Report 2017-302 Recommendations
When an audit is completed and a report is issued, auditees must provide the State Auditor with information 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. Additionally, Senate Bill 1452 (Chapter 452, Statutes of 2006), requires auditees who have not implemented recommendations after one year, to report to us and to the Legislature why they have not implemented them or to state when they intend to implement them. Below, is a listing of each recommendation the State Auditor made in the report referenced and a link to the most recent response from the auditee addressing their progress in implementing the recommendation and the State Auditor's assessment of auditee's response based on our review of the supporting documentation.
Recommendations in Report 2017-302: Judicial Council of California: It Needs to Follow Competitive Bidding Processes More Consistently and Establish Clear Guidance for Invoice Processing (Release Date: December 2017)
| Recommendations to Judicial Council of California | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 1 | To help ensure that it obtains the best value for the goods and services it purchases and that its staff take the steps necessary to comply with the judicial contracting manual, the Judicial Council should continue to reinforce with staff through management memos, training, or other formal means the need to ensure that the person with the appropriate level of authority approves purchases; obtain authorized approvers' signatures for noncompetitive procurements; properly document justification for noncompetitive procurements; and not exclude potential vendors from bidding based on assumptions about their prices. |
Fully Implemented |
| 2 | To better align the judicial contracting manual with state requirements and to make certain that it receives the best value for services, the Judicial Council should update by March 2018 the judicial contracting manual's guidance on contract splitting and sole-source procurements to reflect the more specific definitions in SCM. |
Fully Implemented |
| 3 | To ensure that Judicial Council staff have the information they need to process invoices appropriately and to comply with the judicial contracting manual, the Judicial Council should develop by June 2018 one document with clear invoice-processing procedures for its accounting staff. This document should define the steps for processing invoices related to different types of purchase agreements and common exceptions to the typical process, including instructions for handling invoices processed on behalf of other Judicial Branch entities. |
Resolved |
| 4 | By June 2018, the Judicial Council should fully implement the State Auditor's recommendation from 2013 related to controls over its information systems. |
Fully Implemented |
| 5 | To prevent misinterpretation of policies governing its procurement practices, the Judicial Council should reissue its local manual by June 2018, incorporating all updates made since the 2011 version of the manual. |
Fully Implemented |
| 6 | To help ensure that the Judicial Council complies with state reporting requirements related to conflicts of interest, it should report to the appropriate authority any staff who do not file statements of economic interests after reasonable attempts to prompt them to file, as described in guidance from the Fair Political Practices Commission. Further, the Judicial Council should complete its procedures to improve compliance and implement them beginning in January 2018. |
Fully Implemented |