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.

6-Month 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.

  • Completion Date: May 2014
  • Response Date: June 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Fully Implemented


60-Day 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.

  • Completion Date: January 2014
  • Response Date: February 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day 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

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader