Report 2013-302/2013-303 Recommendation 19 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 #19 To: Court of Appeal, First District

The first and fifth districts should implement procedures to ensure that they consistently document their evaluation and selection process for procurements.

Agency Response*

In addition to the measures described in the courts response of February 14, 2014, the court has finalized a checklist and created a filing system to aid court staff procuring goods and services in consistently documenting their evaluation and selection process. A copy of this checklist has today been e-mailed to Aaron Fellner of your office.

  • Response Type†: 6-Month
  • Completion Date: May 2014
  • Response Date: June 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented


Agency Response*

All court staff involved in purchasing have been verbally instructed to review and follow the updated Judicial Branch Contracting Manual (JCBM) and the Local Contracting Manual for the Court of Appeal, First District (LCM), which are comprehensive. When there are questions about the manuals requirements, the AOC Business Services office can be contacted for assistance. There will be additional focus on and review of each procurement/contract for compliance with the JBCM and LCM. A draft checklist is in the process of finalization and will mirror the requirements of the JBCM and LCM.

  • Response Type†: 60-Day
  • Completion Date: January 2014
  • Response Date: February 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

The first district has indicated that it is developing a checklist that will include steps court staff must take to ensure that they consistently document their evaluation and selection process for procurements. However, the checklist has yet to be finalized and used by court staff to procure goods and services.

  • Auditee did not address all aspects of the recommendation

All Recommendations in 2013-302/2013-303

†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