Most Recent Reports

Report 2012-119: California Department of Veterans Affairs: It Has Initiated Plans to Serve Veterans Better and More Cost-Efficiently, but Further Improvements Are Needed

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 09 May 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our audit of the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) highlighted the following:

Budget constraints and licensing restrictions have resulted in unused space in some of the veterans homes.
CalVet has not maximized its ability to generate revenue for the care provided to the veterans residing in its homes.
State laws and CalVet policies limit its ability to recover the full cost of providing care to veterans while they are living at a home and from offsetting these costs with funds collected from veterans' estates after they pass away.
Even though it has taken steps to utilize unused space to generate revenue through leases, CalVet does not have a formal process for evaluating opportunities to better utilize unused space.
CalVet does not monitor its sole public�private partnership agreement with another entity involving unused space; therefore, it is unable to evaluate the success of the agreement.
Legal restrictions may limit its ability to fully utilize the unused space at the veterans homes.
To increase its outreach efforts within its limited personnel resources, CalVet uses technology�based strategies to reach a larger number of veterans.
CalVet could benefit from analyzing its current purchasing model and strengthening the oversight of its purchasing practices.

Report 2012-109: City of San Diego: Although It Generally Followed Requirements for Reviewing Permits, It Could Do More to Protect Historical Resources and to Notify the Public Properly About Its Actions

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our review of the permit review process for the City of San Diego (San Diego) found that its Development Services Department (Development Services):

Generally followed San Diego's permit review process.
Did not collect sufficient information to ensure that all appropriate projects underwent reviews to determine whether the project sites possess historical resources. Specifically, of the 19 applications for projects in San Diego that we examined, five had incomplete information on historical resources, and in 10 the information provided conflicted with the records of the County of San Diego's assessor/recorder/county clerk.
Did not consistently adhere to the City of San Diego Municipal Code when approving four of the 10 construction changes we reviewed.
Did not make certain that the public receives mandatory notices about environmental determinations for approved projects.
- For three of the six projects we reviewed that were subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, Development Services filed the Notice of Determination between 12 business days and more than 90 business days late.
- Development Services does not post a Notice of Right to Appeal Environmental Determination for projects that have been reviewed by hearing officers because it believes it is not required to do so.
Did not verify that each employee required to complete a Statement of Economic Interests, commonly known as Form 700, submits the form at the appropriate time. Specifically, four of the 15 Development Services designated employees we selected for review submitted their Form 700, required upon assuming or leaving office, between one month and more than 12 months late.
Our review of the City of San Diego's Ethics Commission found that it does not ensure employees who must attend ethics training do so biennially by March 31, as the policy of the San Diego City Council requires. Six of the seven employees we selected for review attended the required ethics training between four and 18 months after the March 31 deadline.

Report 2012-110: Special Interest License Plate Funds: The State Has Foregone Certain Revenues Related to Special Interest License Plates and Some Expenditures Were Unallowable or Unsupported

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our audit of the special interest license plate (special plate) programs and some of the related funds highlighted the following:

The California Department of Motor Vehicles (Motor Vehicles) does not ensure that it has collected the appropriate amount of fees that are due for special plates.
- Despite being required to collect annual retention fees on inactive special plates, it only collects these fees for a maximum of four years and only when plate holders notify Motor Vehicles of their intent to reuse them.
- It did not collect an estimated $12 million in revenues from such fees during fiscal years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
- It potentially undercharged some special plate owners by a total of nearly $10.2 million during fiscal years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
- It has been inaccurate in the charges used to recover its administrative costs from special plate programs--during fiscal years 2009-10 through 2011-12 it overcharged the California Environmental License Plate Fund $2.1 million annually for personalized plates.
- It did not recover net administrative fees of roughly $1.1 million during fiscal years 2009-10 through 2011-12 for other special plates because it continues to use the per-plate administrative cost information it developed when certain programs were first established.
We identified weaknesses in how money was being spent from the special plate funds.
- The California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) did not monitor its $2.5 million contract with the California Fire Fighter Joint Apprenticeship Committee to ensure the training called for by the contract was delivered as specified.
- Cal EMA spent Antiterrorism Fund money in a manner inconsistent with the purposes state law establishes--it exceeded the 5 percent administrative cap in some years and it used over 10 percent of the expenditures we reviewed for unrelated purposes.
- Some state agencies could not always provide adequate support for amounts they charged to special plate funds or could not support their rationale for such charges. For example, the California Department of Food and Agriculture could not provide adequate support for $896,000 in expenses.
- The California Natural Resources Agency did not submit required annual and triennial reports to the governor and Legislature that provide pertinent information about program performance.
- The California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board did not identity and notify all individuals eligible for the Memorial Scholarship Program by the date required by law--ultimately only 13 of the 43 identified eligible individuals plus three other individuals who were not screened for eligibility participated.

Report I2009-0640: California Department of Transportation: Caltrans Employees Engaged in Inexcusable Neglect of Duty, Received Overpayment for Overtime, Falsified Test Data, and Misappropriated State Property

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our investigation at the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) substantiated the following:

A supervisor neglected his duty to supervise two technicians, which facilitated their being able to get paid for work they did not perform.
Two technicians improperly claimed overtime and differential pay for work not performed, costing the State an estimated $13,788 in overpayments.
Caltrans employees engaged in 11 incidents of data falsification--10 of the incidents involved one of the technicians, while the remaining incident involved an engineer who reviewed testing data collected by that technician.
Caltrans could not identify the engineer who falsified the data.
The supervisor improperly used Caltrans property by taking it to land that he owned with help from two technicians and other subordinate employees.

Report 2012-001: State of California: Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2012

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

The California State Auditor just released report 2012-001: State of California: Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2012.

Report 2012-001.1: State of California: Internal Control and Compliance Audit Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

The California State Auditor just released report 2012-001.1: State of California: Internal Control and Compliance Audit Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012.

Report 2012-002: State of California: Federal Compliance Audit Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

The California State Auditor just released report 2012-002: State of California: Federal Compliance Audit Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012.

Report 2012-117: State Athletic Commission: Its Ongoing Administrative Struggles Call Its Future Into Question

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our audit of the State Athletic Commission (commission) and the Department of Consumer Affairs (Consumer Affairs) highlighted the following:

Because the commission's former executive officer did not promptly inform the commissioners of the commission's revenue deficiencies and the commissioners did not take prompt action, the commission ended fiscal year 2011-12 with a fund balance of just $23,000--enough to cover only three days of operating costs.
The commission has no long-term plan to guide it into solvency. Its July 2012 solvency plan--intended to be a short-term effort to control costs--includes changes that may be impractical and too drastic.
The commission failed in its responsibility to manage its financial and administrative operations.
- It did not adequately track information critical to develop and adhere to an annual budget and was likely not fully aware of how events it regulated affected its financial condition.
- It failed to ensure it receives all the revenue that it is due from taxes, assessments, and fees it assesses on event promoters and athletes.
The commission lacks assurance that it has consistently protected the health, safety, and welfare of athletes as the law requires--many of the 12 event files we reviewed could not demonstrate that inspectors performed necessary regulatory functions at events.
The commission has not effectively managed the Boxers' Pension Plan (pension plan).
- It has not ensured that the vast majority of boxers receive the benefits to which they are entitled.
- For at least the last five fiscal years, it failed to transfer pension plan revenue from the Boxers' Pension Fund into its higher-earning investment account.
- It spent nearly 88 percent of annual contributions on its administration from 2009 through 2011 when state law limits the administrative expenses to 20 percent of the prior two years' average annual contributions.

Report 2012-301: Judicial Branch Procurement: Six Superior Courts Generally Complied With the Judicial Branch Contracting Law, but They Could Improve Some Policies and Practices

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:00:00 GMT

Our pilot audit for the superior courts in Napa, Orange, Sacramento, Stanislaus, Sutter, and Yolo counties and our review of the Judicial Branch Contracting Manual (judicial contracting manual) highlighted the following:

The judicial contracting manual does not require that court entities give preference to small businesses bidding on information technology procurements, which is inconsistent with the Public Contract Code.
The Administrative Office of the Courts' (AOC) Semiannual Report on Contracts for the Judicial Branch for the Reporting Period January 1 Through June 30, 2012 (semiannual report), was neither accurate nor complete with respect to data from the superior courts.
Each of the six courts we visited generally demonstrated good contracting practices and complied with the judicial contract law.
Although the courts' local manuals generally comply with the judicial contracting manual and state law, they lack certain policies such as policies to implement the Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise program.
Some courts had isolated instances of noncompliance with their contracting practices such as having no justification for sole-source procurements.

Report 2012-044: California Department of Education: Despite Some Improvements, Oversight of the Migrant Education Program Remains Inadequate

webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) — Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:00:00 GMT

Our audit of the federally funded migrant education program (migrant program) highlighted the following:

The California Department of Education's (Education) inadequate guidance to the regional offices that administer the migrant program's services has led to inconsistencies and controversy regarding allowable expenses and wide variation in how regions classify expenses.
- Education's recent calculations of regional administrative costs were flawed and inaccurate due to the inconsistencies and interpretation in classifying expenses.
- Most of the expenditures we reviewed appear reasonable and allowable, however, we question some expenses including expenses related to a potential conflict of interest in one region.
Internal difficulties could have affected Education's oversight of the migrant program.
- The turnover rate in Education's migrant program office has been double the national average for turnover in state and local governments.
- A fractured relationship exists between Education and some of its migrant program regions due, in part, to past decisions related to allowable costs and administrative cost calculations.
Education has not completed an evaluation of the statewide effectiveness of the migrant program.
- The data collected about the program is likely insufficient and can only measure about half of the program's target outcomes.
- Data limitations do not allow Education to effectively evaluate the regional structure used to carry out the migrant program.