Northampton County Council orders audit of Gracedale retention-bonus funds, sets May 30 deadline

Northampton County Council on March 20 voted to request an audit of funds set aside for retention bonuses at the county nursing facility Gracedale, amending an initial 20-day deadline to no later than May 30, 2025. The vote followed more than two hours of discussion about the scope, timing and who should perform the review.

Council member Michael Brown introduced the resolution asking the Northampton County Controller to prepare and submit an audit of the funds related to Resolution 70-22. Council members pressed for a quick answer after reports that employees were told retention bonuses would not be paid as originally intended. "Employees are being told they're not getting these monies," Council member James Warren said, arguing for urgency.

Northampton County Controller Cerinsky told the council the controller's office could not complete the requested work in 20 days. "The controller's office will not be able to complete that in 20 days," she said, and recommended changing the deadline to late May. She described the requested work as an "agreed-upon procedures" review rather than a full financial audit, saying staff would examine not only financial records but also who received bonuses and how disbursements were made.

Controller staff provided details about year-end obligations and staffing that shaped the timeline. Cerinsky said the controller's year-end work requires substantial hours and staff time and that, based on historical records and current workload, the office believed it could complete the agreed-upon procedures review by May 30, 2025. She identified senior lead auditor Stacy Duke and deputy controller Mark Arndt as staff involved in the work and said the review would begin with an AUP (agreed-upon procedures) letter outlining the scope after a meeting between council and the controller's office.

Several council members proposed alternatives, including using an outside audit firm to meet the shorter deadline if the council insisted on faster timing. Council member Ron Kraft moved to amend the resolution to set the deadline to May 30, 2025, or earlier if the controller could finish sooner; that amendment was adopted. Council discussion repeatedly returned to the central facts the audit seeks to clarify: how roughly $10 million set aside under Resolution 70-22 (the Gracedale retention bonus allocation) was distributed, whether those funds were used as intended, and whether any employees were excluded.

County staff also spoke during the discussion. A county official, identified in the meeting as Mr. Baron, said he had not reviewed the specific allegations and that HR handled payroll disbursements. "I haven't read the specifics of the complaint. I get complaints all the time. I don't know the specific person involved," he said.

After debate and the amendment of the deadline, the council voted 8-1 to approve the resolution as amended. Council President Kegan, Kraft, Vargo Heffner, Warren, Capraro, Giovanni, Gaffredo and Heckman voted yes; Brown voted no.

The council's request directs the controller to provide a full analysis of funds set aside for retention bonuses from the American Rescue Plan Act for Gracedale employees (excluding the Gracedale administrator, director of nursing and assistant director of nursing), show how and when any retention bonuses were dispersed and identify any of the monies from Resolution 70-22 that remain or were used for other purposes. The controller's office said the next step will be a meeting between council and the controller to agree on the specific procedures the review will follow; the controller expects to deliver the work by May 30, 2025, or earlier if possible.

The review aims to clarify competing accounts presented to council and address employees' concerns about promised bonuses. The council did not direct that an outside firm be hired; members left that option on the table if the office could not meet the May 30 timeframe or if council subsequently requested an independent review.