Report 2010-116 Recommendation 6 Responses

Report 2010-116: Sex Offender Commitment Program: Streamlining the Process for Identifying Potential Sexually Violent Predators Would Reduce Unnecessary or Duplicative Work (Release Date: July 2011)

Recommendation #6 To: State Hospitals, Department of

To reduce costs for unnecessary evaluations, Mental Health should either issue a regulation or seek a statutory amendment to clarify that when resolving a difference of opinion between the two initial evaluators of an offender, Mental Health must seek the opinion of a fourth evaluator only when a third evaluator concludes that the offender meets SVP criteria.

Agency Response*

Previously reported on 10/2/2014 that this will not be implemented.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Response Date: September 2015

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement


Agency Response*

DSH will not seek regulations or a statutory amendment clarifying that when resolving a difference of opinion between two initial evaluations a fourth evaluation will be conducted only when the third is positive. Based on significant reduction in CDCR referrals and the scarcity of cost savings DSH will obtain two independent evaluations to resolve cases where there is a difference of opinion.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Response Date: October 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement


Agency Response*

As previously reported, DSH has begun the approval process for a proposed regulation to seek the opinion of a fourth evaluator only when the third evaluator concludes the offender meets SVP criteria. It is anticipated the proposed regulation will be submitted to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) by the end of December 2013.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Estimated Completion Date: December 2014
  • Response Date: November 2013

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Not Fully Implemented


Agency Response*

The Department of State Hospitals (DSH) has begun the approval process for a proposed regulation which will be sent to the Office of Administrative Law to seek the opinion of a fourth evaluator only when a third evaluator concludes that the offender meets SVP criteria.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Estimated Completion Date: Unknown
  • Response Date: November 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Not Fully Implemented


All Recommendations in 2010-116

†Response Type refers to the interval in which the auditee is providing the State Auditor with their status in implementing recommendations made in an audit report. Auditees must submit a response regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year or subsequent to one year.

*Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader