Report 2018-301 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 2018-301: Judicial Branch Procurement: Some Superior Courts Generally Followed Requirements but Could Improve Their Procurement Practices (Release Date: January 2019)
| Recommendations to Superior Court of California, County of Imperial | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 4 | The Imperial court should ensure that it documents its justifications and approvals for using noncompetitive procurements. |
Fully Implemented |
| 8 | To ensure the appropriateness of every payment, the Imperial court should require all invoices to receive approval before it processes their payment. |
Fully Implemented |
| 11 | The Imperial court should document its alternative purchase card procedures regarding transaction limits in its local manual. |
Fully Implemented |
| Recommendations to Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 2 | The Los Angeles court should ensure that it documents best value in its procurement files when selecting vendors from leveraged procurement agreements. |
Resolved |
| Recommendations to Superior Court of California, County of Monterey | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 3 | The Monterey court should ensure that it documents fair and reasonable pricing from vendors in its procurement files. |
Fully Implemented |
| 6 | The Monterey court should revise its guidance regarding invoice approval limits to include a description of circumstances under which it will allow exceptions to such limits, and it should inform court staff of the revisions. |
Fully Implemented |
| Recommendations to Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 5 | The Santa Barbara court should ensure that it documents its justifications and approvals for using noncompetitive procurements. |
Fully Implemented |
| 9 | The Santa Barbara court should reinstate its previous requirement that staff submit packing slips or receipts before its payment of invoices. |
Fully Implemented |
| 12 | The Santa Barbara court should document its alternative purchase card procedures regarding transaction limits in its local manual. |
Fully Implemented |
| Recommendations to Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara | ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Recommendation | Status |
| 1 | The Santa Clara court should ensure that it supports all payments with a contract or purchase order that clearly states the terms and pricing for any goods or services received. The court should also ensure that it competitively awards its contracts as appropriate and that it properly documents its fair and reasonable pricing determinations, including those for applicable leveraged agreements. |
Fully Implemented |
| 7 | The Santa Clara court should establish and implement procedures to ensure that adequate separation of duties exists for procurement. These procedures should specifically prevent a single individual from both approving an invoice's amount and then also authorizing its payment. |
Fully Implemented |
| 10 | The Santa Clara court should ensure that its staff abide by the judicial contracting manual's purchase card transaction limits, or it should document an alternative transaction limit in its local contracting manual. |
Fully Implemented |