Performance Audit of Ohio Department of Aging Highlights Employee Turnover, Communications Issues

COLUMBUS — Only one in three people employed by the Ohio Department of Aging (ODA) in fiscal year 2019 remained on staff in fiscal year 2024, according to a new audit released Thursday.

The significant employee turnover, which outpaced other state offices, strained ODA’s communications with local agencies and constituents, negatively affected operations, and hindered auditors’ work to identify issues and offer recommendations for improvement.

“Ohio seniors rely on the services that are funded through ODA,” Auditor of State Keith Faber said. “It’s essential that this agency address these issues immediately.”

The ODA performance audit was conducted by the Auditor of State’s Ohio Performance Team, which reviews the operations of public agencies and programs and offers recommendations for improvements.

The full report is available online at ohioauditor.gov/auditsearch/search.aspx.

The Ohio Department of Aging was established in 1984 and primarily distributes funding to the dozen Area Agencies on Aging around the state, which operate independently to provide local programming to residents age 60 and older.

Employee retention has been an issue at ODA, with a significantly higher turnover rate compared with similar state agencies in six of the last eight years. Though 125 people stopped working at the Ohio Department of Aging between 2017 and 2024, the agency had exit interview data for only two people, with no meaningful insight tracked on reasons for employees’ departures.

The high turnover rates negatively affected communication inside the agency and with Area Agencies on Aging and other external constituents. Local agency representatives voiced their dissatisfaction during the performance audit, including difficulties getting timely answers to questions from ODA and policy and program changes that were not clearly communicated or implemented.

In a survey conducted as part of the performance audit, seven of the 12 Area Agencies on Aging said they were “very dissatisfied” or “dissatisfied” with ODA’s overall level of communication; seven said ODA “never” or “rarely” provides timely responses to questions; and 11 were “very dissatisfied” or “dissatisfied” with how rule changes and other important updates were communicated.

Auditors wrote, “… (K)nowledge gaps have inhibited ODA’s ability to respond to questions and necessitated that (Area Agencies on Aging) spend time bringing new ODA staff up to speed.” The local agencies also “felt left out of decision making and are not informed of the processes involved.”

Auditors had comparable issues, noting they “occasionally struggled to obtain information in a timely manner. In part, this was due to individuals lacking the institutional knowledge to answer questions. Further, we encountered instances where we were told information did not exist only to have it provided to us later in the audit.”

They added, “This lack of clarity and information delayed the audit process and resulted in additional work and expense….”

The new performance audit released Thursday offered nine recommendations for improvements at ODA, including:

• The agency’s current State Plan on Aging is overly broad and included goals beyond the scope of agency’s influence, “resulting in a plan that did not provide action steps that were easily implemented or measured.” Moving forward, ODA should consider objectives specifically tied to programs it impacts and communicate and collaborate with constituents to track progress.
• Though required to submit an annual report with information about complaints and issues raised by residents and recommendations for improvement, the last report was submitted prior to 2020. The State Long Term Care Ombudsman “should prepare and publish the required annual report in a timely manner.”
•  While ODA has made efforts to improve its data collection and utilization, the agency still does not collect, utilize, and/or publish information that could assist in decision making, including tracking the number of older Ohioans using different services and regional wait-list and levy data. Auditors wrote, “ODA should continue its data analytics efforts and explore collecting, utilizing, and publishing data elements beyond those specifically mentioned in this recommendation.”

###

The Auditor of State’s Office, one of five independently elected statewide offices in Ohio, is responsible for auditing more than 5,900 state and local government agencies. Under the direction of Auditor Keith Faber, the office also provides financial services to local governments, investigates and prevents fraud in public agencies, and promotes transparency in government.

Public Affairs
Contact: Marc Kovac
press@ohioauditor.gov