Report 2013-302/2013-303 Recommendation 3 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 #3 To: Administrative Office of the Courts
To improve the usefulness of the Judicial Council's semiannual reports until a statutory requirement is enacted, the AOC should work with the Judicial Council to pursue a cost-effective method to do the following:
- Include new contracts and the complete history of contracts amended during the reporting period in the semiannual reports, including the date of the original contract; the original contract amount and duration; all subsequent contract amendments; and the date, amount, and duration of each such amendment. The AOC should present this information beginning with the semiannual report covering the July 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, reporting period.
1-Year Agency Response
The implementation of the changes including additional data elements was predicated on the proposed legislation becoming statute and funding being provided. The legislation was suspended and no funding has been provided. Without additional funding, the costs involved in the implementation are significant when budget cuts have resulted in other priorities for the funding we have.
- Estimated Completion Date:
- Response Date: December 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Will Not Implement
We maintain that the AOC should improve the usefulness of the Judicial Council's semiannual reports by including new contracts and the complete history of contracts amended during the reporting period in the semiannual reports.
6-Month Agency Response
The implementation of the changes including additional data elements was predicated on the proposed legislation becoming statute and funding being provided. The legislation was suspended and no funding has been provided. Without additional funding, the costs involved in the implementation are significant when budget cuts have resulted in other priorities for the funding we have.
- Completion Date: July 2014
- Response Date: July 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken
- Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation
60-Day Agency Response
Much of the information relating to the complete history of amended contracts recommended by the Auditor for inclusion in the semiannual reports beginning with the semiannual report covering the July 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, reporting period resides in physical files maintained by individual judicial branch entities files that are not accessible electronically without modifications to systems and processes and procurement of software licenses estimated to be in excess of $1 million dollars, not counting the cost of additional time required of staff at each judicial entity to cull and upload the information from paper files.
The AOC can attempt to pursue a cost-effective method to provide in the semiannual report the additional information recommended by the Auditor that is not currently statutorily mandated. However, in light of the significant ongoing budget reductions to judicial entities, and specifically to trial courts, that have negatively impacted the public services they provide, whether this recommendation can be fulfilled in the timeframe requested (July 1 December 31, 2014 reporting period) without further impairment of the publics access to justice is unclear, unless additional funding is provided.
- Estimated Completion Date: TBD based on funding
- Response Date: February 2014
California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken
All Recommendations in 2013-302/2013-303
Agency responses received are posted verbatim.