Audit Report On The Efficiency Of The Department Of Parks And Recreation In Addressing Complaints Related To Tree Removals

AUDIT REPORT IN BRIEF

The audit determined whether the Department of Parks and Recreation is addressing and resolving complaints related to tree removals and emergency pruning in a timely manner.

The Department of Parks and Recreation (Parks) maintains a 28,800-acre park system distributed throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Parks is also responsible for the more than 500,000 trees that line the streets and the two million trees within the parks. In 1996, Parks conducted the first-ever street tree census placing the tree population on a database called Tree Manager—a computerized information management tool for urban forestry operations.

The Parks Division of Central Forestry and Horticulture (Central Forestry) is responsible for citywide urban forestry and horticulture initiatives. Central Forestry, through its five borough forestry offices (Forestry) administers a Dead Tree Removal Program through which it pledges to inspect and remove dead trees in front of citizens’ residences within 30 days of notification. Forestry also prunes dead wood and hanging limbs that are potentially hazardous (emergency pruning).

Parks generally resolved complaints related to tree removals in a timely manner. We noted that Tree Manager accurately reflected information entered into it related to service requests, inspection reports, and work orders. Together with other tests of data reliability, there was a reasonable basis to rely on the integrity of Parks’s computer-processed data.

Our test of the timeliness of service requests to be completed by Forestry staff revealed that 90% of dead-tree removal service requests recorded in Tree Manager were completed within the 30-day mandate. This is slightly below the Parks target of a 95% completion rate for the 30-day mandate, as stated in the 2006 Mayor’s Management Report. Forestry’s review process of outstanding service requests to ensure the timely completion of tree removals needs improvement. Specifically, we noted internal control deficiencies in the review of service requests and subsequent inspection reports and work orders.

In addition, Parks does not ensure that all service requests are recorded in Tree Manager. As a result, the Tree Manager database does not contain all service requests it receives from the public, thereby increasing the risk that hazardous tree-related conditions that may result in accidents may be overlooked.

Moreover, our review of five randomly selected claims settled in Fiscal Year 2006, revealed that Forestry personnel failed to dispatch work crews to remedy hazardous conditions involved in those claims, although Forestry had performed prior inspections noting the conditions.

Finally, the Management Information Systems Department (MIS) lacks adequate controls over Tree Manager. Parks lacked adequate system documentation and controls such as record layouts, data entry validation, and audit trail. We also found that a disaster recovery plan to safeguard Tree Manager data is not in place.

To address these issues, we make five recommendations. We recommend that Parks should:

• Ensure that Forestry improves the manner in which it oversees, prioritizes, and schedules work orders in order to comply with the 30-day tree removal mandate.

• Establish adequate procedures to ensure that all service requests are entered in Tree Manager and followed up for resolution.

• Ensure that inspections and the follow-up work necessary to perform dead tree removals are performed and documented.

• Ensure that MIS and Forestry officials design, specify, and implement in the new forestry data management system adequate features and system controls (i.e., record layouts, field definitions, disaster recovery, audit trail, input controls, data interface, etc.) to strengthen the reliability and integrity of the system.

• Ensure that the new system have appropriate tools and reports to facilitate and enhance supervisory review of completed and outstanding service requests.

In its response, Parks agreed with three of the audit’s five recommendations.