accounting, loan, applicant and lessee lists, land inventory, beneficiary demographic data, and leasing activities. The first step would include retaining a consultant's services to assess DHHL's data and analysis needs and to recommend a feasible management information system. The system is needed for daily operations, periodic reporting. Such a system would provide more timely data. As the accuracy of data input increases, the system will reflect this.
a. Finding: DHHL has not notified applicants who filed since June 1981 as to whether their applications have been approved (page 53).
Comment: Letters of notification to each applicant not previously notified will be sent as the process of verification of native Hawaiian ancestry is completed. This process was delayed at the time of the draft report audit because DHHL applicant data base information was being transferred from one system to a word processor. DHHL is currently making positive progress in terms of resolving this problem.
b. Finding: There is no system of application accountability numbers whereby a single series of numbers is used and a number is assigned once to an application (page 53).
Comment: A new application procedure is being established which will satisfy this concern. Internal procedures need to be finalized before implementation.
c. Finding: DHHL does not have current addresses for a large number of applicants and attempts to contact the individuals have not been successful (page 53).
Comment: A key problem has been maintaining updated addresses for DHHL applicants. Rules provide that each applicant be contacted every two years. These biennium contacts and periodic area screenings help to identify applicants whose mail cannot be delivered because of a change of address.
DHHL maintains a mail return file for followup by staff. Lack of manpower has been a problem. The current plan is to conduct segmented screenings to comply with the biennium contact requirement and keep the mail return followup manageable. For example a segmented system of contacts would result in 300 mailings each month, rather than 7,500 mailings at one time every two years.
d. Finding: The Hawaiian Homes Commission should establish policies and procedures to drop applicants from the eligibility lists or penalize them after reasonable efforts to verify whereabouts and confirm interest are unsuccessful (pp. 56-57).
Comment: Interest and commitment are at a high level at the time of application. This decreases as the length of time on the waiting list increases. When leases are made available, the applicant is asked to decide interest within 30 days after waiting for several years. This is a major decision involving a large financial investment and possibly relocation. The current procedure of placing applicants on an inactive status provides DHHL with opportunities to identify the effective (i.e., interested and committed) waiting list. This procedure was authorized in 1977, became operational in 1980, and provides for an inactive list. At the present time, DHHL has no desire to drop applicants entirely from eligibility lists.
e. Finding: Question as to whether 1952 list of Waimea ranch applicants received proper notification when the list was cancelled on May 14, 1956 (pp. 55-56).