Report 2013-302/2013-303 Recommendation 10 Responses
Report 2013-302/2013-303: Judicial Branch Procurement: Semiannual Reports to the Legislature Are of Limited Usefulness, Information Systems Have Weak Controls, and Certain Improvements in Procurement Practices Are Needed (Release Date: December 2013)
Recommendation #10 To: Supreme Court of California
The AOC, the Supreme Court, and the first, second, and fourth districts should implement procedures to ensure that they follow a competitive process for their procurements when required.
1-Year Agency Response
The Court developed and implemented a comprehensive checklist to ensure the documentation of fair and reasonable pricing, evaluation and selection processes, and justifications and approvals for sole-source purchases are addressed going forward. The checklist was forwarded to the email address below on December 11, 2014.
- Completion Date: July 2014
- Response Date: December 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented
6-Month Agency Response
This will be fully implemented at the same time the AOC implements that changes in the procedures.
- Estimated Completion Date: 12/31/2014
- Response Date: July 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented
60-Day Agency Response
Will ensure going forward that when it is determined that the pricing is fair and reasonable, documentation for such determination is maintained in the appropriate procurement file.
- Completion Date: December 2013
- Response Date: February 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented
The Supreme Court has developed a draft checklist to ensure it adheres to procurement requirements. However, the Supreme Court has not yet finalized the document or used it when entering into new contracts.
Agency responses received are posted verbatim.