Most Recent Reports http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/recent Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:00:00 GMT List of the most recent reports published by the California State Auditor Report 2013-001: State of California: Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2013 http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-001 The California State Auditor just released report 2013-001: State of California: Financial Report Year Ended June 30, 2013. Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-001 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-110: Child Welfare Services: The County Child Welfare Services Agencies We Reviewed Must Provide Better Protection for Abused and Neglected Children http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-110 <p>Our audit of child welfare services (CWS) agencies in Butte, Orange, and San Francisco counties highlighted the following:</p> <ul> <li>Information contained in the initial intake documents prepared when reports of child maltreatment are received, was often inaccurate or incomplete.</li> <li>Assessments that analyze safety and risk factors were sometimes not prepared in a timely manner or were not prepared at all.</li> <li>The county CWS agencies did not consistently follow up, in a reasonable time frame, on unsuccessful attempts to make in-person contact with children--sometimes waiting weeks before attempting to make contact.</li> <li>When social workers decided to leave a child in a home that presented a safety threat, they often did not establish a credible safety plan to mitigate that threat.</li> <li>Social workers at times allowed the child to be placed or remain in a temporary living situation and often did not perform any history check on the temporary caregivers.</li> <li>Required assessments used to determine the strengths and needs of a family, and to develop the corresponding case plan, were not always completed.</li> <li>For each item we reviewed, we noted a frequent lack of documented supervisory review.</li> </ul> Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-110 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-045: Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education: It Has Consistently Failed to Meet Its Responsibility to Protect the Public's Interests http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-045 <p>Our audit of the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (bureau) revealed the following:</p> <ul> <li>The bureau has not met its statutory responsibility to regulate and oversee private postsecondary educational institutions (institutions).<ul> <li>As of June 30, 2013, it had more than 1,100 licensing applications outstanding, some for more than three years.</li> <li>During fiscal years 2009-10 through 2012-13, it took an average of 185 days to process 3,200 licensing applications that it had received and closed.</li> <li>It failed to identify proactively and sanction effectively unlicensed institutions.</li> <li>It conducted only a fraction of the inspections of institutions required by law and failed to identify violations during these inspections.</li> </ul></li> <li>The bureau has not protected students' interests as state law requires.<ul> <li>It failed to respond appropriately to complaints against institutions, even when students' safety was allegedly at risk.</li> <li>It did not ensure that institutions provided students with accurate disclosures about their operations.</li> <li>It can improve its management of the Student Tuition Recovery Fund.</li> </ul></li> </ul> Tue, 18 Mar 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-045 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report I2012-0651: Employment Development Department: It Failed to Participate in a Federal Program That Would Have Allowed the State to Collect Hundreds of Millions of Dollars http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/I2012-0651 <p>Our investigation at the Employment Development Department (EDD) substantiated the following:</p> <ul> <li>EDD officials failed to act efficiently to participate in the federal Treasury Offset Program (Offset Program) that would have allowed the State to collect an estimated $516 million in unemployment benefit overpayments.</li> <li>EDD decided to forego participation even though it estimated it would cost $322,800 for modifications, compared to the projected benefit of recovering more than $100 million in the first year.</li> <li>After our investigation began, EDD officials developed a plan for participating in the Offset Program.</li> </ul> Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/I2012-0651 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-302.1: Administrative Office of the Courts Supplemental Letter Report http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-302.1 The California State Auditor just released report 2013-302.1: Administrative Office of the Courts Supplemental Letter Report. Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-302.1 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-501: Board of Pilot Commissioners for the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun: It Continues to Lack Sufficient Controls Over Certain Travel Reimbursements http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-501 The California State Auditor just released report 2013-501: Board of Pilot Commissioners for the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun: It Continues to Lack Sufficient Controls Over Certain Travel Reimbursements. Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-501 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-036: Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund: Counties' Benefit Committees Did Not Always Comply With State Laws for Distribution Fund Grants http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-036 <p>Our audit of the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund (distribution fund) revealed the following:</p> <ul> <li>The Legislature allocated $30 million in fiscal year 2010-11 and $9.1 million in both fiscal years 2011-12 and 2012-13 from the distribution fund to local governments for mitigation grants.</li> <li>We reviewed 12 grants and found that for seven, the Indian gaming local community benefit committees (benefit committees) awarded $1.7 million in funds without sufficient documentation.</li> <li>Butte County's benefit committee underfunded the city of Oroville $57,500 over a period of three years and provided that amount to the county instead.</li> <li>Butte and Lake counties do not have a process in place to verify that grant recipients comply with requirements for the interest earned on mitigation grant funds.</li> <li>Butte County's benefit committee has not established a conflict-of-interest code and some designated individuals in each of the four counties we reviewed failed to meet filing requirements. </li> <li>Expenditures and transfers from the distribution fund exceed revenues annually, continuing a decline in the fund balance that may be nearly depleted by the end of fiscal year 2014-15.</li> <li>State oversight could improve compliance with state laws for administering the mitigation grant program.</li> </ul> Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-036 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-109: California Public Utilities Commission: Improved Monitoring of Balancing Accounts Would Better Ensure That Utility Rates Are Fair and Reasonable http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-109 <p>Our audit on the California Public Utilities Commission's (commission) monitoring of balancing accounts highlighted the following:</p> <ul> <li>The commission lacks adequate processes for sufficient oversight of utility balancing accounts to protect ratepayers from unfair rate increases.</li> <li>The Office of Ratepayer Advocates (Ratepayer Advocates) reviewed only 58 percent of the value of large energy utilities' balancing accounts active during 2009 through 2011, leaving a value of $37.6 billion in other balancing accounts unreviewed.</li> <li>The commission does not have a systematic process for selecting balancing accounts to review.</li> <li>Ratepayer Advocates does not ensure that its analysts adequately document and receive formal supervisory approval for reviews of balancing accounts.</li> <li>The commission does not periodically audit the accounting records of the utilities it regulates according to a schedule prescribed in law. </li> <li>A state law requiring the commission to provide the audit reports to the California State Board of Equalization is outdated.</li> </ul> Tue, 04 Mar 2014 17:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-109 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-046: Cafeteria Funds: Local Education Agencies Generally Use the Funds for Appropriate Purposes http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-046 <p>Our audit of local education agencies' (LEAs) cafeteria fund expenditures highlighted the following:</p> <ul> <li>Although each of the 18 LEAs we reviewed for fiscal years 2010-11 through 2012-13 spent all or most of their cafeteria funds for allowable purposes, we identified $1 million in unallowable expenditures among 16 LEAs.<ul> <li>More than $480,000 of these unallowable expenditures were for facility costs at four LEAs.</li> <li>Five LEAs charged more than $171,000 in interest to their cafeteria funds, despite a federal regulation prohibiting such charges.</li> <li>Seven LEAs inappropriately charged more than $94,000 in utilities and other support costs.</li> <li>Many of the LEAs had payroll errors that accounted for other unallowable costs.</li> </ul></li> <li> Nine LEAs we visited had net cash resources in their cafeteria funds that exceeded the federal limit--by the end of fiscal year 2012-13, these LEAs had a combined total of more than $28 million in excess of the federal limit.</li> <li>Ten of the 18 LEAs we reviewed did not maintain sufficient records to demonstrate that they were complying with federal requirements involving sales of certain foods purchased with cafeteria funds.</li> <li>CDE was not expressly required to review LEAs cafeteria fund expenditures for allowability before fiscal year 2013-14, which is when it will begin such reviews.</li> </ul> Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-046 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster) Report 2013-039.1: Fi$Cal Status Letter http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-039.1 The California State Auditor just released report 2013-039.1: Fi$Cal Status Letter. Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:00:00 GMT http://draftwww.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2013-039.1 webmaster@bsa.ca.gov (California State Auditor Webmaster)