Report 2011-030 All Recommendation Responses

Report 2011-030: State Bar of California: Its Lawyer Assistance Program Lacks Adequate Controls for Reporting on Participating Attorneys (Release Date: May 2011)

Recommendation #1 To: Bar of California, State

The assistance program should take steps to better gauge its effectiveness. For example, it could measure how long its participants remain in the program and assess the program's impact on any further actions that disciplinary bodies impose on these attorneys. Further, if the assistance program believes that the effectiveness of the program is better measured through other means, it should develop these alternative measures and assess the program's effectiveness in meeting its stated goals.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2013

The State Bar identified and implemented performance measures. Please see supporting documentation.

  • Completion Date: December 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented


Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From September 2012

The State Bar's Office of Budget & Performance Analysis will work with LAP program management and the program oversight committee to define and report performance measures for the program.

  • Estimated Completion Date: December 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Not Fully Implemented


Recommendation #2 To: Bar of California, State

The assistance program should ensure that case managers are submitting to the appropriate entity the required reports in a timely manner, as required by its policies. Specifically, the assistance program should make certain that the new automated process for tracking and monitoring case managersí reporting of noncompliance is implemented properly and is being used as†intended.

1-Year Agency Response

The assistance program implemented an automated mechanism to assist the director, case managers, and administrative assistants in tracking and monitoring the immediate report filing process. (See 2013-406, p. 165)

  • Response Date: July 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented


Recommendation #3 To: Bar of California, State

To make certain that case managers treat consistently the noncompliance issues that do not require immediate reports to disciplinary bodies, the assistance program should finish implementing its case file review process. Further, the assistance program should develop guidelines to help case managers determine when to submit noncompliance issues to the evaluation committee.

1-Year Agency Response

According to the State Bar, it has fully implemented its annual case review process, which requires case managers to meet on a monthly basis and review a random selection of case files. The review process involves an assessment of each selected case and a discussion of any changes that may be required. At the end of the case review process, the case management supervisor is required to follow up to ensure each case manager has made the necessary changes. In addition, the assistance program has developed guidelines to help case managers determine when to submit noncompliance issues to the evaluation committee. (See 2013-406, p. 166)

  • Response Date: July 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented


All Recommendations in 2011-030

Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.