Report 2021-616 All Recommendation Responses

Report 2021-616: Board of State and Community Corrections: Its Administration of Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funds Has Been Marred by Delays, Unfair Awards, and Insufficient Monitoring (Release Date: October 2021)

Recommendation #1 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that it efficiently and effectively administers state and federal grants, including any future emergency funds it might receive, Community Corrections should improve its standard grant policies and procedures by December 2021 to address the justification for the allocation formula it chooses, including an assessment of the recipients' need for the funds.

In September 2022, the Board approved updates to the Grant Proposal Evaluation Process that addresses the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

In September 2022, the Board approved updates to the Grant Proposal Evaluation Process that addresses the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

In September 2022, the Board approved updates to the Grant Proposal Evaluation Process that addresses the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it did not include justification for the allocation formula it chooses, including an assessment of the recipients' needs for the funds. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

By June 2022, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) will update and post its grant procedures to further ensure justifications for the allocations of grant funds are clearly described in Board reports.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

By June 2022, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) will update and post its grant procedures to further ensure justifications for the allocations of grant funds are clearly described in Board reports.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Recommendation #2 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that it efficiently and effectively administers state and federal grants, including any future emergency funds it might receive, Community Corrections should improve its standard grant policies and procedures by December 2021 to address how its allocation of emergency funds, such as federal COVID-19 funding, will reflect the effect of the emergency on potential applicants.

The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) has updated its Grant Proposal Evaluation Process to address the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) has updated its Grant Proposal Evaluation Process to address the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) has updated its Grant Proposal Evaluation Process to address the allocation of emergency funding.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it did not include how its allocation of emergency funds, such as federal COVID-19 funding, will reflect the effect of the emergency on potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

By June 2022, the BSCC will update its grant policies and procedures to include a process for the allocation of emergency funds. In the interim, the BSCC will continue to ensure its presentations and written reports to the Board provide explanations for any allocation formula(s).

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

By June 2022, the BSCC will update its grant policies and procedures to include a process for the allocation of emergency funds. In the interim, the BSCC will continue to ensure its presentations and written reports to the Board provide explanations for any allocation formula(s).

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Recommendation #3 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that it efficiently and effectively administers state and federal grants, including any future emergency funds it might receive, Community Corrections should improve its standard grant policies and procedures by December 2021 to address the promptness of is grant process, including specific timelines for how quickly it must obtain board approval, develop its grant solicitation, evaluate applications, make awards, and disburse the funds.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document describes the grant process, timeframes, Board role, emergency process, evaluation, and funding recommendation process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document describes the grant process, timeframes, Board role, emergency process, evaluation, and funding recommendation process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

Community Corrections updated its standard grant policies and procedures in September 2022 to include administration of emergency funds, which generally addresses the intent of our recommendation.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document describes the grant process, timeframes, Board role, emergency process, evaluation, and funding recommendation process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the promptness of is grant process, including specific timelines for how quickly it must obtain board approval, develop its grant solicitation, evaluate applications, make awards, and disburse the funds. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC efficiently and effectively administers its state and federal grants. By June 2022, the BSCC will update its grant policies and procedures to reflect the different elements of the grant development process. This includes, but is not limited to, timelines for Board approval, Request for Proposal process, proposal evaluation, and the award process

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We strongly disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it efficiently and effectively administers its federal grants. Specifically, in the title of our report, we noted that "Its Administration of Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funds Has Been Marred by Delays, Unfair Awards, and Insufficient Monitoring." We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' updated grant policies and procedures during its future responses.

The BSCC efficiently and effectively administers its state and federal grants.

By June 2022, the BSCC will update its grant policies and procedures to reflect the different elements of the grant development process. This includes, but is not limited to, timelines for Board approval, Request for Proposal process, proposal evaluation, and the award process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Recommendation #4 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that it efficiently and effectively administers state and federal grants, including any future emergency funds it might receive, Community Corrections should improve its standard grant policies and procedures by December 2021 to address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

: Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we found that it does not address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and the steps it will take to ensure that it informs all applicants--and potential applicants--of the deviations, such as by including this information in its grant solicitation or in subsequent communications made available to all potential applicants. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' insinuation that its practices are sufficient. As we state on page 18 of the report, Community Corrections did not clearly answer our question about whether it took any steps to inform applicants about its departure from grant requirements, and it could not demonstrate that it notified all potential applicants about the deviations. Moreover, Community Corrections states that its solicitation for this formula grant was not intended to screen out eligible applicants. However, as we note on page 14, there were 26 counties that chose to not apply for a CESF grant, some of which told us that they believed they were unable to meet grant requirements. Had Community Corrections notified counties it was willing to deviate from its requirements, more counties may have applied for CESF funding. Therefore, we are disappointed that Community Corrections does not recognize the need for improvements to its grant process. As we describe on page 19 of the report, the problems we found with Community Corrections' grant process for the CESF grant likely occurred because it lacks robust grant procedures. Therefore, the recommendations we made for Community Corrections to improve its grant procedures are applicable to any other emergency grant funds that it may receive as well as to the other 18 federal and state grants that it administers. These improvements would add clarity and transparency to future grant solicitations. We look forward to receiving Community Corrections' future responses so that we can assess its progress and plans for implementing our recommendations.

Each competitive proposal that the BSCC administers describes the proposal review process that will be followed, disqualification criteria, the rating and scoring process, and the conditions under which a prospective applicant will be contacted. The BSCC has and will continue this practice.

Applicants for noncompetitive funding streams must ensure that submitted proposals address the grant requirements. When applicable, the BSCC has and will continue to offer technical assistance to ensure that submitted proposals align with grant requirements.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: No Action Taken

Contrary to Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation, it has failed to take action to improve its grant policies and procedures to address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and inform all applicants and potential applicants of the deviations. As we discussed in our comments to Community Corrections' response to the audit on page 40 of our report, best practices indicate that Community Corrections should have notified all potential applicants about deviations from the grant requirements it was willing to accept. Doing so is a matter of fairness to all potential applicants. As we state on page 18 of the audit report, Community Corrections did not clearly answer our question about whether it took any steps to inform applicants about its departure from grant requirements, and it could not demonstrate that it notified all potential applicants about the deviations. Further, as we note on page 14 of the report, there were 26 counties that chose to not apply for a CESF grant, some of which told us that they believed they were unable to meet grant requirements. Had Community Corrections notified counties that it was willing to deviate from its requirements, more counties may have applied for CESF funding.

We are disappointed that Community Corrections does not recognize the need for improvements to its grant process accordingly. As we describe on page 19, the problems we found with Community Corrections' grant process for the CESF grant likely occurred because it lacks robust grant procedures. Therefore, the recommendations we made for Community Corrections to improve its grant procedures are applicable to any other emergency grant funds that it may receive as well as to the other 18 federal and state grants that it administers. These improvements would add clarity and transparency to future grant solicitations.

Recommendation #5 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that it efficiently and effectively administers state and federal grants, including any future emergency funds it might receive, Community Corrections should improve its standard grant policies and procedures by December 2021 to address a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, including the justification for awards and an explanation of how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements, so that its decision to approve each application is justified.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

We do not agree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process to include a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications, it does not address how it will solve instances in which an application does not comply with the solicitation's requirements. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

As we stated on our assessment of Recommendation 4, we disagree with Community Corrections' insinuation that its practices are sufficient. Specifically, as we describe on page 7 of the report, Community Corrections did not require CDCR to provide any documentation to support its need for the initial $15 million award or for the subsequent $7 million award. We would have expected Community Corrections to require CDCR to provide documentation to support its need for the funds or, at a minimum, to verify the number of inmates CDCR planned to house and an estimate of the associated costs. Because CDCR provided this amount as the funding it needed, it is reasonable to expect that CDCR would have had this information readily available. By failing to require CDCR to provide this information, Community Corrections had no assurance that the funding it provided to CDCR was reasonable, appropriate, or necessary. Further, on pages 17 and 18 of our report, we note that in our review of 31 applications, we identified 18 for which Community Corrections found that the counties did not meet certain requirements. Notably, in 16 instances, Community Corrections' staff indicated that the counties did not adequately form local advisory committees. Finally, Community Corrections' response to Recommendation 4 does not address the specific action to improve it standard grant policies and procedures to address a thorough and documented evaluation of grant applications. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' updated grant policies and procedures in its future responses.

See above response to question 4.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: No Action Taken

Contrary to Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation, it has failed to take action to improve its grant policies and procedures to address the circumstances under which it will deviate from its solicitation requirements and inform all applicants and potential applicants of the deviations. As we describe on pages 7 and 8 of the audit report, Community Corrections did not require CDCR to provide any documentation to support its need for $22 million in CESF funds. We would have expected Community Corrections to require CDCR to provide documentation to support its need for the funds or, at a minimum, to verify the number of inmates CDCR planned to house and an estimate of the associated costs. By failing to require CDCR to provide this information, Community Corrections had no assurance that the funding it provided to CDCR was reasonable, appropriate, or necessary. As a result, it risks the possibility that it may have to return unspent or misused funds to the federal government. Additionally, in its response to our audit report, Community Corrections tried to minimize its decision to award funds to counties that did not fully comply with its grant requirements. Specifically, on pages 17 and 18 of our report, we note that in our review of the 31 applications, we identified 18 for which Community Corrections found that the counties did not meet certain requirements. Notably, in 16 instances, Community Corrections' staff indicated that the counties did not adequately form local advisory committees, even though in several places in Community Corrections' response, it emphasized the importance that it placed on counties forming these committees.

Therefore, we are disappointed that Community Corrections does not recognize the need for improvements to its grant process accordingly. As we describe on page 19, the problems we found with Community Corrections' grant process for the CESF grant likely occurred because it lacks robust grant procedures. Therefore, the recommendations we made for Community Corrections to improve its grant procedures are applicable to any other emergency grant funds that it may receive as well as to the other 18 federal and state grants that it administers.

Recommendation #6 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To maximize the number of applicants that apply for grant funding, Community Corrections should ensure that its grant requirements are not overly burdensome and that they are achievable within the grant period.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

he BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has implemented measures to ensure that its grant program requirements are not overly burdensome or that they do not include outcomes that are not achievable. In our review of Community Corrections' updated grant proposal evaluation process, we did not find any guidance in this regard. Thus, until this information is included, we will continue to report the status of this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We strongly disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable. Specifically, as described in the section beginning on page 14 of our report, we concluded that Community Corrections' grant requirements surrounding local advisory committees and having counties pass through 20 percent of the funds to CBOs were overly burdensome to the counties. We interviewed representatives from five of the 26 counties that did not apply for CESF funds and, as we describe on page 15, three stated that they did not apply because of the grant solicitation's requirements, including the amount of time and resources it would take to form the committees. Additionally, Community Corrections' did not provide documentation to support its assertions herein. Thus, we look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' efforts to implement this recommendation in its future responses.

The BSCC develops grant programs pursuant to authorizing legislation or the applicable federal requirements. All attempts are made to develop programs that are fair, reasonable, and responsive to the administrative, programmatic, and fiscal responsibilities that accompany each grant. The BSCC does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: No Action Taken

Community Corrections' insinuation that it develops grant programs solely based on authorizing legislation or applicable federal requirements is inaccurate and misleading. Further, we disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it does not develop program requirements that are burdensome or that include outcomes that are not achievable. As we discuss in the section starting on page 14 of the report, Community Corrections required counties to form local advisory committees to plan and oversee CESF funds at the local level and pass through 20 percent of the funds to CBOs. However, some counties felt they did not have the time or resources to meet this requirement. These requirements represented a more stringent approach than that taken by the U.S. DOJ, which required that recipients use CESF funds to prepare for, prevent, or respond to COVID-19 only. Additionally, we interviewed representatives from five of the 26 counties that did not apply for CESF funds and three stated that they did not apply because of the grant solicitation's requirements, including the amount of time and resources it would take to form the committees. It is likely that some of the other counties may have also chose not to apply for similar reasons. Thus, we concluded that these grant requirements were overly burdensome to the counties. It is unfortunate that Community Corrections' is dismissive of our recommendation and fails to recognize that its burdensome requirements created an unnecessary obstacle that deterred some counties from applying for CESF funds.

Recommendation #7 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To effectively notify potential applicants of funding opportunities, by December 2021, Community Corrections should take steps to ensure that its email distribution list includes accurate and complete information for key local government officials.

The BSCC email distribution list is one tool that is used to inform interest parties about key BSCC activities. For more targeted outreach, the BSCC coordinates with representatives from various associations, organizations, and agencies that represent local government officials to share grant specific information. We are confident that these email lists are accurate and complete. In addition to targeted outreach activities, the BSCC distributes information via an email distribution list that any interested person may add their name to. These are some of the many tools we use to provide notice of funding opportunities.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement

Although Community Corrections states that it coordinates with representatives from various associations, organizations, and agencies that represent local government officials to share grant specific information, during our audit, Community Corrections could only demonstrate that it sent an email to a single representative of one county organization. Further, we are perplexed by Community Corrections' statement that it is confident that its email lists are accurate and complete. As we describe on page 17 of the report, we found that the county email distribution list—which Community Corrections stated was its standard method of notifying potential applicants of funding opportunities—was outdated. Specifically, we found this list did not include key officials for the five counties we reviewed. It is therefore likely that Community Corrections excluded key officials for some of the other counties that did not apply for funds. It is unfortunate that Community Corrections' fails to recognize its shortcomings and will not take steps to ensure that its email distribution list includes accurate and complete information for key local government officials.

Recommendation #8 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To comply with federal and state requirements, and to ensure transparency, consistency, and fairness in its grant process, Community Corrections should post its grant procedures publicly on its website once it has improved its standard grant procedures.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022. The new updated grant administration guide that includes the Emergency Grant process can be located at: https://www.bscc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Grant-Proposal-Evaluation-Process-Updated-September-2022.pdf.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Community Corrections has updated its website with its 2023 grant administration guide. However, the guidance it posted on its website does not clearly describe the grant proposal evaluation process to ensure transparency, consistency, and fairness in evaluating and awarding grants. Thus, until Community Corrections includes a comprehensive description of its grant evaluation process publicly on its website, we will continue to assess this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022. The new updated grant administration guide that includes the Emergency Grant process can be located at: https://www.bscc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Grant-Proposal-Evaluation-Process-Updated-September-2022.pdf.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Community Corrections has updated its website with its 2023 grant administration guide. However, the guidance it posted on its website does not clearly describe the grant proposal evaluation process to ensure transparency, consistency, and fairness in evaluating and awarding grants. Thus, until Community Corrections includes a comprehensive description of its grant evaluation process publicly on its website, we will continue to assess this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Community Corrections has updated its website with its 2023 grant administration guide. However, the guidance it posted on its website does not clearly describe the grant proposal evaluation process to ensure transparency, consistency, and fairness in evaluating and awarding grants. Thus, until Community Corrections includes a comprehensive description of its grant evaluation process publicly on its website, we will continue to assess this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process in September 2022, the guidance posted on its website is an administrative manual from 2020. Until it updates the guidance posted on its website, we will continue to assess this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process in September 2022, the guidance posted on its website is an administrative manual from 2020. Until it updates the guidance posted on its website, we will continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

The BSCC Grant Proposal Evaluation Process document was posted to the website in September 2022

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

We disagree with Community Corrections' assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although Community Corrections updated its grant proposal evaluation process in September 2022, the guidance posted on its website is an administrative manual from 2020.

See response to questions one and two.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections' responses indicate that it will implement updated grant policies and procedures by June 2022. We look forward to reviewing its progress during future responses.

See response to questions one and two.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

In its response, Community Corrections references "questions one and two," which refers to its update on its progress in implementing recommendations one and two. Specifically, Community Corrections stated that it would improve its standard grant procedures by June 2022. Therefore, we look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress in addressing this recommendation once it has updated its grant procedures.

Recommendation #9 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To ensure that CDCR and the counties spend CESF funds appropriately and in a timely manner, Community Corrections should immediately develop and implement a plan to begin monitoring the use of CESF funds. This plan should include steps to ensure that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, takes action based on what it finds, and employs a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding.

The BSCC monitored grantee spending of the CESF awards. BSCC conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits and conducted limited in-person site visits.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, the actions it will take based on what it finds, or a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, the actions it will take based on what it finds, or a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, the actions it will take based on what it finds, or a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, the actions it will take based on what it finds, or a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time, takes action based on what it finds, and employs a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Although Community Corrections demonstrated during a previous response that it had conducted some limited financial desk reviews of counties' CESF funds, it has not demonstrated that it has conducted virtual site visits or in-person site visits as it asserts. Further, Community Corrections has not demonstrated that it has developed and implemented a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds, including that it obtains and reviews required reports on time the actions it will take based on what it finds or a strategy to identify potential instances of counties using CESF funds to supplant other funding. We look forward to reviewing Community Corrections' progress toward implementing this recommendation during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. The BSCC has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, and scheduled in-person site visits. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections did not provide documentation to support its assertion that it has conducted financial desk reviews, virtual site visits, or in-person visits to monitor the use of CESF funds. Additionally, it has not provided documentation of a plan for monitoring the use of CESF funds. Thus, we look forward to reviewing its progress during future responses.

The BSCC has and will continue to monitor grantee spending of the CESF awards. Grantee spending on initial invoices did not include expenditures. As grantee spending has increased from $0 to actual expenses, the BSCC has begun financial desk reviews of submitted expenditures. In addition, the BSCC has identified grantees that would benefit from virtual or in-person visits beginning in January 2022. The BSCC will continue its virtual and in-person monitoring until the CESF Program concludes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections did not provide documentation to support its claims of full implementation. Thus, until it does so, we will report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

Recommendation #10 To: State and Community Corrections, Board of

To comply with federal reporting requirements, Community Corrections should submit all required fiscal and progress reports to the U.S. DOJ by the reporting deadlines.

FFRs and progress reports have been submitted for all reporting periods.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not provided us with documentation to demonstrate that it is complying with all required federal reporting deadlines.

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

Community Corrections has not provided us with documentation to demonstrate that it is complying with all required federal reporting deadlines.

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented

Community Corrections submitted sufficient documentation to support that it submitted its required fiscal reports to the U.S. DOJ by the reporting deadlines. Although it submitted a copy of its most recent progress report, the progress report is not dated and it did not provide documentation to support that it submitted this report before the deadline. We look forward to receiving such documentation during its next response.

The BSCC will comply with all required federal reporting deadlines.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending

All Recommendations in 2021-616

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.