REGULATORY BOARD REVIEW BOARD OF OPTOMETRYREGULATORY BOARD REVIEW BOARD OF OPTOMETRY September 2018 PE 18-06-612 AUDIT OVERVIEW The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most

REGULATORY BOARD REVIEW BOARD OF OPTOMETRY

September 2018PE 18-06-612

AUDIT OVERVIEW

The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most of the General Provisions of Chapter 30 of the West Virginia Code.

The West Virginia Board of Optometry’s Website Needs Only Modest Improvements to Enhance User-Friendliness and Transparency.

WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION & RESEARCH DIVISION

JOINT COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

JOINT COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION

SenateEd Gaunch, ChairMark Maynard, Vice-ChairGreg BosoCharles ClementsMike MaroneyRandy SmithDave SypoltTom TakuboRyan WeldStephen BaldwinDouglas E. FacemireGlenn Jeffries Corey PalumboMike Woelfel

House of DelegatesGary G. Howell, Chair Danny Hamrick, Vice-ChairMichael T. Ferro, Minority ChairPhillip W. Diserio, Minority Vice-ChairChanda AdkinsDianna GravesJordan R. HillRolland JenningsDaniel LinvilleSharon MalcolmPatrick S. MartinZack MaynardPat McGeehanJeffrey Pack

Tony PaynterTerri Funk SypoltGuy WardScott BrewerMike CaputoJeff EldridgeRichard IaquintaDana LynchJustin MarcumRodney PylesJohn Williams

Building 1, Room W-314State Capitol ComplexCharleston, West Virginia 25305(304) 347-4890



SenateEd Gaunch, ChairMark Maynard, Vice-ChairRyan WeldGlenn JeffriesCorey Palumbo

House of DelegatesGary G. Howell, Chair Danny HamrickZack MaynardRichard IaquintaIsaac Sponaugle

Agency/ Citizen MembersKeith RakesVacancyVacancy VacancyVacancy

Aaron AllredLegislative Auditor

John SylviaDirector

Brandon Burton Research Manager

Daniel KannerResearch Analyst

Steve YoungReferencer

Note: On Monday, February 6, 2017, the Legislative Manager/Legislative Audi-tor’s wife, Elizabeth Summit, began employment as the Governor’s Deputy Chief Counsel. Most or all the actions discussed and work performed in this report occurred after this date. However, the Governor’s Deputy Chief Counsel was not involved in the subject matter of this report, nor did the audit team have any com-munications with her regarding the report. As Deputy Chief Counsel, the Legisla-tive Auditor’s wife is not in a policy making position within the Executive Branch. Therefore, the Performance Evaluation and Research Division does not believe there are any threats to independence with regard to this report as defined in A3.06.a and A3. 06.b of the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. Furthermore, the Legislative Auditor has instructed the Director of Performance Evaluation and Research Division to document and discuss any issues he believes are a threat to the division’s independence with the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House due to Ms. Summit’s position.

Performance Evaluation & Research Division | pg. 5

Regulatory Board Review

CONTENTS

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Issue 1: The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most of the General Provisions of Chapter 30 of the West Virginia Code .............................................................................................................11Issue 2: The West Virginia Board of Optometry’s Website Needs Only Modest Improvements to Enhance User-Friendliness and Transparency .............................................................................................23

List of Tables

Table 1: Board of Optometry Work Budget Information FY 2016-2017 ..................................................................13Table 2: Board of Optometry Licensure Fees of West Virginia and Surrounding States ...................................13Table 3: Complaint Decision Statistics FY 2016-2018 ....................................................................................................14Table 4: Continuing Education Requirements for Optometrist In Surrounding States ....................................15Table 5: Board of Optometry Expected and Actual Revenues FY 2015-2018 .......................................................18Table 6: Board of Optometry Percentage of Expected and Required Expenditures .........................................18Table 7: FY 2016 Board of Optometry Attributed Spending for Travel Out of State and the Greenbrier ...................................................................................................................................................................19Table 8: FY 2017 Board of Optometry Attributed Spending for Travel Out of State and the Greenbrier ....................................................................................................................................................................19Table 9: FY 2018 Board of Optometry Attributed Spending for Travel Out of State and the Greenbrier ....................................................................................................................................................................20Table 10: West Virginia State Board of Optometry Website Evaluation Score ........................................................23Table 11: Website Evaluation Score .......................................................................................................................................24

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Transmittal Letters ..............................................................................................................................................27Appendix B: Objectives, Scope and Methodology .........................................................................................................29Appendix C: Website Criteria Checklist and Points System ...........................................................................................31Appendix D: Agency Responses .............................................................................................................................................35

pg. 6 | West Virginia Legislative Auditor

Board of Optometry



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ThePerformanceEvaluationandResearchDivision(PERD)withintheOfficeoftheLegislativeAuditorconductedaRegulatoryBoardReviewoftheWestVirginiaStateBoardofOptometry(Board)pursuanttoWestVirginiaCode§4-10-10(b)(2).ObjectivesofthisauditweretoassesstheBoard’scompliancewiththeprovisionsofChapter30andotherapplicablelaws,andevaluatetheBoard’swebsiteforuser-friendlinessandtransparency.Theissuesofthisreportarehighlightedbelow.

Frequently Used Acronyms in This Report:

PERD–PerformanceEvaluationandResearchDivision.

ARBO–AssociationofRegulatoryBoardsofOptometry

FARB–FederationofAssociationsofRegulatoryBoards

CE–ContinuingEducation

Report Highlights:

Issue 1: The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most of the General Provisions of Chapter 30 of the W. Va. Code.

The Board is financially self-sufficient, accessible to the public, has established continuingeducationrequirements,andmaintainsdueprocessrightsforlicensees.

Ontwooccasions,theBoardfailedtoadheretoW. Va. Code §30-1-5(c)andsubmitstatusreportstothepartyfilingthecomplaintwithinsixmonthsafterthecomplaintisinitiallyfiled.Therefore,the Board should comply with statutory language and submit status report updates and closecomplaintswithintheappropriatetimeperiod.

TheBoarddoesnothaveadequatesegregationofdutiesdue tohavingonlyonefull-timestaffmember. However, theBoardhasestablishedinternalcontrols toreducetheriskoffraud. To additionallyfurtherreducetheriskoffraud,theBoardshouldconsiderutilizingtheWestVirginiaStateTreasurer’sOfficeLockboxSystem.

MostmembersoftheBoardhaveattendedtheWestVirginiaAnnualSeminarforStateLicensingBoardsatleastonceduringtheirterms,however,thechairpersonhasnotattended.Therefore,thechairpersonshouldcomplywithW. Va. Code §30-1-2a(c)(2)andattendtheWestVirginiaAnnualSeminarforStateLicensingBoardsannually.


Board of Optometry

TheBoardmaywanttoconsiderbeingmoreconservativeinexpendituresforattendingnationalconferences.

Issue 2: The West Virginia Board of Optometry’s Website Needs Only Modest Improvements to Enhance User-Friendliness and Transparency.

TheBoard’swebsiteneedsmodestimprovementstoenhanceuser-friendlinessandtransparency.Additionalfeaturesshouldbeconsideredtofurtherimproveuser-friendlinesssuchasasitemap,RSSfeeds,andanonlinesurvey/polltogaugeuserfeedback.

TheBoard’swebsitecouldbenefitfromadditionaltransparencyfeaturessuchasawebsiteupdatestatus,FOIAinformation,andperformancemeasures.

PERD’s Response to the Agencies’ Written Response

PERD received the Board’s response to the draft copy of the regulatory board review onSeptember10,2018.TheBoard’sresponsecanbeseeninAppendixD.TheBoardagreeswithrecommendationsone, two, three, four, seven, and eight. Per recommendationfive, theBoardhas eliminated travel to theFederationofRegulatoryBoardsannualconference,however,theBoardindicatesthattheexpertisesharedat theAssociation of Regulatory Boards of Optometry (ARBO) are well worth the investment. PERDacknowledgesthatnationalconferencessuchasARBOcanbebeneficialbutPERDmaintainsthattheBoardshouldconsiderdecreasingthenumberofindividualsthatattend.Perrecommendationsix,theBoardhasindicated that itwill evaluate the annualmeeting at theGreenbrierResort forpossiblediscontinuation attheBoard’snextmeetingonNovember1,2018. TheBoardwillalsoexamine thecostof themeeting todetermineifthebenefitsoutweighthecosts.TheBoarddoesreportthathavingthemeetingatthelocationallowsforlicenseestoaskquestionstotheBoard’sExecutiveDirector.However,theBoarddoesnothaveanydocumentationshowingthenumberoflicenseeswhoattendthemeetings.

Recommendations

1. The Board should comply with West Virginia Code §30-1-5(c) and submit reports to the party filing the complaint within six months after the complaint is initially filed.

2. The Board’s chairperson should adhere to W. Va. Code §30-1-2a(2) and attend the Seminar for State Licensing Boards annually.

3. The Board should consider utilizing the West Virginia State Treasurer’s Office lockbox to process licensure fees and annual license application and renewal to further reduce risk.

4. The Board should consider decreasing the amount of expenditures for out-of-state national conferences.



5. The Board should consider discontinuing having one of its annual meetings at the Greenbrier Resort unless there is evidence that the benefits to licensees exceed the additional costs.

6. If the Greenbrier meetings are continued, the Board should reimburse lodging expenses consistent with the policies of the Travel Management Office of the Department of Administration.

7. The Board should make improvements to its website to provide a better online experience for the public.


Board of Optometry



ISSUE 1

The Board of Optometry (Board) is fi-nancially self-sufficient, accessible to the public, has established continuing education requirements, and main-tains due process rights for licensees.

The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most of the General Provisions of Chapter 30 of the West Virginia Code.

Issue Summary

The Board of Optometry (Board) is financially self-sufficient,accessible to the public, has established continuing educationrequirements,andmaintainsdueprocessrightsforlicensees.However,theBoardhashadtwoinstancesinwhichastatusreportwasnotsenttothecomplainantwithinsixmonthsofthecomplaintbeingfiled.Furthermore,becausetheBoardonlyhasonestaffmember,theBoarddoesnothaveadequateinternalcontrol. However, theBoardhasreducedtheriskoffraudbyassigning the staffmemberandvariousBoardmemberswithcertainresponsibilities.TheBoardreceivesthemajorityofitsfeesviaits website and theWestVirginia State Treasurer’s eGov system, butsomelicenseesstillpayviapaperdocuments,whichmustbehandledandprocessedbytheBoard.Therefore,theBoardshouldfurtherminimizethehandlingofrevenuebycompletelyutilizingtheWestVirginiaStateTreasurer’sOffice lockbox system. PERD also found that during thescopeoftheaudit,thechairpersonhasnotattendedtheannualseminarforstatelicensingboardsasrequiredbylaw(§30-1-2a(c)(2)). Finally,after review of expenditures during the scope of the audit, it is theLegislativeAuditor’sopinionthattheBoardshouldconsiderreducingthenumberofquestionableexpenditures forout-of-state travel tonationalmeetingsanddiscontinuingtheannualGreenbrierResortBoardmeetingunless there isevidence that thebenefits to licenseesexceed thecosts.However,ifthemeetingscontinuetheBoardshouldreimburselodgingexpensesconsistentwiththepoliciesoftheTravelManagementOfficeoftheDepartmentofAdministration.

The Board Complies With Most of the General Provisions of Chapter 30 With One Exception.

TheBoardisinsatisfactorycompliancewithmostofthegeneralprovisionsofChapter30ofWest Virginia Code. Theseprovisionsareimportantfortheeffectiveoperationofregulatoryboards.TheBoardisincompliancewiththefollowingprovisions:

• TheBoardhasadoptedanofficialseal(§30-1-4).• TheBoardmeetsatleastonceannually(§30-1-5(a)).• TheBoard’scomplaintsareinvestigatedandresolvedwith

dueprocess(§30-1-8).• TheBoardhaspromulgatedrulesspecifyingtheinvestigation

andresolutionprocedureofallcomplaints(§30-1-8(k)).

The Board is in satisfactory compli-ance with most of the general provi-sions of Chapter 30 of West Virginia Code.


Board of Optometry

The Board maintains an end-of-year cash balance that is in excess of one year of expenditures.

• TheBoard is financially self-sufficient in carrying out itsresponsibilities(§30-1-6(c)).

• The Board has established continuing educationrequirements(§30-1-7a).

• TheBoardhasaregisterofallapplicantswithappropriateinformation specified in code, such as the date of theapplication,name,age,educationandotherqualifications,place of residence, examination required, whether thelicensewasgrantedordenied,anysuspensions,etc.(§30-1-12(a)).

• TheBoardhassubmittedanannualreporttotheGovernorand Legislature describing transactions for the precedingtwoyears(§30-1-12(b)).

• TheBoardhascompliedwithpublicaccessrequirementsasspecifiedby(§30-1-12(c)).

• Arosterhasbeenpreparedandmaintainedofalllicenseesthatincludesnamesandofficeaddresses(§30-1-13).

TheBoardisnotincompliancewiththefollowingprovisions:

• TheBoardshallinvestigateandresolvecomplaintswhichitreceives,andshall,withinsixmonthsofthecomplaintbeing filed, send a status report to the party filing thecomplaintbycertifiedmailwithasignedreturnreceiptandwithin one year of the status report’s return receipt dateissueafinalrulingunlessthepartyfilingthecomplaintandtheboardagreeinwritingtoextendthetimeforthefinalruling(§30-1-5(c)).

• The Board’s chairperson and executive director are toannuallyattendtheWestVirginiaAnnualSeminarforStateLicensingBoards(§30-1-2a(c)(2)).

The Board Is Financially Self-Sufficient. The Board maintains an end-of-year cash balance thatis in excess of one year of expenditures (seeTable 1). West Virginia Code §30-1-6(c)requiresboardstobefinanciallyself-sufficient.ItistheLegislativeAuditor’sopinionthatcashreservesintheamountofonetotwotimesaboard’sannualexpendituresareanacceptablelevel.



Table 1Board of Optometry Work Budget Information

FY 2016 - 2017Fiscal Year Beginning Cash Balance Revenue Disbursements Ending Cash Balance2016 $251,391 $135,300 $152,244 $234,4472017 $234,447 $144,650 $132,160 $246,9372018 $246,937 $138,354 $118,124 $267,167

Average $244,258 $139,435 $134,176 $249,517Source: West Virginia OASIS

The Board’s annual revenues come from fees for application,licensure,andrenewals.Annualdisbursementsincludestaffsalariesandbenefits,utilities,and travelcosts. According to theBoard’sFY2017AnnualReport,thereare287licensees.

WestVirginiaandsurroundingstates’licensureandrenewalfeescanbeseeninTable2.ThoughKentuckyhasahigherinitiallicensurefee,WestVirginiahasthehighestrenewalfeeonanannualbasis.Whenadjustedforannualfees,WestVirginia’srenewalfeeis$100higherthanMarylandandatleastdoublethatoftherestoftheneighboringstates.

Table 2Board of Optometry Licensure Fees

for West Virginia and Surrounding StatesState InitialLicensureFee* RenewalFee* RenewalCycleKentucky $500 $200 AnnualMaryland $300 $600 BiennialOhio $175 $135 AnnualPennsylvania $25 $135 BiennialVirginia $250 $150-$200^ AnnualWestVirginia $300 $400 AnnualSource: State licensure boards’ websites and W.Va. Code of State Rules §14-5-2. * For fees with ranges, the fee depends on the type of license. ^ Virginia has two separate license fees for TPA-certified optometrist and non TPA-certified optometrist

The Board Resolves Complaints in a Timely Manner, but Status Reports Need to Be Sent in All Cases Within Six Months of the Complaint Being Filed.

TheLegislativeAuditorrevieweddisciplinarydataandcomplaintsinvestigatedbytheBoardforFY2016–2018.PerW. Va. Code of State Rules (CSR) 14-4-5.1, complaintsagainstlicenseescanbefiledwiththeBoardbyanyperson,firm,corporation,memberoftheBoard,orpublicofficial. TheBoardprovides a complaint formon itswebsite, though


Board of Optometry

The Board complies with closing complaints within the 18-month guideline.

complaintsmaybefiledinanywrittenform.Ofthe20grievancesfiledduringtheauditscope,noneresultedindisciplinaryactiontakenbytheBoard.ThisincludestwoongoingcomplaintsfromearlierinFY2018.Table 3 provides anoverviewof the complaints received, disciplinaryactiontaken,andaveragetimetoresolvethecomplaints.

Table 3Complaint Decision Statistics

FY 2016-2018

Fiscal Year Number of Complaints ReceivedNumber of

Disciplinary ActionsAverage Resolution

Time in Days2016 12 0 1472017 5 0 1172018 3 0 108

Source: Board of Optometry Complaint Statistics

According toW. Va. Code §30-1-5(c), each Chapter 30 boardis required to close a complaintwithin18monthsof the initialfiling.Furthermore,theBoardisrequiredtosendstatusreportstothecomplainantsixmonthsafterthecomplaintwasinitiallyfiledifthecasehasnotbeenresolvedpriortosixmonths.AsshowninTable3,theBoardcomplieswithclosingcomplaintswithinthe18-monthguideline.Duringthescopeoftheaudit,theBoardhadsixcasesinwhichstatusreportsweretobesenttothecomplainantsixmonthsafterthecomplaintwasinitiallyfiled.TheBoardadheredtothestatutoryrequirementonfouroccasions.The Board should comply with West Virginia Code §30-1-5(c) and submit reports to the party filing the complaint within six months after the complaint is initially filed.

The Board Has Established Continuing Education Requirements.

TheBoardhasestablishedcontinuingeducation(CE)requirementsforitslicensees.W. Va. CSR §14-10-3.1 states that individual licensees shall accrue aminimumof 43hours of continuing education for eachevennumbered,two-yearcycle.Table4providestheCErequirementsinWestVirginiaandthesurroundingstates.



The Board performs an audit of all licensees every two years.

Table 4Continuing Education Requirements for Optometrist

In Surrounding StatesState CE Hours* Renewal Period

Kentucky 15 AnnualMaryland 50 Biennial

Ohio 25 AnnualPennsylvania 30 BiennialVirginia 20 Annual

WestVirginia 43 BiennialSource: Each state’s licensing board website and regulations.* For hours with ranges, the number of hours depends on the type of license.

Licenseeshaveaperiodoftwoyearstoacquire43CEsrelevanttothepracticeofoptometry. Licenseesarerequiredtoutilizeatrackersystemtologthecoursestheyhavecompletedandsubmitthisinformationforreview.TheBoardperformsanauditofalllicenseeseverytwoyears.PertheBoardofOptometry:

The audit begins in July/August with a letter congratulating those who have met the criteria for CE. Those who do not have the appropriate number of hours in the database are sent an email listing the number of deficit hours in OE Tracker and a final deadline to get their paperwork turned in to OE Tracker. Once the deadline passes a list is developed with the deficit totals and presented to the Board to begin the complaint procedure for disciplinary action.

The Board Should Ensure Board Members Receive the Required Orientation Sessions.

Boardmembers are required to have a background in a varietyoffields.PerW. Va. Code §30-8-4(b),membershipmustconsistoffivelicensedoptometristsandtwocitizenmembers.AccordingtoW. Va. Code §30-1-2a (2),thechairperson,theexecutivedirectororthechieffinancialofficeroftheboardshallannuallyattendtheStateAuditor’sSeminaronRegulatoryBoards.TheExecutiveDirectorisincompliancebyattendingthisorientationin2016and2017.However,theBoard’sChairpersonhasbeenabsentfromtheannualorientationduringthosesameyears.Also,accordingtoW. Va. Code §30-1-2a (3),eachboardmembershallattendatleastoneseminarduringeachtermofoffice.Althoughthemajorityofboardmembers have attended required orientation, twomembers havenotyetattendedtheseminarduringtheircurrentandongoingterms.The


Board of Optometry

Because the Board only has one full-time staff member, efforts are taken to minimize the direct handling of funds.

StateAuditor’sSeminaronRegulatoryBoardshasnotyetoccurredfor2018,sothereisstillanopportunityforthisissuetoberectified.The Board’s chairperson should adhere to W. Va. Code §30-1-2a(2) and attend annually the Seminar for State Licensing Boards.

The Board’s Financial Management of Expenditures Lacks Internal Controls Because of an Inadequate Number of Staff; However, the Risk of Inappropriate Use of Resources Is Relatively Low.

The Board has one full-time staff member who serves as theexecutivedirector.Withonlyoneemployee,itisimpossibletosegregateduties for proper internal control. Segregation of duties is importantbecause it safeguards against improper use of loss of the Board’sresources.Inordertohaveadequatesegregationofduties,thereshouldbe controls in place that prevent one person from performing two ormorecontrolactivitiesassociatedwithpurchasingandreceivingrevenue,suchas authorizing transactions, receivingmerchandise, receivinganddepositingrevenue,recordingtransactions,andmaintainingcustodyofassets.

Asanexampleofappropriatesegregationofdutiesforhandlingcash, theWestVirginia State Treasurer specifies in itsCash Receipts Handbook for West Virginia Spending Units, “Unless otherwise authorized by the State Treasurer’s Office, an individual should not have the sole responsibility for more than one of the following cash handling components:”

• collection,• depositing,• disbursement,and• reconciling.

Because theBoardonlyhasone full-timestaffmember,effortsare taken tominimize the direct handling of funds. Upon receipt ofpaper checks, theBoard’s sole staffmember opens the envelopes andfiles checks in a folder. Staff then endorses the checkswith a rubberstamp,prepares thebankdepositslip,copies thechecks,andtakesthecheckstothebankfordeposit.Lastly,carboncopiesofthedepositslipare attached to a copyof theStateTreasurer’sOffice transmittal formwiththecopiesofthecheckstobefiledintoadepositrecordfoldertobeenteredintotheOASISsystem.ThevastmajorityoflicenserenewalfeesarepaidelectronicallythroughtheeGovsystemasapproximately7percentoflicenseespaywithapapercheck.InitiallicensureapplicationfeesareonlyacceptedbypapercheckastheBoardhasnotestablisheda

The Executive Director is in compli-ance by attending this orientation in 2016 and 2017. However, the Board’s Chairperson has been absent from the annual orientation during those same years.



Expenses incurred by the Board are documented in the P-card log and are reviewed as part of the financial report of each regularly scheduled board meeting. Upon final approval, documents are secured at the Board’s office for review and audit purposes.

The Board does not currently utilize the State Treasurer’s Office lockbox system, but would be willing to exam-ine and implement the program for future use.

paymentprocessthrougheGovforthe$300applicationfee.Additionally,oftheestimated$12,000collectedannuallyforlicenseverificationfees,approximately15percentispaidbycheck.TheBoarddoesnotcurrentlyutilizetheStateTreasurer’sOfficelockboxsystem,butwouldbewillingtoexamineandimplementtheprogramforfutureuse.Tominimizethehandlingofanyrevenue,theBoardshouldconsidertheutilizationoftheStateTreasurer’slockboxsystem.TheStateTreasurer’sOfficeprovidesalockboxoperationwherebyremittancescanbepickedupfromapostofficebox,openedand sorted, imaged,deposited, and the informationforwardedtotheBoardbytheTreasurer’sOfficeforafee.Useofthelockboxoperation helps tomitigate the risk of fraud and is beneficialtoboardswithlittleornostafftohandlesuchprocedures. Therefore, the Legislative Auditor recommends the Board consider utilizing the State Treasurer’s lockbox to further reduce risk.

Expendituresaremadeby theBoard through theWestVirginiaStateAuditor’sP-cardpoliciesandprocedures. Allitemswithavalueof $500 or more require prior approval from the board chairpersonand internal resources and statewide contracts areutilized topurchaseitemsorserviceswhenavailable.Theexecutivedirectorisresponsiblefor obtaining goods from the appropriate vendor and ensuring thatall required documentation is attached to each P-card transaction.The Board’s secretary-treasurer reviews all documentation for eachtransactionandtheexecutivedirectoruploadstheseitemstotheOASISsystem.ExpensesincurredbytheBoardaredocumentedintheP-cardlog and are reviewed as part of the financial report of each regularlyscheduledboardmeeting.Uponfinalapproval,documentsaresecuredattheBoard’sofficeforreviewandauditpurposes.OnMarch16th,2018,theWestVirginiaPurchasingDivisioncompletedanauditoftheBoardandhadnomaterialfindings.

Inordertoassesstheriskoffraudandgainareasonableassurancethat fraudhasnotoccurred,PERDexamined theBoard’s revenueandexpenditures. For revenue, PERD calculated the minimum expectedrevenue for the Board by multiplying annual fees by the number oflicensees forFY2016–2018and found thatactual revenueexceededexpectedrevenue. Therewouldbeconcern ifexpectedrevenuesweresignificantly higher than actual revenues andwould require additionalinquirybyPERD.Table5providesacomparisonofactualandexpectedrevenuesfortheBoard.


Board of Optometry

Table 5Board of Optometry

Expected and Actual RevenuesFY 2015-2018

Fiscal Year

Number of Active Licensees

Annual Renewal Fee

Expected Revenues

Actual Revenues

2016 285 $400 $114,000 $135,3002017 296 $400 $118,400 $144,6502018 299 $400 $119,600 $138,354

Source: PERD calculations based on each FY Board Annual Report which documents the Board’s active licensees.

PERD also calculated the percentage of low-risk expenditures.PERD evaluated the Board’s expenditures for FY 2016 – 2018 anddeterminedthat,onaverage,79percentoftheBoard’sexpensesconsistedof expected and required expenditures to vendors. The LegislativeAuditor’sopinionisthatwhentheBoard’srequiredexpendituresare90percentormoreoftheBoard’stotalannualexpenditures,thelikelihoodof fraudhavingoccurredon theexpenditureside is relatively low. If,however, expected/required expenditures are significantly below 90percent, then other expenditures are unduly high, which suggests thepossibilityoffraudulent,questionableorabusiveexpenditures.Table6showstheannualpercentageofexpectedandrequiredexpenditures.

Table 6Board of Optometry

Percentage of Expected and Required Expenditures

Fiscal Year Percent of Expected & Required Expenditures2016 722017 812018 83

Source: PERD calculations based on State Auditor’s Office data.

Since the percentage of expected/required expenditures were,on average, significantly below 90 percent, PERD conducted a detailreviewof theBoard’s totalexpendituresfromFY2016-2018 toassessthelikelihoodthatfraudoccurred.Uponexaminingtheseexpenditures,the Legislative Auditor determined that the Board’s expenditures toattend national conferences and annual board meetings held at theGreenbrierResortinWhiteSulphurSprings,WestVirginiacontributedto required/expectedexpendituresbeingbelow90percent. Tables7-9document theBoard’s travel for the annualAssociation ofRegulatory



BoardsofOptometry(ARBO)meeting, theFederationofAssociationsofRegulatoryBoards (FARB)meeting, and annual boardmeetings attheGreenbrierResort.TheLegislativeAuditorconcludesthatthetravelexpenseswerelegitimateandthatfraudhasnotlikelyoccurred;however,thereisconcernthattheseexpensesmaybeexcessive.

Table 7FY 2016 Board of Optometry Attributed Spending for Travel Out of State and the

GreenbrierDestination Reason Cost

GreenbrierResort FY2015and2016BoardMeetings $9,870

Seattle FY2015ARBONationalMeeting $5,611

Tampa FY2016FARBNationalMeeting $1,314

Boston FY2016ARBONationalMeeting $9,797

Source: OASIS*Legislative Auditor calculated attributed spending such as airfare, registration fees, meals, lodging, and miles traveled to and from the Greenbrier from the OASIS system.




Boston FY2016ARBONationalMeeting $1,052

WashingtonDC FY2017ARBONationalMeeting $5,324

SanAntonio FY2017FARBNationalMeeting $4,077



Board of Optometry

Consideration should be given to re-ducing the number of national confer-ences and/or reducing the number of individuals attending.




Washington,DC FY2017ARBONationalMeeting $643

Denver FY2018ARBONationalMeeting $5,594


Required/expectedexpendituresarethosethatarelegallyrequiredorcontractuallybinding;reasonablyexpectedoressentialforthenormaloperationofanagency.ItistheLegislativeAuditor’sopinionthatout-of-statetravelfornationalassociationmeetingscanassistboardmemberswith knowledge that may assist in better operations of the agency.However, the cost to have several board members and the executivedirector attend these conferences each year imposes a significant costforarelativelysmallboard.Considerationshouldbegiventoreducingthe number of national conferences and/or reducing the number ofindividualsattending.Thegainedknowledgefromthosewhoattendedcanbesharedwiththerestofthemembers.Forexample,theFY2016ARBOmeeting inBoston had four boardmembers and the executivedirector attend, theFY2017ARBOmeeting inWashington,D.C.hadthreeboardmembersandtheexecutivedirectorattendandtheFY2018ARBOmeeting inDenverhad fourboardmembers and the executivedirector attend. During the FY 2016 ARBO meeting, Boston hotelcharges for the fourdays spent in attendanceperpersonwere$1,094,theFY2017hotelchargesinWashington,D.C.forthreedaysperpersonwere $910,while the hotel charges for the three days at theFY2018ARBOmeetinginDenverwere$656perperson.Therefore, the Board may want to consider being more conservative in expenditures for attending national conferences.

Also,theLegislativeAuditorfindsthattheBoardisnotreimbursingtheexpensesincurredforannualboardmeetingsheldattheGreenbrierResortinamannerconsistentwithstatetravelpolicyasstipulatedinW.Va.§30-1-11(c). TheBoard’smeetingat theGreenbrierResort are inconjunctionwiththeWestVirginiaAssociationofOptometricPhysicians.AccordingtotheBoard,“The Board does this so licensees may observe a board meeting and ask questions. The Board also has a display at the

Also, the Legislative Auditor finds that the Board is not reimbursing the expenses incurred for annual board meetings held at the Greenbrier Re-sort in a manner consistent with state travel policy as stipulated in W. Va. §30-1-11(c).



It is implied that reimbursing lodg-ing expenses up to 300 percent of the standard lodging rates is for justifi-able reasons.

display hall so licensees may pick up information on regulations, such as CE requirements, license renewal instructions and any changes that have taken place in regulations.” TheBoard’sExecutiveDirectorisalsoatthedisplaytoanswerquestionslicenseesormembersofthepublicmayask.

The West Virginia Travel Rule 6.4 states “Employees are reimbursed for lodging up to the maximum per diem established by the federal government. Travelers may request reimbursement above the per diem rate, not to exceed 300 percent (300%) of the maximum per diem allowance.” During thescopeof theaudit, thestandard lodgingperdiemratesforWestVirginia rangedfrom$89-$93.GreenbrierroomratesreimbursedbytheBoardrangedfrom$325-$370pernight.Theseratesexceededthestandardlodgingratesevenwhenthe300%maximumallowance is applied. Additional costs for the Greenbrier meetingsincludeameetingroomandhospitalityitemsforthosewhoattend.BoardhospitalityexpendituresfortheFY2018Greenbriermeetingcostatotalof$554,whichalsoincludesa$169.35GreenbrierHistoricPreservationFee.Thehospitalityitemsprovidedincluded24brownies,24assortedcookies, coffee, decaf coffee, hot tea, 15 cans of soda, and 15 bottledwaters.

Itisimpliedthatreimbursinglodgingexpensesupto300percentofthestandardlodgingratesisforjustifiablereasons.TheLegislativeAuditor questions having an annual board meeting at the GreenbrierResortforthereasonsgivenbytheBoard,giventheexpenses.TheBoarddoesnothaveanydocumentationshowingthenumberoflicenseeswhoattendedtheGreenbriermeetings.The Board should evaluate the cost and benefits of these Greenbrier meetings to determine if they should be continued. However, if the Board continues having Greenbrier meetings, the Board must reimburse the actual lodging expenses consistent with the guidelines of the Travel Management Office of the Department of Administration, pursuant to W. Va. Code §30-1-11(c).

Conclusion

The Board complies with most of the general provisions ofChapter30.However,theBoardshouldadheretoW. Va. Code §30-1-2a(c)(2)andensurethattheChairpersonandExecutiveDirectorattendthe State Seminar onRegulatoryBoards annually. TheBoard shouldcomplywithW. Va. Code §30-1-5(c) andsendofficialstatusreportstocomplainantswithinsixmonthsafterthecomplaintisinitiallyfiled.Dueto the lack of staff, the Board does not have adequate segregation ofduties,however,stepshavebeentakentoreducetheriskoffraud.TheWestVirginiaStateTreasurer’sOfficelockboxshouldbeutilizedbytheBoardtoprocesslicensurefeesandannualapplicationandrenewalsto

The Legislative Auditor questions hav-ing an annual board meeting at the Greenbrier Resort for the reasons giv-en by the Board, given the expenses.


Board of Optometry

further reduce risk. Finally, theBoard shouldconsiderdecreasing thenumberofquestionableexpendituresforout-of-statetravelfornationalconferencesanddiscontinuinghavingoneofitsannualmeetingsattheGreenbrierResortunlessthereisevidencethatthebenefitstolicenseesexceedthecosts. However,ifthemeetingscontinuetheBoardshouldreimburse lodging expenses consistent with the polices of the TravelManagementOfficeoftheDepartmentofAdministration.

Recommendations

1. The Board should comply with West Virginia Code §30-1-5(c) and submit reports to the party filing the complaint within six months after the complaint is initially filed.

2. The Board’s chairperson should adhere to W. Va. Code §30-1-2a(2) and attend the Seminar for State Licensing Boards annually.

3. The Board should consider utilizing the West Virginia State Treasurer’s Office lockbox to process licensure fees and annual license application and renewal to further reduce risk.

4. The Board should consider decreasing the amount of expenditures for out-of-state national conferences.

5. The Board should consider discontinuing having one of its annual meetings at the Greenbrier Resort unless there is evidence that the benefits to licensees exceed the additional costs.

6. If the Greenbrier meetings are continued, the Board should reimburse lodging expenses consistent with the policies of the Travel Management Office of the Department of Administration.



The West Virginia Board of Optometry’s Website Needs Only Modest Improvements to Enhance User-Friendliness and Transparency.

Issue Summary

TheofficeoftheLegislativeAuditorconductedaliteraturereviewonassessmentsofgovernmentalwebsitesanddevelopedanassessmenttool to evaluateWestVirginia’s state agencywebsites (SeeAppendixC).Theassessmenttoollistsseveralwebsiteelements.Someelementsshouldbeincludedineverywebsite,whileotherelementssuchassocialmedialinks,graphics,andaudio/videofeaturesmaynotbenecessaryorpracticalforsomestateagencies.Table10indicatestheBoardintegrates56percentofthechecklistitemsinitswebsite.ThismeasureindicatesthattheBoardhasagoodwebsiteandonlymodestimprovementsinuser-friendlinessandtransparencyareneeded.

Table 10West Virginia State Board of Optometry

Website Evaluation ScoreSubstantial

ImprovementNeededMoreImprovement

NeededModestImprovement

NeededLittleorNo

ImprovementNeeded0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100%

56%Source: The Legislative Auditor’s review of the West Virginia State Board of Optometry website as of July 10, 2018.

The Board’s Website Scores Moderately High in User-Friendliness and Transparency

Inordertoactivelyengagewiththeagencyonline,citizensmustfirstbeabletoaccessandcomprehendtheinformationongovernmentwebsites. Therefore, government websites should be designed to beuser-friendly. A user-friendly website is understandable and easy tonavigatefrompagetopage.Governmentwebsitesshouldalsoprovidetransparency of an agency’s operation to promote accountability andtrust.

TheLegislativeAuditor reviewed theBoard’swebsite forbothuser-friendlinessandtransparencyandfoundthatthewebsiteisinneedofmodestenhancementsintheseareas(seeTable11).The Board may want to consider adding some elements that could be beneficial to the public.

ISSUE 2

The Board integrates 56 percent of the checklist items in its website. This measure indicates that the Board has a good website and only modest im-provements in user-friendliness and transparency are needed.


Board of Optometry

The Board’s website is easy to nav-igate as there is a link to every page on the top of the website; however, the website lacks a site map, social media links, and a foreign language accessi-bility tool.

Table 11Website Evaluation Score

Category Possible Points Agency Points PercentageUser-Friendly 18 10 56%Transparency 32 18 56%

Total 50 28 56%Source: The Legislative Auditor’s review of the Board’s website as of July 10, 2018.

The Board’s Website Is Navigable, But Additional User-Friendly Features Should Be Considered.

TheBoard’swebsiteiseasytonavigateasthereisalinktoeverypageonthetopof thewebsite;however, thewebsite lacksasitemap,socialmedialinks,andaforeignlanguageaccessibilitytool.AccordingtotheFlesch-KincaidReadingTest,theaveragereadabilityofthetextisona7thgradelevelforreadability,makingiteasytounderstand.

User-Friendly Considerations

Although some itemsmay not be practical for this board, thefollowingaresomeattributesthatcouldimproveuser-friendliness:

Foreign Language Accessibility –A link to translate allwebpagesintolanguagesotherthanEnglish.

Site Map –Alistofpagescontainedinawebsitethatcanbeaccessedbywebcrawlersandusers.

Online Survey/Poll – A short survey that pops up andrequestsuserstoevaluatethewebsite.

Social Media Links –Thewebsiteshouldcontainbuttonsthatallowuserstopostanagency’scontenttosocialmediapagessuchasFacebookandTwitter.

RSS Feeds –Thisallowssubscribers to receive regularlyupdated work (i.e. blog posts, news stories, audio/video,etc.)inastandardizedformat.



The Board’s website has 56 percent of the core elements that are necessary for a general understanding of the Board’s mission and performance. The Board’s website contains im-portant transparency features such as email contact information, its tele-phone number, and public records such as rules, disciplinary actions, and meeting minutes.

The Website Has Good Transparency Features but Some Improvements Can Be Made.

A website that is transparent should promoteaccountabilityandprovideinformationforcitizensabouthowwelltheBoard isperforming,aswellasencouragingpublicparticipation. TheBoard’swebsitehas56percentofthecoreelementsthatarenecessaryforageneralunderstandingoftheBoard’smissionandperformance.TheBoard’swebsitecontainsimportanttransparencyfeaturessuchasemailcontact information, its telephone number, and public records such asrules,disciplinaryactions,andmeetingminutes.

Transparency Considerations

TheBoardshouldconsiderprovidingadditionalelementstothewebsitetoimprovetheBoard’stransparency.Thefollowingaresomeattributesthatcouldbebeneficial:

Administrator(s) Biography –Abiographyexplainingtheadministrator(s)professionalqualificationsandexperience.

Privacy Policy –Aclearexplanationoftheagency/state’sonlineprivacypolicy.

Graphic Capabilities –Allows users to access relevantgraphicssuchasmaps,diagrams,etc.

Audio/Video Features – Allows users to access anddownloadrelevantaudioandvideocontent.

FOIA Information –InformationonhowtosubmitaFOIArequest,ideallywithanonlinesubmissionform.

Performance Measures/Outcomes –Apagelinkedtothehomepage explaining the agency’s performancemeasuresandoutcomes.

Website Updates – The website should have a websitestatusonscreenandideallyforeverypage.


Board of Optometry

Conclusion

The LegislativeAuditor finds only modest improvements areneeded to the Board’s website in the areas of user-friendliness andtransparency. The website can benefit from incorporating severalcommon features. TheBoardhaspertinentpublic informationon itswebsite including itsmissionstatement, rulesand regulations,andanagencyhistory.TheBoard’scontactinformationisalsoprovided,asaredownloadable itemssuchasannual licenserenewalforms. However,providing website users with additional elements and capabilities,as suggested in the report, would improve user-friendliness andtransparency.

Recommendation

7. The Board should make improvements to its website to provide a better online experience for the public.



The Performance Evaluation and Research Division (PERD) within theOfficeof theLegislativeAuditorconducted thisRegulatoryBoard Review of the West Virginia Board of Optometry (Board) asrequiredandauthorizedbytheWestVirginiaPerformanceReviewAct,Chapter4,Article10,oftheWest Virginia Code (WVC),asamended.ThepurposeoftheBoard,asestablishedbyitsmission,isto“ensurethatallapplicantsforlicensureandallDoctorsofOptometrycurrentlylicensed,practicetheirprofessioninamannerthatbenefitsandprotectsthepublic,andtoensurethatthehighestqualityoptometriceyeandvisioncareisprovidedinaprofessional,competentandethicalmanner.”

Objectives

TheobjectivesofthisregulatoryboardreviewaretoassesstheBoard’scompliancewith thegeneralprovisionsofChapter30,Article1, of theWest Virginia Code; theBoard’s enabling statute (WVC §30-8-etal.);andtheBoard’shandlingofcomplaints.Finally,itisalsotheobjective of the LegislativeAuditor to assess theBoard’swebsite foruser-friendlinessandtransparency.

Scope

TheregulatoryboardreviewincludedanassessmentoftheBoard’sfinancial internal controls; policy and procedures regarding internalcontrols and complaints;meetingminutes; complaint files from fiscalyears 2016 through 2018; complaint-resolution process; disciplinaryprocedures and actions; revenues and expenditures for the period offiscalyears2016through2018;continuingeducationrequirementsandverification;theBoard’scompliancewiththegeneralstatutoryprovisions(WVC §30-1-etal.)forregulatoryboardsandotherapplicablelaws;andkeyfeaturesoftheBoard’swebsite.

Methodology

PERDgatheredandanalyzedseveralsourcesofinformationandconductedauditprocedurestoassessthesufficiencyandappropriatenessoftheinformationusedasauditevidence.Theinformationgatheredandauditproceduresaredescribedbelow.

Testimonial evidence was gathered for this review through

Appendix ATransmittal Letter


Board of Optometry

interviewsordiscussionswiththeBoard’sstaffandconfirmedbywrittenstatements. PERD staffmademultiple visits to the Board’s office toreview files and meet with staff. PERD collected and analyzed theBoard’smeetingminutes,complaintdata,budgetaryinformation,annualreports,proceduresforinvestigatingandresolvingcomplaints,continuingeducation, and procedures for collecting revenue and disbursingexpenditures. Information was gathered from the Ohio, Virginia,Pennsylvania,Kentucky,andMarylandregulatoryboardregardingtheircontinuingeducationrequirementsandlicensefeestructures. TheLegislativeAuditoralsotestedtheBoard’sexpendituresforfiscalyears2016through2018toassessrisksoffraudontheexpenditureside.Thetestinvolveddeterminingiflow-riskexpenditureswereatleast90 percent of total expenditures. Some low-risk expenditures includevariouspayrollexpenses,boardmembercompensation,andofficerentandutilities.

Additionally,theLegislativeAuditorcomparedtheBoard’sactualrevenue to expected revenue inorder to assess the risksof fraud, andtoobtainreasonableassurance thatrevenuefiguresweresufficientandappropriate.Expectedrevenueswereapproximatedbyapplyinglicensefeestothenumberoflicenseesfortheperiodoffiscalyears2016through2018.

Inordertoevaluatestateagencywebsites,theLegislativeAuditorconducted a literature review of government websites, reviewed top-ranked government websites, and reviewed the work of groups thatrategovernmentwebsitesinordertoestablishamasterlistofessentialwebsite elements. TheBrookings Institute’s “2008 State and Federal E-Government in the United States,” and the Rutgers University’s2008 “U.S. States E-Governance Survey (2008): An Assessment of State Websites,” helped identify the top ranked states in regard toe-government.TheLegislativeAuditoridentifiedthreestates(Indiana,Maine,andMassachusetts)thatwererankedinthetop10inbothstudiesandreviewedall3states’mainportalsfortrendsandcommonelementsin transparency and open government. The LegislativeAuditor alsoreviewed a 2010 report from theWestVirginiaCenter onBudget andPolicythatwasusefulinidentifyingagroupofcoreelementsfromthemasterlistthatshouldbeconsideredforstatewebsitestoincreasetheirtransparencyande-governance.Itisunderstoodthatnoteveryitemlistedinthemasterlististobefoundinadepartmentoragencywebsitebecausesometechnologymaynotbepracticalorusefulforsomestateagencies.



Appendix BObjective, Scope and Methodolgy

The Performance Evaluation and Research Division (PERD) within the Office of the LegislativeAuditor conducted this Regulatory Board Review of theWest Virginia Board of Optometry (Board) asrequiredandauthorizedbytheWestVirginiaPerformanceReviewAct,Chapter4,Article10,of theWest Virginia Code (WVC),asamended.ThepurposeoftheBoard,asestablishedbyitsmission,isto“ensurethatallapplicantsforlicensureandallDoctorsofOptometrycurrentlylicensed,practicetheirprofessioninamannerthatbenefitsandprotectsthepublic,andtoensurethatthehighestqualityoptometriceyeandvisioncareisprovidedinaprofessional,competentandethicalmanner.”

Objectives

TheobjectivesofthisregulatoryboardreviewaretoassesstheBoard’scompliancewiththegeneralprovisionsofChapter30,Article1,oftheWest Virginia Code;theBoard’senablingstatute(WVC §30-8-etal.);andtheBoard’shandlingofcomplaints. Finally, it isalsotheobjectiveof theLegislativeAuditor toassesstheBoard’swebsiteforuser-friendlinessandtransparency.

Scope

The regulatory board review included an assessment of the Board’s financial internal controls;policy and procedures regarding internal controls and complaints;meetingminutes; complaint files fromfiscalyears2016through2018;complaint-resolutionprocess;disciplinaryproceduresandactions;revenuesandexpendituresfor theperiodoffiscalyears2016through2018;continuingeducationrequirementsandverification;theBoard’scompliancewiththegeneralstatutoryprovisions(WVC §30-1-etal.)forregulatoryboardsandotherapplicablelaws;andkeyfeaturesoftheBoard’swebsite.

Methodology

PERDgatheredandanalyzedseveralsourcesofinformationandconductedauditprocedurestoassessthesufficiencyandappropriatenessoftheinformationusedasauditevidence.Theinformationgatheredandauditproceduresaredescribedbelow.

TestimonialevidencewasgatheredforthisreviewthroughinterviewsordiscussionswiththeBoard’sstaffandconfirmedbywrittenstatements.PERDstaffmademultiplevisitstotheBoard’sofficetoreviewfilesandmeetwithstaff.PERDcollectedandanalyzedtheBoard’smeetingminutes,complaintdata,budgetaryinformation, annual reports, procedures for investigating and resolving complaints, continuing education,and procedures for collecting revenue and disbursing expenditures. Information was gathered from theOhio,Virginia,Pennsylvania,Kentucky,andMarylandregulatoryboardregardingtheircontinuingeducationrequirementsandlicensefeestructures. TheLegislativeAuditoralso testedtheBoard’sexpendituresforfiscalyears2016through2018toassessrisksoffraudontheexpenditureside.Thetestinvolveddeterminingiflow-riskexpenditureswereatleast90percentoftotalexpenditures.Somelow-riskexpendituresincludevariouspayrollexpenses,boardmembercompensation,andofficerentandutilities.

Additionally, theLegislativeAuditor compared theBoard’s actual revenue to expected revenue inordertoassesstherisksoffraud,andtoobtainreasonableassurancethatrevenuefiguresweresufficientand


Board of Optometry

appropriate.Expectedrevenueswereapproximatedbyapplyinglicensefeestothenumberoflicenseesfortheperiodoffiscalyears2016through2018.

Inordertoevaluatestateagencywebsites,theLegislativeAuditorconductedaliteraturereviewofgovernmentwebsites,reviewedtop-rankedgovernmentwebsites,andreviewedtheworkofgroupsthatrategovernmentwebsitesinordertoestablishamasterlistofessentialwebsiteelements.TheBrookingsInstitute’s“2008 State and Federal E-Government in the United States,”andtheRutgersUniversity’s2008“U.S. States E-Governance Survey (2008): An Assessment of State Websites,” helped identify the top ranked states inregardtoe-government.TheLegislativeAuditoridentifiedthreestates(Indiana,Maine,andMassachusetts)thatwererankedinthetop10inbothstudiesandreviewedall3states’mainportalsfortrendsandcommonelementsintransparencyandopengovernment.TheLegislativeAuditoralsorevieweda2010reportfromtheWestVirginiaCenteronBudgetandPolicythatwasusefulinidentifyingagroupofcoreelementsfromthemasterlistthatshouldbeconsideredforstatewebsitestoincreasetheirtransparencyande-governance.Itisunderstoodthatnoteveryitemlistedinthemasterlististobefoundinadepartmentoragencywebsitebecausesometechnologymaynotbepracticalorusefulforsomestateagencies.Therefore,theLegislativeAuditorcomparedtheBoard’swebsitetotheestablishedguidelinesforuser-friendlinessandtransparencysothattheBoardcandetermineifitisprogressinginstepwiththee-governmentmovementandifimprovementstoitswebsiteshouldbemade.

We conducted this performance audit in accordancewith generally accepted government auditingstandards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriateevidencetoprovideareasonablebasisforourfindingsandconclusionsbasedonourauditobjectives.Webelievethattheevidenceobtainedprovidesareasonablebasisforourfindingsandconclusionsbasedonourauditobjectives.



West Virginia State Board of Optometry

User-Friendly Description Total Points PossibleTotal Agency

Points

Criteria The ease of navigation from page to pagealongwiththeusefulnessofthewebsite. 18 10

Individual Points Possible

Individual Agency Points

SearchTool Thewebsiteshouldcontainasearchbox(1),preferablyoneverypage(1). 2points 2

HelpLink

Thereshouldbea link thatallowsusers toaccessaFAQsection(1)andagencycontactinformation(1)onasinglepage.Thelink’stextdoesnothavetocontainthewordhelp,but it should contain language that clearlyindicates that the user can find assistanceby clicking the link (i.e. “How do I…”,“Questions?”or“Needassistance?”)

2points 2

Foreignlanguageaccessibility

A link to translate all webpages intolanguagesotherthanEnglish. 1 point 0

ContentReadabilityThe website should be written on a 6th-7th grade reading level. The Flesch-KincaidTest is widely used by Federal and Stateagenciestomeasurereadability.

Nopoints,seenarrative

SiteFunctionalityThewebsiteshouldusesansseriffonts(1),thewebsiteshouldincludebuttonstoadjustthefontsize(1)andresizingoftextshouldnotdistortsitegraphicsortext(1).

3points 1

SiteMap

A list of pages contained in awebsite thatcanbeaccessedbywebcrawlersandusers.TheSiteMapactsasanindexoftheentirewebsiteandalinktothedepartment’sentiresiteshouldbelocatedonthebottomofeverypage.

1point 0

MobileFunctionalityTheagency’swebsiteisavailableinamobileversion (1) and/or the agency has createdmobileapplications(apps)(1).

2points 1

NavigationEverypageshouldbelinkedtotheagency’shomepage(1)andshouldhaveanavigationbaratthetopofeverypage(1).

2points 2

FAQSection Apagethatliststheagency’smostfrequentaskedquestionsandresponses. 1point 1

Appendix CWebsite Criteria Checklist and Points System


Board of Optometry


FeedbackOptionsApagewhereuserscanvoluntarily submitfeedback about the website or particularsectionofthewebsite.

1point 1

Onlinesurvey/poll A short survey that pops up and requestsuserstoevaluatethewebsite. 1point 0

SocialMediaLinksThe website should contain buttons thatallow users to post an agency’s content tosocial media pages such as Facebook andTwitter.

1point 0

RSSFeedsRSSstandsfor“ReallySimpleSyndication”and allows subscribers to receive regularlyupdatedwork(i.e.blogposts,newsstories,audio/video,etc.)inastandardizedformat.

1point 0

Transparency Description Total Points PossibleTotal Agency

Points

Criteria

A website which promotes accountabilityandprovidesinformationforcitizensaboutwhat the agency is doing. It encouragespublicparticipationwhilealsoutilizingtoolsandmethodstocollaborateacrossalllevelsofgovernment.

32 18

Individual Points Possible

Individual Agency Points

Email Generalwebsitecontact. 1point 1PhysicalAddress Generaladdressofstageagency. 1point 1PhoneNumber Correctphonenumberofstateagency. 1point 1

LocationofAgencyHeadquarters

The agency’s contact page should includean embeddedmap that shows the agency’slocation.

1point 0

Administrativeofficials

Names (1) and contact information (1) ofadministrativeofficials. 2points 2

Administrator(s)biography

Abiographyexplainingtheadministrator(s)professionalqualificationsandexperience. 1point 0

Privacypolicy A clear explanation of the agency/state’sonlineprivacypolicy. 1point 0




PublicRecords

The website should contain all applicablepublic records relating to the agency’sfunction.Ifthewebsitecontainsmorethanoneofthefollowingcriteriatheagencywillreceivetwopoints:• Statutes• Rulesand/orregulations• Contracts• Permits/licensees• Audits• Violations/disciplinaryactions•MeetingMinutes• Grants

2points 2

Complaintform Aspecificpagethatcontainsaformtofileacomplaint(1),preferablyanonlineform(1). 2points 2

Budget Budgetdataisavailable(1)atthecheckbooklevel(1),ideallyinasearchabledatabase(1). 3points 2

Mission statement The agency’s mission statement should belocatedonthehomepage. 1point 1

CalendarofeventsInformation on events, meetings, etc. (1)ideallyimbeddedusingacalendarprogram(1).

2points 1

e-Publications Agency publications should be online (1)anddownloadable(1). 2points 2

AgencyOrganizationalChart

Anarrativedescribingtheagencyorganization(1), preferably in a pictorial representationsuchasahierarchy/organizationalchart(1).

2points 1

Graphiccapabilities Allows users to access relevant graphicssuchasmaps,diagrams,etc. 1point 0

Audio/videofeatures Allows users to access and downloadrelevantaudioandvideocontent. 1point 0

FOIAinformationInformationonhowtosubmitaFOIArequest(1),ideallywithanonlinesubmissionform(1).

2points 0

Performancemeasures/outcomes

Apage linked to the homepage explainingthe agency’s performance measures andoutcomes.

1 point 0


Board of Optometry


AgencyhistoryTheagency’swebsiteshouldincludeapageexplaining how the agency was created,whatithasdone,andhow,ifapplicable,hasitsmissionchangedovertime.

1point 1

WebsiteupdatesThewebsite should have awebsite updatestatus on screen (1) and ideally for everypage(1).

2points 0

Job Postings/links toPersonnel Division website

The agency should have a section onhomepage for open job postings (1) anda link to the application page PersonnelDivision(1).

2points 1



Appendix DAgency Response


Board of Optometry



Building 1, Room W-314, State Capitol Complex, Charleston, West Virginia 25305

telephone: 1-304-347-4890 | www.legis.state.wv.us /Joint/PERD/perd.cfm | fax: 1- 304-347-4939

Documents

REGULATORY BOARD REVIEW BOARD OF OPTOMETRYREGULATORY BOARD REVIEW BOARD OF OPTOMETRY September 2018 PE 18-06-612 AUDIT OVERVIEW The West Virginia Board of Optometry Complies With Most