system, we have had more than 50,000 customer transactions done online. The Corp Online system allows customers to submit via the website all corporate registration information, paperwork, and filing fees. When Corp Online was originally launched, it was only available on Internet Explorer; we have since expanded it to all usage on all web browsers.The Corporations Division has received very positive responses from the public regarding the changes made to Corp Online. Customers very much like the ability to file and pay for most of their required corporate filings without having to visit the DCRA offices, as well as being able to have their corporate documents delivered to them electronically.

A challenge we’ve had with some of our customers is getting the inexperienced one comfortable with using Corp Online for their filings and payments. We have some customers who are used to filing their paperwork in-person or via the mail. To help them transition to the online system, we walk them through the Corp Online system so that they become comfortable with the online navigation and payment security system. We also note the most frequently asked questions or issues about Corp Online so as to include them in the next round of online system upgrades in order to make the Corp Online as user-friendly as possible.

59. The agency made changes in the process and/or timeline for mailing corporate registration renewal notices. How have these changes reduced business owners’ complaints received by the Committee? Have there been any changes any further changes since FY12?

Response:

One of the major streamlining changes the Corporations Division made was to standardize all corporate entities’ biennial report filing deadlines to April 1. This has helped eliminate confusion on which types of corporate entities had to file their biennial report on which date and has helped improve compliance. The Corporations Division sends notices to customers via e-mail and regular mail reminding them to file their

57

biennial report before the April 1 deadline so as to be in good standing and to avoid late fees.

60. How have the new online services for processing payments by the agency reduced complaints from business owners? Are there any outstanding issues and if so how, is the agency working with the vendor community to resolve them?

Response:

The Corporations Division does not receive many complaints regarding processing payments, particularly since having the ability to immediately process credit card payments online is received very positively by our customers. In the few instances we’ve had where a customer made duplicate or erroneous payments, we work with the customer to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. We are working with Office of the Chief Technology Officer and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer to expand the online payment system to include all major credit card companies, as well as ACH debit card companies.

61. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the corporations division. Include: A description of the most common complaints; A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers.

Response:

The Corporations Division does not get many complaints. The few that we do receive generally involve filing fees and Corporate Code requirements, such as the need to register a corporate entity with DCRA and the need to file biennial reports. Each complaint is given appropriate attention and the Corporations Division strives to resolve any complaints in an expeditious manner. The recurring customers issues for the Corporations Division are customers’ inexperience with using the Corp Online system and the new Corporate Code’s requirements for filings and internal procedures for corporate entities. We work with customers to help them get comfortable with the online filing of their corporate records, as well as explaining to them the legal requirements of maintaining their corporate entity in good standing.

D. PERMITTING DIVISION

62. Has the agency made any operational changes in the permitting process. If so, provide an explanation of the procedures from initial application to renewal issuance.

Response:

58

The Permitting Operations Division has fully implemented OCPI- Online Construction Permit Intake Electronic Plan Review-Accepting, processing, reviewing, and issuing of Building Permit via web-based ProjectDox.

Intake

Intake staff reviews the application for completeness and ensuring submitted documentation is adequate for processing. The Intake review process is: Applicants complete their application online The applicant then receives a File Job (FJ) number The applicant then goes to intake where he/she receives a building permit number

and they are directed to the Plan Review Coordinator (PRC) counter

Plan Review Coordinator (PRC)

The PRC reviews the application and building plans. Projects are divided into two categories: walk-through and file jobs.

If a file job, a filing fee is assessed and invoice created. Upon payment of filing fee, the submission is placed in a 14- or 30-business day initial review filing status;

If a walk-through, the application or plans are reviewed immediately by Permit Division staff located in the Permit Center;

Large projects that require reviews by other agencies, such as the Department of Transportation (DDOT), Department of the Environment (DDOE), Department of Health (DOH), Office of Planning (OP), and (DC WATER), are forwarded to those agencies for their reviews and approvals before issuance of the permit by DCRA.

Additionally, the PRC is required to: 1. Input specific application data into the CPMS system;2. Review application, plans, and required documentation to ensure compliance with

the necessary building permit requirements;3. Determine the complexity of the job (file job or walk-through);4. Determine the required reviewing disciplines;5. Document required reviews on plans cover sheet, to ensure clarity of required

reviews are identified;6. Transfer the customer to next reviewer if it is a walk-through; and7. Package application with plans if it is a file job and transfer to the Plans File

Room.

ProjectDox

Upon applicant’s request, the permit application with drawings is accepted through ProjectDox.

59

Once the applicant pays the required filing fee, the project is accepted into Accela and ProjectDox is highlighted in the work flow.

PRC then evite the applicant through ProjectDox to upload electronically the drawings and supporting documents.

Once it is confirmed that the applicant has uploaded the documents electronically, the PRC then selects the required reviews and the reviewers are notified through email notification.

Reviews are conducted in parallel and corrections/approvals are posted. At the completion of reviews, the applicant will be notified through a system

generated email. Once the application is approved electronically, the applicant will pay the

outstanding permit fee and collects the permit.

Plans File Room

Applications and plans are forwarded from the Permit Center to the Plans File Room twice a day. Each plan is given a file bin number. The bin number is recorded in CPMS for future reference. The main responsibilities of the Plans File Room are to:

Provide customers with their application status; Document retrieval of application packet to make corrections and resubmission of

corrections; Process File Room intake and withdrawal of applications and plans for customers; Check on the status of the assigned discipline review and communicate

information to the applicant; Provide a receipt to retrieve a building permit from permit issuance if application

packet is finally approved; Perform quality control checks to ensure all reviews are complete; and Transfer approved document to the Permit Center for issuance.

All file jobs stored in the Plans File Room are identified in CPMS and are accessible by Permit Center staff. Reviewers in each discipline are responsible for completing the required reviews within the designated timeframes of 14 and 30 business days. All walk-through jobs are completed by staff in the Permit Center within 24 hours.

Plan reviewer’s responsibilities include:

If application qualifies for same-day review, the following is required:1. Applicant visits the assigned reviewing disciplines within the Permit Center;2. If application packet is approved by all disciplines, applicant is routed for quality

control check and routed to permit issuance;3. If application packet is disapproved by one or more disciplines, applicant can

make the necessary changes and return for re-review the same day or at a later date.

If application is a file job, the 14- or 30-business day review is required:

60

1. All discipline reviewers retrieve application packet from the Plans File Room;2. Review is conducted by plans reviewers to ensure that the proposed work

complies with D.C. Construction Codes and Zoning Regulations.3. Update hardcopy of application and system databases with approvals or

comments; and4. Return application packet to the Plans File Room.

Upon final approval by all designated disciplines for the 14 and 30 business day file jobs, the applicant is contacted by the Plans File Room staff to make payment and receive their permit.

If Third Party Review:1. Coordinator reviews NOI, Notice of Intent for approved Third Party Review

agencies, for accuracy2. Validates address3. Checks for completeness of application4. Calculate permit fees and generate invoices5. Route application to Structural and Zoning for initial review6. Ensure the required sister-agency approvals are obtained7. Notify applicants when permit is ready for issuance

Quality Control Review

All plans and applications are reviewed to ensure: Completeness of application with all required approval signatures documented; Approvals are granted; Property holds are cleared; Database information is updated and accurate; After quality control review is conducted, the approved documents are forwarded

to permit issuance.

Issuance

Perform final cursory review of application to ensure all required signatories are documented on the application and in CPMS prior to issuance of a permit;

Building Permit Number is documented in CPMS; Approved plans are separated where two official plans are set aside for the

applicant: one set is transferred to the file records room; the other is transferred to the Office of Tax and Revenue Assessment Division;

Create payment invoice for applicant; Issuance staff validates payment by recording paid receipt number into CPMS; A copy of the paid receipt is attached to the application; Print and issue permit; Attach application to file plans/drawings for filing.

Permit Renewal and Issuance

61

Intake staff reviews the application for completeness and ensuring submitted documentation is adequate for processing. The Intake review process is:

1. Perform review and verification of applicant information in CPMS;2. Verify address and owner;3. Check and identify any property holds or Stop Work Orders (SWO) to make sure

any fines are paid or confer with Inspections Division to ensure compliance;4. Check for any property administrative holds such as Historic Preservation Review

Board, Commission on Fine Arts, WMATA, etc.;5. Enter applicable data into electronic software application;6. Provide customer with a Qmatic number and transfer queuing number to Plan

Review Coordinator (PRC) or other reviewing disciplines.

Plan Review Coordinator (PRC)

The PRC reviews the application and the issued building permit, and categorizes as walk-through.

The application is reviewed immediately by Permit Division staff located in the Permit Center; if approved, it will be forwarded to issuance.

Issuance

1. Staff performs final cursory review of application to ensure all required signatories are documented on the application and in CPMS prior to issuance of a permit;

2. Create payment invoice for applicant;3. Issuance staff validates payment by recording paid receipt number into CPMS;4. A copy of the paid receipt is attached to the application;5. Print and issue permit; 6. Attach application and permit for filing

63. Please describe any changes you have made or anticipate making to the permitting process since last fiscal year, and include the efforts you have taken to inform the public of these changes.

Response:

Online ordering of Plats from DC Surveyors Office Online intake of Certificate of Occupancy Application. Implementation of new intake counter in the permit center for screening of

documents, before start of process. Numerous permitting changes will take place related to Green Building once the

2013 DC Construction Codes are adopted

62

The permitting process changes are informed to the customers thru the DCRA website, stakeholders meetings and through community and professional organization outreach. Signs are also posted in the Permit Center.

Code modification request applications will soon require an Architect/Engineer Seal. This will, hopefully eliminate the requests submitted that lack thorough code analysis and justification.

64. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the permitting process. Include:a) A breakdown of the percentages by category; b) A description of the most common complaints; c) A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; d) A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers.

Response:

(a) & (b) A breakdown of the percentages by category of the most frequent complaints are as follows:

The length of review time for re-submitted applications: 50% Inability to complete the permitting process online: 10% The ability to identify the plan reviewer’s name, so as to address to them any

questions/comments: 25% Being able to obtain an overtime expedited review, even with the payment of

additional fee(s): 15%

c) Information is posted on the website and staff is trained on a continuous basis. DCRA has added additional plan reviewers in structural and fire protection sections. Also, the on-line permit intake process and ProjectDox systems have been implemented, whereby reviews are done in parallel rather than sequentially

d) The part of the process most difficult to the customers is shepherding plans to

sister agencies which are not on-site. Inconsistency of information given to customers DCRA is exploring the possibility of identifying the names of the plan reviewers

so that customers can address any questions/comments to the reviewer directly. Applicants and designers using DC plan review, for their designs.

65. Last year the agency identified the lack of customer familiarity of computer systems and corporate rules and regulations remains a challenge. What is the agency doing to provide a more educated customer?

Response:

63

DCRA has installed computer stations within the permit center whereby staff can educate/assist the customer through completion their application online. DCRA has conducted onsite and offsite demonstration of the ProjectDox system for electronic submission and processing of building permit. DCRA has published handouts on its website regarding these processes. DCRA provides updates/information though its quarterly stakeholders meetings.

66. What other agencies support the office in the permit review process? Are any of the agencies failing to meet target review timeframes? Are other involved agencies staffing FTEs at DCRA or are permit applications sent out for review?

Response:

Agencies that support the office in Permit Review Processing are DC Water, DOH, DDOT, DDOE, and OP. DCRA has on-site FTE support for plan reviews process from DDOT, DDOE, OP, for both walk-through and small complex file jobs.

The permit applicants still have to go off-site to obtain DOH review as they do not have any FTE at DCRA site.

DCRA commits to an initial review of 30 business days. Applicants usually expect other agencies to meet the same review timeframe, and when other agencies do not meet it, they become frustrated with the permitting process. DCRA and our sister agencies are working to resolve this issue by creating a uniform plans review timeframe.

67. How many permits were issued in error in FY12 and FY13 to date? What was the reason for the error and how was it rectified?

Response:

A retaining wall permit on the 4200 block of River Road NW was issued in error without DDOT review. We directed the applicant to apply for new/revised permit to address the omission/error.

A building permit on the 900 block of 12th Street SE and a sign permit on the 2500 block of Pennsylvania Avenue NW were issued in error without Historic Preservation review.

69. How many permits were revoked in FY12 and for what reasons?

Response:

In FY12, we revoked four permits:

200 block of 14th Place NE – revoked because was issued in error. 200 block of 56th Place NE – revoked because applicant failed to pay previously

issued fines before receiving permit.

64

300 block of H Street NE – revoked because failed to comply with regulations for H Street Overlay.

4500 block of Grant Street NE – revoked because was issued in error. 1400 block of Monroe Street NW- revoked because was an illegal conversion to

3-family dwelling.

70. What amounts of fines were issued in FY12 for violation of the rules governing permitting? What kinds of violations were committed? How much was actually collected?

Response:

In FY2012, $1,079,001 in illegal construction fines was collected. The majority of fines are the result of permitting violations, such no building permits or deviation from approved documents. A small percentage is tied to inspection violations, such as no inspection history or concealed work.

71. Please describe any additional permitting process changes that are planned in the coming year to continue to ensure rapid response to permit requests.

Response:

1. Streamlining of certificate of occupancy application intake through online submission and payment.

2. Revise the process of issuing certificates of occupancy for conversion of single-family dwelling into a two-family flat through business licensing process (Self-Certification).

3. Ordering building plats online.4. Review and modify the scope of walk-thru building permits.5. Internet access for DC surveyors records for customers, off-site.6. Continue to provide Permit Operations Division information at the Small

Business Resource Center – twice per month for half a day.

65

VII. ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE

A. INSPECTIONS DIVISION

72. Please provide a detailed description of the inspection process, including a step by step explanation of the procedures from initial application to renewal issuance.

Response:

The inspection process is different depending on the type of requested inspection:

Inspections required by permit – work that requires the issuance of a permit is subject to the applicable inspections by DCRA. For example, a permit for a single family dwelling would require inspections of the foundation system, framing, sub-systems such as plumbing, HVAC, electrical, and final inspections when complete.

a. Customer calls the Interactive Voice Response system (IVR) [(202) 442-9557] with permit number and type of inspection needed.

b. Customer follows the voice prompts and selects the day of their inspection.c. IVR schedules the inspection in our Comprehensive Property Management

System (CPMS) for the requested day and gives the customer a confirmation number.

d. All of the combination inspectors have been assigned to particular geographic areas (currently divided by ANC boundaries). Each area has a primary inspector and two back-up inspectors. The IVR system has been programmed with inspector’s names and assigned areas.

e. The IVR and CPMS systems automatically assign inspections based on a logic algorithm that checks the primary inspector’s workload for the next day. If the inspector has room on his schedule, the customer is given the option to schedule for the next day. If the primary inspector has a full schedule, IVR checks the back-up inspectors for availability. If these inspectors have full schedules, IVR checks the next business day. It will repeat the process until an opening is available.

f. The customer is given the chance to confirm the date of inspection or choose another date. IVR will check the availability as above. If there is a situation where multiple inspections are scheduled across multiple days, the customer can consolidate the inspections to a single day.

g. On the day of the inspection, the inspector retrieves his/her schedule, checks history of inspections to verify required inspections have been approved and makes contact with the customers to establish a time frame for the inspection.

h. The inspector performs the inspection to verify conformance with the approved construction documents and compliance with applicable construction codes.

i. If the inspection fails, the inspector provides the customer with a correction list. The customer must call the IVR system for a follow-up inspection.

66

j. The inspector provides the customer with an Inspection Record Card. This card replaces the “Green Stickers.” This card will document the inspection history for each permit relating to a particular job. There is space on the card to record seven permits and each phase of construction. The card records disapprovals as well as approvals.

k. When the inspector returns to the office, they will input the results of the inspections into CPMS.

Inspections pursuant to Illegal Construction – Upon receipt of a complaint involving Illegal Construction an inspector is dispatched to confirm the allegations and a Case is created in the database.

a. Customer calls Illegal Construction Unit at 442-STOP(7867)b. Inspector dispatched c. If complaint if found valid – Stop Work Order and Notice of Infraction

(NOI) issuedd. If complaint is not found valid – case noted as “no cause” found and closed

Inspections for Housing/Property Maintenance – generated by phone call notification generally from tenant and a case is created in the database.

a. Customer calls the IVR system [(202) 442-9557] and presses “6” to speak with a scheduling unit representative with a complaint of possible violation of the housing or building codes.

b. The complaint is entered into CPMS and scheduled for a particular day. c. The date of the inspection is confirmed with the customer and the inspection

process is explained. d. Each afternoon, the customer service manager allocates a number of

inspections to all inspectors working the following day. The inspection is scheduled via CPMS. Comments are added that include the contact information for the customer and any special instructions that should be known.

e. On the day of the inspection, the inspector retrieves his/her schedule and makes contact with the customers to establish a time frame for the inspection, as needed.

f. The inspector performs the inspection. The inspector then notes any violations of the codes and takes appropriate photographs. If there are no violations, the case is closed.

g. Upon return to the office, the inspector will input the results of the inspection into CPMS.

i. If violations were noted, the photographs are uploaded for further processing.

ii. A notice of violation (NOV) is created. iii. The paper case file is turned in to the supervisor for review. iv. After the review, the NOV is signed by the inspector and mailed for

service.

67

h. (In some cases, the NOV is personally served on the responsible party.) In cases involving a tenant complainant, a copy of the NOV is mailed to the tenant at this time.

i. After mailing, a reinspection date is scheduled in CPMS for the end of the abatement period. The customer is called and the reinspection date is confirmed.

j. If the violations have been abated at the time of reinspection the cases is closed.

k. If the violations are not abated, the case is forwarded to Enforcement.

Other Inspections –

Boiler – complaint and compliance verification driven

Elevator – complaint and quality control driven

Proactive – The proactive program schedules inspections of multifamily buildings. The inspection is looking for violations of property maintenance /Housing codes in the common areas and a percentage of units. The NOV and enforcement process mirrors the housing inspection process.

73. Please describe any changes you have made or anticipate making to the inspection process since last fiscal year, and include the efforts you have taken to inform the public of these changes.

Response:

We have made or anticipate making the following changes:

Increase in Green Construction inspection training. Introduced Requirements for Third Party Inspection Companies to increase Green

Building and Accessibility knowledge. With DCRA’s implementation of Special Inspections Manual, there will be closer

monitoring of special inspections testing and inspections. All process changes involve stakeholder notification and feedback, e.g., DCBIA

Leadership, AOBA.


Response:

Most of the new online services have focused on the Permitting Operating Division. However, by mid-2013, we expect to be able to accept online applications for certificates of occupancy.

75. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the inspection process. Include:

68

A breakdown of the percentages by category; A description of the most common complaints; A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers.

Response:

1. Failure to inspect a property timely once a complaint has been lodged .

Action: Inspections are scheduled timely and in order of priority. Continue to review complaints and inspection requests to ensure that life, health and safety violations are our first priority in scheduling and inspecting. Any inspection can now be scheduled within three business days. We have also centralized the online housing request email so that it is filtered through our IQ (Correspondence) system and not to one staff person, so that no request goes unanswered. This has resulted in a lack of complaints from tenants and those who represent them like lawyers, advocates and ANC Commissioners.

2. Failure to inspect required licensing inspections timely .

Action: DCRA reviewed the complaints around this particular type of license, and along with an analysis provided by CPM program participants, the information lent itself to a policy decision to be made by the agency that DCRA will now issue Housing Business Licenses prior to the approved inspection being completed, which decreases customer frustration with delayed inspections or delayed license issuance after application and payment. DCRA will conduct quarterly analysis of this program based on applications received, licenses issued and compliance with the program to make sure that it is customer friendly and efficient. 3. Failure to receive inspection notices after an inspection has been completed .

Action: We addressed this ongoing complaint, which has decreased each year, by implementing an electronic (email) service, in addition to first-class mail, posting in the common areas, and putting a notice under the tenant’s door. If a tenant calls to request a notice, any staff person who answers the phone may provide them with this information (with the click of a button) because all notices are on file in our Accela system and can easily be transmitted as a PDF by email. Tenants do not have to go through FOIA for this information.

76. Last year, the agency acknowledged that it still has issues with the Inspection Transformation process and the “one inspector” concept because of its inability to replace inspectors who exit the agency and the hiring freeze. Have these constraints been reduced, and if so please explain. Does the “one inspector” concept continue to be popular with the customer base?

Response:

69

The only issue with the Inspection Transformation process was the inability to replace inspectors as they left the agency, due to budgetary constraints (hiring freeze). Several inspectors let go in October 2010, have returned to service as of December 2011. In addition, we have hired additional inspectors to fill several budgeted positions, including four Housing Code Specialists to supplement the Housing Inspector ranks. We plan to open several positions in the coming months for Housing Inspectors, Construction Inspectors, as well as Boiler and Elevator Inspectors.

The original model for the combining of Housing and Construction inspectors was to provide a more comprehensive inspection for the citizens of the District. However, we have recognized a distinction in the skill sets and processes between the Housing Inspectors and the Construction Inspectors. These differences introduced unexpected inefficiencies that outweighed the advantages to the cross-training we were providing.

The overall customer response to the Combination Inspector concept for permit-based inspections has been very positive. It allows the customer to schedule a single block of time to meet multiple inspection requirements.

77. Please provide and overall assessment of the status of the building inspections division, including a separate discussion of commercial and residential inspectors. Include an assessment of whether the inspections process is improving, and if so, any indicators of this improvement.

Response:

Construction Inspections

The Construction Inspection Program is operating smoothly. From scheduling time frames and expectations through resource allocation and time management, the agency has seen a increase in productivity with the ability to send a single inspector (trained in each trade: Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical, and Building) to handle all four disciplines in one single scheduled inspection. This has resulted in an increase in customer expectation and service; it streamlines the ability to schedule staff and subcontractors, and saves on vehicle and fuel usage. The agency has received excellent feedback from the building industry and property owners.

Property Maintenance Inspections

The Housing Inspections Program is also operating smoothly. Since these inspectors have been transitioned out of the Combination Inspection Program the time frame for initial inspections has been closed to two days instead of two weeks. The Housing inspectors now focus on complaint based tenant inspections and rental housing business license inspections.

78. Have there been any significant changes inspection response times from initial request to

70

completion. If so, please explain.

Response:

There has been little change in the response time to inspection requests since last year.

Permit based inspection requests are scheduled through the Interactive Voice Response System (IVR). A customer calls in and interacts with an automated scheduling system by providing their permit number, type of inspection requested and the preferred date of the inspection. If accepted, the request goes onto the general schedule for that day to be assigned later to a specific inspector. At present, requests through this system are be handled within 2 business days and often can be accommodated next day.

Complaint based inspection calls are routed to a live customer service agent for scheduling. The agent documents the nature of the complaint along with contact information for the tenant. Following some recent improvements in response time, these requests are being handled generally within 1-3 business days, with urgent cases handled within 24 hours. Illegal Construction inspection requests are handled separately from Housing and Permit based inspections. The Illegal Construction Unit has, at present, 4 dedicated inspectors whose sole purpose is to enforce the illegal construction requirements. The typical response time is between 24 and 48 hours after receipt of notification, however, in the event of an emergency or a time sensitive inspection, such as an owner or contractor working over top of a posted Stop Work Order, we are generally able to respond within hours as staffing allows.

After the inspector performs the inspection, they have 48 hours to enter their results into the database.

79. Have there been any changes in the re-inspection process from the time that a NOV is issued to the processing of an enforcement action?

Response:

There has been little change in the reinspection process since last year. The re-inspection process is as follows:

1. When a NOV is issued, an abatement period is assigned in the system once a service date has been entered in CPMS and the NOV is mailed.

2. The administrative clerk assigns and schedules the re-inspection to the identified inspector’s schedule for after the abatement time frame.

3. The customer is contacted and informed of the re-inspection date. 4. The reinspection is scheduled to the inspector in CPMS.5. On the day of the re-inspection, the customer is contacted and informed about the

inspection time frame.

71

6. The re-inspection is performed and photographs are taken. 7. The inspector returns to the office and enters the results of the inspection into CPMS. 8. If violations are abated, the case is closed and the case is filed. 9. If the violations are not abated, the case is processed for enforcement action.

Photographs are properly annotated and attached to the case file. Inspector fills out and signs the required forms. The inspector forwards the paper case file to the supervisor for review. After review, the case is updated in CPMS and the paper file is forwarded to the

enforcement section for preparation of fines and possible abatement of violations by the District.

80. Please provide the Committee with an update on the technology enhancements for the re-inspection process? How long does it take for a case to be transmitted from the Inspection Division to the Enforcement Division? Has there been any improvement in the abatement of the lag time for case transmission from the Inspection Division to the Enforcement Division?

Response:

The Inspections Division physically transmits cases to the Enforcement Division. We are looking into electronic submission of cases between Divisions and the Office of Administrative Hearings. The most time-consuming portion of generating Notices of Violation continues to be the entering of data, legal citations, and other pertinent information on the Notices so that it meets the requirements of the Office of Administrative Hearings.

81. Is the current FTE staffing still insufficient to achieve the agency’s goals relating to residential and commercial inspections? If so, please explain?

Response:

We are in a better position to achieve agency goals this year. While there are several unfilled positions, we continue to seek the best qualified persons to become Construction and Housing inspectors. In addition, there are several FTE positions that need to be filled to meet our Green Building, Third Party Oversight and Special Inspection Oversight responsibilities.

82. In the past, the agency indicated that permit-based inspections were its top priority. Does this remain a priority? How does the agency determine which inspections (housing or permit-based) get the highest priority?

Response:

We have been able to focus on both permit-based inspections and complaint-based inspections. This is due to a better staffing situation, better management of personnel, and improvements in processes on both sides of the division.

72

83. Is the agency meeting its goal of capturing permit violations through the proactive inspection program? How does the agency view the success of the program and by what does it measure this success?

Response:

The goal of the Proactive Inspection Program was not to capture permit violations. It was to inspect a representative sample of units in a multifamily building to find violations of the Property Maintenance and Housing codes.

The agency has a goal to visit 2,500 dwelling units per year. In FY2012 the Proactive Program inspected 3,029 units in 1,198 buildings.

In addition to the data centered results, the Proactive Inspection Program has been well received by tenant advocacy groups and property owners. It has reduced the amount of “Building Wide” inspection requests to almost zero.

84. Has the average inspector weekly caseload changed since FY11?

Response:

There has been little change in the average inspector weekly caseload since FY11. A construction inspector should have a caseload of 40-50 inspections per week. A construction inspection could take a little as 10 minutes or as much as two hours, but most take approximately thirty minutes. A Property Maintenance Inspector should have a caseload of 15 -25 inspections scheduled per week. These Property Maintenance inspections also have a large range of time to perform the inspection with the average around thirty minutes.

In addition to the actual inspection, the administrative time spent generating the notices in CPMS is longer than a permit inspection. Most permit based inspections do not have the complications and the complex customer service requirements that housing inspections have.

85. Have there been any changes to the agency’s expectations for the performance of its inspectors since FY12?

Response:

The agency continues to expect its inspectors to perform their inspections in a comprehensive and thorough, but expeditious manner. Customer service is a priority. Inspectors are the agencies face, and we expect them to treat our customers with respect and professionalism. Inspection results are expected to be entered into CPMS within 48 hours.

73

86. Have the agency’s measures for monitoring the quality of an inspectors’ work changed?

Response:

The methods of monitoring the quality of an inspector’s work have not changed since FY12. Supervisor quality assurance evaluations Prescheduled ride-alongs with inspectors Unannounced periodic spot checks in the field We are developing program to monitor inspection disapproval rate. A high

disapproval rate may correlate to a more thorough inspection.

87. Has the number of complaints of miss inspection appointments and/or that the agency has failed to provide timely notice that an inspection must be rescheduled been reduced? Accordingly, please answer the following: a) State the average number of inspections that were completed per month in FY12. b) State the average number of inspections that were missed or rescheduled by the

agency for a given month in FY12. c) Have there been changes in how the agency informs citizens of the time and date

of their inspection and of any need to cancel or reschedule? d) Have there been changes in the process of notifying residents when an inspection

must be cancelled or rescheduled?

Response:

The division’s Customer Service SOP (issued October 2011) establishes clear guidelines for inspectors when he/she believes an inspection is going to be missed. The ICA managers will make every effort to accommodate the inspection request for the day it is requested, but occasionally we must set the inspection for another day.

(a)

*There were several all-day training session in June that pulled all inspectors out of regular inspectional activities.

(b)

MonthOct ‘11

Nov ‘11

Dec ‘11

Jan ‘12

Feb ‘12

Mar ‘12

Apr ‘12

May ‘12

Jun ‘12

Jul ‘12

Aug ‘12

Sept ‘12

TOTALS

Average

MonthFailed to Inspect 29 26 8 19 11 28 17 29 20 40 37 21 280 23.3

(c) Customers are informed of the date of their inspection at the time of scheduling. Reinspection dates are set after mailing of NOVs and the customer receives a phone call

74

MonthOct ‘11

Nov ‘11

Dec ‘11

Jan ‘12

Feb ‘12

Mar ‘12

Apr ‘12

May ‘12

Jun ‘12

Jul ‘12

Aug ‘12

Sept ‘12

TOTALS

Average

MonthInspections Scheduled

2287

2258

2473

2739

2136

2553

2527

2520

2643

2582

3217

2265 28850 2401

from the ICA customer service unit with this information.

The Customer Service SOP directs the inspector to follow these guidelines for an inspection that has the possibility of being missed: If unable to make all inspections, call or email supervisor. There may be an inspector that can cover the inspection. If coverage is not possible, it is the inspector’s responsibility to contact the

customer to work out another inspection day and time. Inspector must email customer service manager to schedule new inspection.

(d) The Customer Service SOP establishes the inspector’s responsibilities for what to do when an inspection must be cancelled or rescheduled

88. Does the agency have any plans for implementing an online inspection notification and report to residents?

Response:

This was one of the items that are being discussed with the agency Office of Information Services. We would like to allow online complaint intake, online inspection scheduling and the ability to report inspection results to customers.

89. Please provide a list of all building code violation citations, including dollar amounts, issued in FY12 and thus far in FY13. Please include the amounts collected.

Response:

Below are fines issued by the Inspections Division and collected by the Enforcement Division:

Illegal Construction

Housing, Building, Trash & Grass Violations

FY12 Cited $2,270,500 $1,065,500FY12 Collected $1,037,018 $352,672

FY13 to date cited $709,500 $319,200FY to date collected $243,979 $79,248

90. Are there any outstanding issues concerning the third party review and inspections process? What is the status of updating the Third Party Inspection Manual?

Response:

75

There are no outstanding concerns with the Third Party Inspection Program. The Third Party Inspection manual was updated in September of 2012 and presented to all Third Party Inspection Agencies. There will be amendments made once the Green Building Manual is completed in Spring of 2013 to specify scope and qualification for Green Review an Inspection agencies.

91. Please provide a detailed description of any special arrangements for inspections of large projects and government projects and any changes to the process since FY12.

Response:

DCRA has established and made available a mechanism to shepherd large-scale & Government projects through the permitting and inspection process. Preliminary Design Review Meetings (PDRMs) are scheduled and monitored through our Development Ambassador Program (DAP) and we encourage the building/construction industry to contact our DAP Coordinator to schedule a PDRM; this information is located on our website. The PDRMs are designed to assist our customers, developers and contractors, through the permitting process by providing an allotted time where all DCRA disciplined reviewers are available to identify any design or construction concerns that the applicant may have to address in the permitting process. This process has been very successful in providing information needed by our customers to obtain a building permit without repeatedly revising and resubmitting plans.

In addition, we have dedicated inspectors to work on these large government projects that choose DCRA as their inspection option. This allows DCRA to facilitate the scheduling of inspections, insures inspection continuity, and insures the highest level of code compliance while reducing the time it takes to get through the code inspection process.

In addition, the Deputy Chief Building Official is planning on setting up regular meetings with the District Department of General Services (DGS) to strengthen our partnership to provide safe buildings for District employees.

92. Complete the updates for the DCRA website to clarify the inspection requirements for elevators in FY12?

Response:

The planned updates did not occur as scheduled. However, we are working on updating not only the DCRA website, but also the forms used for the elevator inspection and certification process.

B DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONSTRUCTION CODES

93. Has the agency completed its update of construction codes and issue same to the Council?

76

Response:

In early FY2012, the Construction Codes Coordinating Board (CCCB) was prepared to publish a proposed rulemaking to adopt the 2009 International Code Council (ICC) model codes. However, in February 2012, Mayor Gray determined that as part of the Sustainable DC initiative, the District would leapfrog over the 2009 ICC Codes and move to be one of the first jurisdictions in the country to adopt the 2012 ICC Codes.

The CCCB published a proposed rulemaking on December 7, 2012 to adopt the 2012 ICC Codes, including the first Green Construction Codes. The public comment period will close on February 22, 2013. Afterwards, the CCCB will review all submitted public comments, publish a second proposed rulemaking that incorporates any changes made, and submit the proposed 2013 D.C. Construction Codes to the Council.

94. Please provide the meeting schedule of the CCCB for FY12.

Response:

The standing meeting date for the CCCB is the third Thursday of every month; special additional meetings are called as needed. Each meeting date of the CCCB is published in the D.C. Register and on the DCRA website. We also publish each meeting’s agenda and minutes on our website.

In FY12 and to date in FY13, the CCCB met on the following dates:

FY 2012Thursday 10/20/2011 RegularFriday 10/28/2011 SpecialTuesday 11/8/2011 Special Thursday 11/17/2011 RegularThursday 12/15/2011 RegularFriday 12/16/2011 SpecialThursday 1/19/2012 RegularThursday 2/16/2012 RegularThursday 3/1/2012 SpecialThursday 3/15/2012 RegularMonday 3/26/2012 SpecialThursday 4/12/2012 SpecialThursday 4/19/2012 RegularFriday 4/27/2012 SpecialThursday 5/3/2012 SpecialFriday 5/11/2012 SpecialMonday 5/21/2012 RegularFriday 6/1/2012 SpecialFriday 6/8/2012 SpecialWednesday 6/13/2012 Continuation of 6/8/12

77

Monday 6/25/2012 SpecialThursday 6/28/2012 RegularTuesday 7/3/2012 SpecialThursday 7/12/2012 SpecialThursday 7/19/2012 RegularThursday 7/26/2012 SpecialThursday 8/2/2012 SpecialWednesday 8/8/2012 Continuation of 8/2/12 Thursday 8/16/2012 SpecialMonday 8/27/2012 SpecialThursday 8/30/2012 SpecialThursday 9/6/2012 SpecialThursday 9/13/2012 SpecialWednesday 9/19/2012 SpecialThursday 9/27/2012 Special

FY 2013Thursday 10/4/2012 SpecialThursday 10/11/2012 SpecialThursday 10/18/2012 SpecialThursday 10/25/2012 SpecialThursday 11/1/2012 SpecialFriday 11/2/2012 Continuation of 11/1/12Thursday 11/8/2012 SpecialThursday 11/15/2012 RegularThursday 11/29/2012 Special

C. OFFICE OF VACANT BUILDINGS ENFORCEMENT

95. (a) Has there been any changes in how the agency has handles requirements for classifying vacant and blighted properties since FY12. (b) How many vacant and/or blighted properties are in your database? (c) Have the procedures for identifying such properties remained unchanged?

Response:

(a) Yes; process improvements in the Accela system have allowed us to better categorize and track blighted properties.

(b) As of February 1, 2013, we have identified 2,578 vacant buildings (which includes 1,030 vacant buildings that qualify for an exemption to the higher property tax rate) and 228 blighted buildings. So far in FY13, we have also identified 265 buildings that had been designated as either vacant or blighted, but that are now occupied.

Below is a ward breakdown of vacant buildings, exempt vacant buildings, and blighted buildings:

78

Vacant Exempt BlightedWard 1 138 121 25Ward 2 41 69 7Ward 3 23 34 2Ward 4 181 135 20Ward 5 311 216 42Ward 6 210 175 30Ward 7 378 167 54Ward 8 266 113 48

(c) Yes; the procedures for identifying vacant and blighted buildings remain unchanged.

D. OFFICE OF CIVIL INFRACTIONS

96. Please provide the Committee with FY12 and FY13 to date, numbers for civil infractions issued, by category and collections.

Response:

Issued FY12

ADMINISTRATIONNUMBER OF NOIs PROPOSED AMOUNT

Illegal Construction 631 $2,270,500

Regulatory Investigations 213 $604,500

Inspections/Grass 459 $1,063,700

Vacant Property 57 $114,000

Weights and Measures 7 $10,500

Totals 1,367 $4,063,200

Collected FY12

ADMINISTRATION COLLECTED AMOUNT

Illegal Construction $1,037,018

Regulatory Investigations $175,914

79

Inspections/Grass $352,672

Vacant Property $26,080

Weights and Measures $4,000

Totals $1,595,684

Issued FY13 to date

ADMINISTRATIONNUMBER OF NOIs PROPOSED AMOUNT

Illegal Construction 182 $709,500

Regulatory Investigations 62 $148,500

Inspections/Grass 119 $319,200

Vacant Property 6 $12,000

Weights and Measures 5 $6,000

Totals 374 $1,195,200

Collected FY13 to date

ADMINISTRATION COLLECTED AMOUNT

Illegal Construction $243,979

Regulatory Investigations $67,305

Inspections/Grass $79,248

Vacant Property $18,926

Weights and Measures $1,000

Totals $410,458

E. BOARD FOR THE CONDEMNATION OF INSANITARY BUILDINGS

97. Please provide an updated chart of the activities of the Board of Condemnation for the

80

current year. Has the Board met its FY12 goal of closing 120 cases? What is the goal for FY13?

Response:

The Board exceeded its FY12 goal of completing 120 cases; its FY13 goal is to complete 145 cases.

In FY12, the Board handled 519 cases. Of those, 176 went through the full condemnation process with the following results:

93 were rendered sanitary by the owners; 78 were condemned; 5 were ordered razed were ordered.

The BCIB’s FY12 caseload broke down as follows:

Total Cases 519

New Case Hearings 185Accepted 166Rejected 19

Notice to Show Cause Hearings 110Render Sanitary 6Extensions 88No Show (condemned) 16

Status Hearings 223Condemnations 62New Hearing Ordered 36Additional Extension Granted 34Razes Ordered 5Render Sanitary Ordered 87

F. OFFICE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR

98. What is the present zoning backlog? What progress has the Office of Zoning Administrator made to achieve the goal of eliminating the backlog?

Response:

As of January 25, 2013, the Office of Zoning Administrator (OZA) backlog of pending building permit applications was 15. As a comparison, there was a backlog of ten applications at this time last year. The Office of Zoning Administrator works proactively to reduce the number of overdue pending applications and to process those that are overdue as expediently as possible. One factor that contributed to the current backlog is a

81

zoning technician vacancy; however, the agency is actively seeking to fill that vacancy as quickly as possible. OZA continues to conduct internal coordination with the Permit Operations Division to minimize the backlog and expedite reviews.

99. Please provide an analysis of the complaints received regarding the Office of Zoning Administrator. Include: A breakdown of the percentages; A description of the most common complaints; A description of the actions taken to address and reduce these common incidences; A description of the parts of the process that remain the most problematic for

customers.

Response:

The Office of Zoning Administrator (OZA) received two customer complaints from February 2012 to date, of which one was deemed valid and one was unsubstantiated. Both complaints focused on OZA employees’ communications with customers at the DCRA Permits Center.

The Zoning Administrator has counseled OZA staff to adhere to good customer service standards. In the one validated case, the Zoning Administrator met with the employee, discussed the circumstances surrounding the complaint, and counseled the employee on how to improve in this area. The OZA has also worked with the Permits Operation Division to implement a formal “End of the Day” protocol to ensure transparency among staff and customers about how to process customers’ applications and manage customer expectations near the close of the business day.

The Zoning Administrator continues to work with the Permit Operations Division to ensure that permit applications are not accepted unless they contain sufficient, clear, and accurate information on which a proper evaluation and review can occur. Incomplete permit applications cause delays and unnecessary re-reviews that can frustrate applicants and impose additional work on staff.

G. STREET VENDING BUSINESS LICENSES

100. Please describe the status of the agency’s revision of the roadway vending regulations and the impediments to completing them.

Response:

The agency published a Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the D.C. Register on January 20, 2012 and a subsequent Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on October 5, 2012. We are currently finalizing an inter-agency review of the thousands of comments received in response to the proposed regulations. Our goal is to submit the proposed vending regulations to the Council for its review and approval by this Spring.

82

101. Identify and describe any new policies the agency has instituted or plans to institute in connection with inspections and licensing pertaining to food truck vending in the District.

Response:

The proposed regulations will continue the current practice of requiring any potential food truck operator to pass inspection by DCRA, DOH and the Fire Marshal before they are issued a license. Even while a food truck is in operation, it is subject to unannounced inspection by fire, health and DCRA inspectors to ensure all licenses, certificates, and permits are valid, as well as to ensure the trucks are being operated in compliance with all District laws and requirements.

102. Have there been any amendments to the vending development zones regulations? If so, please explain.

Response:

Vending Development Zones (VDZ) remain a focal point of the partnership between District agencies and local neighborhood and business associations to best utilize public space in a way that benefits residents and consumers. In response to comments submitted in response to the proposed rulemakings, the VDZ provisions were amended slightly to clarify that VDZs could not be established simply as a method for the exclusion or removal of certain types of vending within the VDZ.

83

VIII. INFORMATION SYSTEMS

103. Please provide an update on the status of information systems technology at the agency, including upgrades and enhancements.

Response:

The following are the upgrades and enhancements for DCRA OIS Maintained Systems and Databases:

CPMS Accela system has been upgraded from v6.6 to v7.05 in FY2013 and is currently providing enhanced functionality.

ProjectDox was implemented in March 2012 allowing for online building plan submissions to the agency.

CPMS online applications have been enhanced to allow online renewals of all business license categories.

Online payments are being accepted for six different types of application processes for business licensing and construction permitting functions.

104. Does the agency have any additional plans to consolidate its computer processes or to greater increase their efficiency and ease of use by the public beyond what was described last year?

Response:

DCRA is piloting an implementation program for making CPMS/Accela available to agency staff operating in the field; estimated launch in second quarter of FY13.

DCRA is launching a mobile version of PIVS to allow public access via smart phones.

DCRA is undertaking a major effort to upgrade the FileNet document repository system and digitize its current paper documents in order to minimizing the agency’s paper storage needs.

84

IX. INTERNAL AUDITING

105. Please provide a detailed description of the operation of the Service Integrity Unit, including: personnel, mission, operations conducted in FY12 and FY13, any misconduct uncovered, programs monitored, number and outcomes of investigations, and trainings provided.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 15 – Service Integrity.

85

X. PUBLIC RELATIONS

106. Last year the committee expressed concern about the services provided by DCRA front-line employees. DCRA responded that it intensified job training activities in certain areas of human resource performance. Does DCRA plan to continue with its training efforts in FY13 and has the agency seen a mitigation of customer complaints regarding employee performance? If so, please explain.

Response:

DCRA has completed a standard format (template) including Administrative Issuance and Process Flow. Agency wide drafts of all standard operating procedures have been completed and training of new and revised procedures is slated to be completed in FY13. DCRA will coordinate with each Division to ensure they include appropriate standard operating procedures and pertinent process information. The Human Resources team will meet with all Divisions and ensure each new employee receives an orientation handbook within the first 30 days of employment.

Additionally, Grade.DC.Gov has allowed DCRA to review and analyze direct public feedback regarding customer service in order to properly develop necessary job training for front-line employees. DCRA’s efforts are exhibited through improving grades over the past eight months. Currently DCRA has a B+ grade average matched with positive reviews including a friendly and helpful staff providing efficient services. In FY13, DCRA will continue to enhance training opportunities correlated to public feedback.

107. What else is being done/can be done to improve the agency’s performance from a customer service perspective?

Response:

DCRA is expanding the use of social media, such as Twitter and DCRA’s now 5,400 followers, to increase customer knowledge of DCRA regulatory authority, rulemaking, relevant pending legislation, and outreach events and initiatives. DCRA will coordinate with each Division to ensure they include appropriate standard operating procedures and pertinent process information. The Human Resources team will meet with all Divisions and ensure each new employee receives an orientation handbook within the first 30 days of employment.

The SBRC will continue providing in-depth overviews of business licensing and special events processes. In FY13 the SBRC will expand its services by providing workshops sessions with subject matters centered on corporate registration and assist the Corporations Division with outreach of its new regulations through the SBRC. Additionally, the SBRC will develop educational workshops on business compliance topics to educate future and current business owners looking to do business in the District of Columbia.

86

DCRA’s Permit Operations Division (POD) created a number of handouts including, but not limited to: Permit Guide, Plans Submittal Guide, and How to Obtain a Construction Permit in FY12. In FY13, the division will streamline the permit application process for simple jobs by generating visual, user friendly handouts for decks, single family dwellings and 2-unit flats conversions, and occupancy capacity placard applications. Guides will be available in the permit center and online. The POD division will also develop a marketing strategy, including training sessions, intended to promote the use of Project Dox by exposing this online service to District Residents and businesses. Guides/handouts will be made available in the permit center and online.

DCRA held 14 community-based, co-sponsored “How To” events focusing on home improvements projects and Green projects. A handout outlining a list of home improvement projects that require a permit is distributed at these events. The handout, titled “Get Building Permits for Your Home Improvement Project From Home” provides information regarding the permitting process, types of permits approved online, scope of work, and is available in both English and Spanish. Additionally, DCRA understands the importance of translating vital documents and all targeted communications into Spanish and other languages as needed. As part of the updated Language Access Plan, DCRA has produced 65% of documents and communications in a continual effort to reach the anticipated goal of 100%.

108. Is the number of front-line employees deployed to handle customer inquiries in person and on the phone on a given day still the same as provided to the Committee last year? If not, please provide an update.

Response:

DCRA has almost 168 public-facing staff. This includes DCRA inspectors and investigator who travel out into the field.

The breakdown by division is as follows: Licensing: 15 Zoning:10 Permitting: 39 Investigations: 11 Inspections: 40 Enforcement: 25 Surveyor: 8 Corporations Division: 12 Records Management: 3 Office of the Director / Customer Service & Outreach: 5

109. How many outreach programs did the agency conduct in FY12 and FY 13 to date. What has been the feedback on the programs you conducted in FY12? What were your top five attended/utilized programs? What were your least attended programs?

87

Response:

In FY 2012, DCRA participated in 65 community outreach events. We held 14 community-based “How To” events focusing on home improvements projects and green building projects. A handout outlining a list of home improvement projects that require a permit is distributed at these events. The handout, entitled “Get Building Permits for Your Home Improvement Project From Home,” provides information regarding the building permitting process, types of permits approved online, scope of work, and is available in both English and Spanish. We received very positive feedback from the community regarding these programs.

110. Please summarize the outreach programs that the agency plans to implement this year by describing the substance of the programs (whether they pertain to general agency operations, permitting/licensing, inspections, etc.)

Response:

We plan on implementing the following outreach programs this year:

DCRA’s largest outreach event this year will be our promotion (in coordination with other DC agencies and the International Code Council) of Building Safety Month in May 2013.

Additional “How To” events focusing on home improvement projects and green building projects as these projects promote the need for building permits.

Business Licensing Compliance outreach sessions to better educate small businesses with the correct business license for different markets.

Outreach to tenants on their rights to requesting a housing code inspection and heating requirements.

88

XI. RECENT LEGISLATION

111. Please discuss in detail any recent legislation directly related to DCRA that was passed by the Council and its effect on the agency.

Response:

The Basic Business License Renewal Amendment Act (B19-825) will require the agency to reconfigure its technology and application processes to offer business license customers the option of a two-year or a four-year business license term.

The Verizon Center Graphics and Entertainment Amendment Act (B19-517) requires the agency to review permit applications for the installation of several new digital advertising signs on the Verizon Center.

112. Please identify and briefly describe any final and proposed regulations that are pending.

Response:

The agency is currently accepting comments on the proposed 2013 District of Columbia Construction Codes (DCMR Title 12) and proposed regulations to implement the new Corporations Code (Title 17, Chapter 7).

We are engaged in an intra-agency review of comments submitted in response to proposed regulations governing signs (DCMR Title 13) and vending licenses (DCMR Title 24, Chapter 5).

We are preparing finalization of amendments to DCMR Title 12, Subtitle A regarding compliance with the Green Building Act.

89

XII. SPENDING PRESSURES

113. Please answer the following related to spending pressures: Please identify and explain any and all spending pressures for the current fiscal year. Please explain your plans to curtail spending to remedy these pressures. Will this plan result in a balanced agency budget? For potential spending pressures please identify how the agency will curb spending. Please explain how any current or potential spending pressures will affect services to

the public.

Response:

The agency has no spending pressures for the current fiscal year.

90

XIII. CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT

114. Please list each contract, procurement, lease, and grant (“contract”) awarded or entered into by your agency during FY12 and FY13, to date. For each contract, please provide the following information, where applicable:

The name of the contracting party The nature of the contract, including the end product or service The dollar amount of the contract, including budgeted amount and actually spent The term of the contract Whether the contract was competitively bid or not The name of the agency’s contract monitor and the results of any monitoring activity Funding source

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 16 – Procurement.

115. Please provide a list of all MOUs currently in place and any MOUs planned for the coming year.

Response:

Please see the attached Exhibit 17 – MOU.

116. Please describe the steps taken by the agency to provide oversight and management for contracts. Specifically, how does the agency ensure that its programmatic needs are being met? How does the agency ensure that contracting actions are standardized across various programs? How have these standards changed since FY12?

Response:

DCRA has worked with its Agency Fiscal Officer to begin receiving Open Purchase Order reports on a daily basis. The agency meets with the Office of Contracting and Procurement to ensure the agency’s programmatic goals are being met when necessary. The agency is in the process of having an Agency Contracting Officer in place to ensure all agency procurement functions are being handled uniformly.

117. Have procurement standards changed since FY12?

Response:

The agency is working with the Office of Contracting and Procurement to have an internal Agency Contracting Officer who will work with OCP on a regular basis to ensure standards are being met. This will enable the agency to ensure both its small and large contracting needs are met efficiently and correctly.

91

118. Have the methods used by your agency to monitor contract compliance changed since FY12?

Response:

The agency has requested and received updated daily reports from its Agency Fiscal Officer to ensure contract compliance and monitoring is occurring on a daily basis.

92

XIV. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

119. Please take the opportunity to provide the committee with any additional comments, concerns or suggestions that you feel the committee should be aware of that have not been addressed in this questionnaire.

Response:

We appreciate the Committee’s thorough questions and we look forward to working with the Committee.

93

Documents

DCRA Performance Questions CY2013 - Council of the ...dccouncil.us/.../event_testimony/DCRA_Performance_Q… · Web viewPerformance Oversight Questions. ... (Word), and a standalone