Director Connie Munn defends COGs partnership as senators press on meal wait lists and $800,000 fund use

Director Connie Munn and Department of Aging staff told an oversight committee that a draft report recommending structural changes to how aging services are delivered needs further review, as members pressed the agency to explain why $800,000 in state funding released last year was largely unused while some regions reported waiting lists for home-delivered meals.

The committee convened to review a draft report the staff said grew from a two-year review of programs and code updates. “We are serving 1 of the fastest growing populations in South Carolina,” Director Connie Munn said, urging caution about reorganizing both the state unit and the area agencies on aging (AAAs) at the same time because of potential staff turnover and service disruptions.

Why it matters: Senators raised concerns that moving AAAs out from under councils of governments (COGs) — a recommendation in the draft report — could harm service delivery where COGs currently provide transportation, workforce development and matching funds. Members asked the committee to pause on any structural change until a procurement-funded study is complete and its findings reviewed.

Funding and wait lists: Senators pressed the department for specifics about a state release of $800,000 last April intended to shore up home-delivered meal programs. Saida Bowman, Department staff, said the department released the funds but only two COGs drew them down; just 17% (about $133,000) of the $800,000 was used. Bowman told the committee that federal funding arrived soon after the state release and South Carolina law requires federal funds to be spent before state funds for the same purpose, which affected local spending decisions. “We reached out to the attorney general’s office for guidance,” Bowman said, and the department included the attorney general’s opinion as an attachment to the committee handout.

Senator Young (identified in the transcript) pressed the agency on the apparent mismatch between unused allocated funds and waiting lists. He cited one region in the handout that showed a waiting-list figure of 2,159 service slots as of 02/28/2026 while that region had spent none of its allocation. “I don’t understand why there’s money that’s just sitting there and we have seniors in South Carolina that need a meal,” the senator said.

The department answered that timing, contracting cycles and the federal-before-state rule can create misleading snapshots: when federal dollars become available after state funds are released, agencies may spend the federal funds first and delay drawing the state dollars until federal funds are exhausted. The department also described monitoring practices, quarterly and sometimes monthly review meetings with AAAs, corrective action plans when problems appear, and the ability to pursue a de-designation process to change a region’s AAA if performance issues persist.

Ombudsman and oversight: Senators also asked about the long-term care ombudsman program, which the department contracts regionally through AAAs. Munn said ombudsmen are essential and that Administration for Community Living guidance informs staffing targets (roughly one ombudsman per 2,000 beds); she said funding limits make adequate coverage difficult in many areas.

Next steps: Committee members agreed to move the draft report to the full oversight committee next week for further review, and to ask the audit council for focused follow-up on highlighted items — including the use of the $800,000, regional spending patterns, and recommendation 16 (the COG governance question). The committee deferred final action on recommendation 16 until the pending efficiency study is complete.

The hearing transcript includes multiple references to area agency directors and providers present for the briefing (Tim Womack, Tish Scotland, Sheila Bell Ford and Andrew Boozer) and notes an attorney-general opinion attached to the department’s materials.

Ending: The committee voted informally to forward the draft to the full oversight committee for a more in-depth review and potential audit follow-up; committee staff will provide members additional county-level breakdowns and the department expects to finalize the procurement for the study vendor imminently.