To ensure it is providing adequate oversight of school district construction projects, the division should develop and document an overall strategy that establishes specific expectations for conducting site visits and monitoring construction. The division should then record and compare its actual visits and monitoring efforts to its planned actions. The division should document explanations for any deviations from its plans.
DSA finalized its site visit goals for all projects and provided staff training on this subject in November 2012. As part of this process, the division developed a monitoring tool to record and compare actual site visits by its field engineers to the policies requiring regular site visits. The monitoring system has been established to compile site visit data and compare to site visit goals. In February 2013, DSA conducted additional staff training that included: (1) using the monitoring system to generate data on field activities; and, (2) procedures for ensuring that site visit goals are met using the available data.
The division provided evidence of its site visit goals, monitoring tool, and the February 2013 training mentioned above. Additionally, in response to another recommendation the division provided a tool showing how it reviews its staffing levels in relation to its site visit goals.
The division conducted training in November 2012 on its objectives for conducting site visits based on project characteristics. For example, for new building construction the division expects to visit a project inspector every four to eight weeks. Additionally, the division has developed a monitoring tool in order to record actual site visits completed by its field engineers and to allow it to compare those visits to the number of site visits expected. According to General Services, the division is developing a two-phase staff training program that will include using the monitoring system to generate data on field activities and procedures for ensuring that site visit goals are met using the available data. The division expects to conduct the training in the first quarter of 2013. (See 2013-406, p. 41)
†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.