Report I2019-1 All Recommendation Responses
Report I2019-1: Investigation of Improper Activities by a State Agency and Its Employees: A Director Committed Gross Misconduct When She Repeatedly Violated Merit‑Based Employment Principles and Attempted to Retaliate Against Suspected Whistleblowers (Release Date: March 2019)
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #1 To: California, State of
Given the totality of the director's improper conduct, the oversight agency should work with the Governor's office to take appropriate steps to ensure that the director, and any other individual who may occupy her position, cannot take similar actions.
Agency Response From May 2020
The agency provided evidence that the new director completed training on anti-retaliation and anti-bias. Thus, we have deemed this recommendation fully implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency reported that it hired a director effective March 2020. In addition, it indicated that the new director has strong human resources and administrative experience to ensure that the issues identified in the report are never repeated. Further, the agency stated that the new director would attend and complete the training recommended by our office by March 31, 2020.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From December 2019
Even though the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From September 2019
Even though the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From June 2019
As of June 2019, the director position is still vacant. However, the agency reiterated that once a permanent director is appointed, it will ensure that within 12 months he or she completes the training about impermissible bias and the anti-retaliations provision of the California Whistleblower Protection Act
Since the public report, the agency also stated that it has hired a team of special consultants with HR, personnel, and administrative experience to help build appropriate administrative operations and culture in the department.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From March 2019
As the director retired from state service, the agency did not take any action against her. To prevent any other individuals who occupy the same position from taking similar actions, the agency stated in May 2018 that it would require the department's future directors to undergo training on the importance of avoiding perceptions of impermissible bias as well as the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act. The agency did not provide any relevant training completed by its acting director, who subsequently also retired. In March 2019, the agency provided evidence that the department's chief deputy director attended training about these two topics. Once a permanent director is appointed, the agency stated that it would ensure the new director completes the training within 12 months of his or her appointment.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #2 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should require the director, the HR chief, and the senior staff member to undergo CalHR or SPB training on the requirements for making good faith appointments.
Agency Response From November 2021
The agency reported that it has filled the HR chief position and provided us with evidence supporting that the HR chief completed CalHR's training on best hiring practices.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From October 2021
The agency reported in October 2021 that currently it is in the process of hiring an HR chief. Once the selected candidate completes the recommended training, the agency will notify us.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2020
The agency reported the HR chief position remains vacant as of September 2020 but that the recommended training will be provided when the position is filled.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From May 2020
The agency provided evidence of the new director's successful completion of training on good faith appointments. The HR chief position remains vacant.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency hired a new director in March 2020 and stated that the director will complete the recommended training in the same month. The HR chief position remains vacant.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From December 2019
The department continues to operate without a director and an HR chief. The agency stated again that once the director and HR chief positions are filled, it will ensure the recommended training is completed.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2019
The department continues to operate without a director and an HR chief. The agency stated once the director and HR chief positions are filled, it will ensure the recommended training is completed.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From June 2019
The agency stated once the director and HR chief positions are filled, it will ensure the recommended training is completed. Until then, the agency has decided to train all department hiring managers proactively about good faith appointments. It stated that it has coordinated with CalHR to provide 160 hours of training to 380 hiring managers about best hiring practices by August 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2019
In December 2018, the HR chief and two senior staff members attended a "Best Hiring Practices" course provided by CalHR's legal division. However, the acting director did not attend this training and has since retired. In February 2019, the agency reported that the department's chief deputy director completed the training. In March 2019, the agency reported that once the permanent director is appointed, it will direct him or her to complete the training. In addition, the agency informed us that its HR chief position is currently vacant and that once a replacement is hired, it would also require that individual to complete the recommended training. This recommendation will remain partially implemented until the department's permanent director, when hired, completes the required training.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #3 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should ensure that the department strengthens its nepotism policy so that it prohibits employees with personal relationships from having any involvement in the selection, appointment, promotion, retention, supervision, and discipline of one another.
Agency Response From September 2019
The agency provided evidence indicating that the department's revised nepotism policy became effective in July 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From June 2019
In May 2019 the agency provided us with a copy of its completed nepotism policy. The completed nepotism policy addressed many of the concerns we identified. It also reported that the department sent a union notice package of the new policy to CalHR for review and if no objections are received, the agency stated the policy could be effective in July 2019.
This recommendation is deemed partially implemented until the new policy is effective.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2019
In August 2018, the agency provided us with a draft of its revised nepotism policy. Our review revealed that, although some improvements were made, the draft policy still allowed the director to grant exceptions; thus, the policy still permitted the director to approve employees with personal relationships to participate in the selection, appointment, retention, supervision, and discipline of one another. We recommended to the agency that the policy be revised to specify that if the close relationship involves the director or his or her executive staff, the agency should be required to grant the exception to policy instead of the department director. We also asked that the agency ensure that the policy addresses our recommendation for managers and supervisors with close personal relationships with affected employees to not be involved in the promotion, retention, and discipline of those employees.
The agency agreed to implement the adjustments and in February 2019, the agency provided us with a memorandum the department's chief deputy director issued to all staff specifically addressing our previously identified deficiencies. However, the actual policy does not appear to include the language contained in the memorandum addressing the identified deficiencies. The agency reported in March 2019 that it would formally incorporate the requested changes into its nepotism policy by May 2019. Until the deficiencies are directly addressed within the department's nepotism policy, this recommendation is considered partially implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #4 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should discipline the director's daughter for her improper activities and document the actions in her official personnel file.
Agency Response From December 2019
The agency filed a corrective action in October 2019 and after reviewing the daughter's subsequent response, the agency reported in November 2019 that its initial determination would stand. Thus, in December 2019 the department voided the daughter's following three appointments: (1) November 2011 appointment to staff services analyst, (2) June 2012 appointment to compliance analyst, and (3) May 2017 appointment to associate information systems analyst.
In addition, the department found that as a result of the daughter's bad faith in the third appointment, she is required to reimburse all compensation resulting from that appointment, totaling approximately $30,000. Information regarding all of these actions were placed in the daughter's official personnel file in December 2019 for a period of one year.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From September 2019
The agency stated that it is working diligently to investigate, prepare, and serve corrective actions related to the daughter's appointments, which includes seeking reimbursement for all compensation resulting from her associate information systems analyst appointment, as ordered by the SPB. The agency estimated that it will file its actions no later than October 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From June 2019
The agency stated that unless it discovers contrary evidence, it will place in the daughter's official personnel file the SPB's April 2019 published findings that she acted in bad faith with regard to the staff services analyst and associate information systems analyst positions. The agency did not state when it anticipates placing the statement in her file.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From March 2019
In May 2018, the agency asserted that because the daughter resigned from state employment effective April 2018, she was no longer subject to state disciplinary action. We responded that although she was no longer a state employee, the agency still should document in the daughter's official personnel file that she resigned shortly after we shared our investigation with the agency. The agency stated in February 2019 that it intends to discuss the recommendation with CalHR, SPB, and other appropriate entities prior to making a final decision. In March 2019 the agency stated that it contacted CalHR and SPB and that neither of them had finalized their reviews at that time. The agency stated that SPB anticipated finalizing its review by April 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #5 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should collect $129,329 from the director's daughter for her fraudulent claims of time worked.
Agency Response From September 2021
In March 2021, the agency shared the SPB's decision regarding the June 2020 hearing wherein SPB affirmed the decision to order the daughter to repay wages unlawfully earned while working as an associate information systems analyst. The agency did not pursue repayment of wages earned while on her training and development assignment as we recommended, which made up the majority of the wages we initially recommended that it collect.
Ultimately, the SPB ordered the daughter to repay approximately $19,000 and the agency confirmed that the full amount was paid in July 2021.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Resolved
Agency Response From September 2020
The agency reported that the SPB hearing occurred in June 2020 and it is awaiting the hearing officer's decision on the matter.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From June 2020
The agency reported that the SPB hearing was continued to June 2020; however, the director's daughter requested a continuance on the hearing.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency reported that the SPB has set an informal hearing on the matter in May 2020. It stated that the department intends to take all necessary and appropriate measures to defend the corrective actions and its notice of overpayment.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From December 2019
In December 2019, the department issued to the director's daughter an accounts receivable notice for overpayments totaling nearly $30,000.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2019
The agency stated that it is working diligently to investigate, prepare, and serve corrective actions related to the daughter's appointments, which includes seeking reimbursement for all compensation resulting from her associate information systems analyst appointment, as ordered by the SPB. The agency estimated that it will file its actions no later than October 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From June 2019
Initially, the agency waited to take any action until SPB finalized its review of the unlawful appointments discussed in this report. We have repeatedly explained to the agency since then that its ability to take action on this recommendation is completely independent from any assessment of whether the appointments of the director's daughter were made in good faith as the overpayments occurred as a result of the daughter's misrepresentations on her timesheets from August 2015 through August 2017. Although SPB completed its investigation and issued its findings in April 2019, the agency continues to take no action on this recommendation. SPB also stated in its report that its finding, "does not in any way diminish or negate the [State Auditor's] findings that [the daughter] filed fraudulent claims of time worked or the associated recommendation that the oversight agency collect [money] from her for those fraudulent claims."
In June 2019 the agency stated that since SPB concluded that the daughter acted in bad faith with regard to her associate information systems analyst appointment, the agency has been directed to collect all compensation resulting from the appointment. The agency stated that it would comply with SPB's directive "assuming [its] review of the evidence supports this finding." This directive, however, only covers five months (April 2017 through August 2017) of the 25 months related to this recommendation. Moreover, since the statute of limitations for collecting overpayments is three years and the agency has taken no action on this recommendation, the overpayments made for the first 11 months (August 2015 through June 2016) can no longer be collected. Although the agency has agreed to collect five months of overpayments, it still has not taken action on the remaining nine months available for collection (July 2016 through March 2017). Despite our repeated communications to the agency advising it on the consequences of delaying action on this recommendation, the agency still has made no progress on this recommendation and despite being aware that with every month that passes, additional state monies for collection become out of reach.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From March 2019
In May 2018, the agency asserted that because the overpayments are tied to the daughter's associate information systems analyst appointment, it would wait until the SPB completes its investigation into that appointment. We asserted in June 2018 that the daughter's dishonest and fraudulent timesheets could be acted upon under the department's power to collect any overpayments it makes. In addition, we reminded the agency that since collection efforts are limited to three years, it should act expeditiously to recover these funds. The agency asserted that it would wait for direction from SPB before it took any action on this recommendation. In February 2019, the agency stated that it intends to also discuss the recommendation with CalHR and other appropriate entities prior to making a final decision. In March 2019 the agency stated that it contacted CalHR and SPB and that neither of them had finalized their reviews at that time. The agency stated that SPB anticipated finalizing its review by April 2019. By delaying action, the agency has already lost the ability to collect $41,560 of overpayments because the statute of limitations has expired.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #6 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should suspend the director's daughter's telecommuting agreement.
Agency Response From May 2018
In May 2018, the agency reported that as the director's daughter had resigned, no valid telecommuting agreement requires suspension. Thus, we determined that this recommendation is resolved.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Resolved
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #7 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should require the IT manager and the new supervisor to attend external training related to the proper supervision of staff and, in particular, of staff who work remotely.
Agency Response From November 2018
In July and August 2018, the agency reported that the IT manager and new supervisor would take CalHR's supervisory training course by October 2018. We questioned the agency's proposed action as this training already is mandated biennially by Government Code section 19995.4 and, as evidenced by our findings, did not have the desired effect on the IT manager's and new supervisor's management skills. The agency defended its decision for these individuals to attend this mandated training because neither employee had taken the mandated training in the past 18-20 years and, by taking the course again, the training would enable the two individuals to more effectively discharge their supervisorial duties. Ultimately, the agency reported to us that the IT manager completed the supervisory training as planned. The new supervisor did not attend the training because she retired. As the new supervisor is no longer employed by the State, we determined that this recommendation is resolved.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Resolved
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #8 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should require the director, IT manager, and the new supervisor to undergo training by CalHR related to the proper procedures to formalize and manage reasonable accommodations.
Agency Response From May 2020
The agency provided evidence of the new director's successful completion of the reasonable accommodation training. Therefore, we have deemed this recommendation fully implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency hired a new director in March 2020 and stated that the director will complete the recommended training by March 31, 2020.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From December 2019
Although the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported again that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete the recommended training.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2019
Although the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete the recommended training.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From June 2019
As of June 2019, the director position has not yet been appointed. Once a new director is appointed, the agency stated that it will require him or her to complete the training.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2019
By October 2018, the agency provided evidence that the IT manager and new supervisor had attended in-house training relating to reasonable accommodations. Although the training was not provided by CalHR as we originally recommended, the training materials appeared thorough and relevant to the concerns we raised during our investigation. In addition, the department had the HR chief, senior staff member, and all other IT managers and supervisors also attend this training. In March 2019 the agency stated that it would direct the director, when appointed, to complete the training. The recommendation will be deemed partially implemented until the department's permanent director, when appointed, completes the recommended training. We believe the new permanent director should take the training within the initial 90 days from his or her appointment.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #9 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should ensure that all staff who are currently permitted to telecommute full time have the proper documentation and justification on file and require that telecommuting agreements be reevaluated annually.
Agency Response From September 2019
The agency provided evidence indicating that the department's new telework policy became effective in August 2019.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From June 2019
In May 2019 the agency provided us with a copy of its new telework policy. In addition, it provided us with a copy of its finalized communication plan. The policy requires that employees and managers maintain proper documentation on file for each telecommuter. It also specifies that telework agreements are only valid for one year and if not renewed, they will expire. The agency stated that a new database was created to track the start date and renewal date for each telework agreement to remind staff and to ensure that renewals occur annually. The agency's communications plan directs HR staff to assist managers and employees in understanding the telework policy and procedures, provide advice on appropriate use of the policy, ensure the policy is kept up to date, and report any abuses of the policy. Further, the agency reported to us that it sent a union notice package to CalHR for review.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2019
In June 2018, the agency informed us that the telecommuting program was removed from the new supervisor's unit and returned to the HR division. The agency also stated that as part of its implementation, it would update the department's telecommuting policy to require renewals of all telecommuting agreements annually, develop a communications plan to ensure participants understand their roles and responsibilities, require in-person meetings with management, and provide quarterly reports to the director and administration chief on its telecommuting program. The agency stated in March 2019 that it intends to memorialize the department's communications plan by April 2019.
In February 2019, the agency provided us with a memorandum that the department's chief deputy director issued to telecommuting employees and to department supervisors and managers reminding staff that telecommuting agreements must be renewed annually. However, the actual department policy on telecommuting does not include this requirement. The agency reported in March 2019 that it would formally incorporate the requested changes into the department's telecommuting policy by May 2019.
The agency provided to us its first two quarterly reports in October 2018 and February 2019 that indicate about 250 employees are permitted to telecommute for the department, some of whom are permitted to telecommute full time. It also showed the number of agreements it authorized or renewed in each month. Based on the information we reviewed, the department is addressing the renewals of its telecommute agreements on a monthly basis. Nevertheless, until a revised telecommuting policy is provided that specifically notes that telecommuting agreements must be reevaluated by management annually, the recommendation is only partially implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #10 To: California, State of
Given the totality of the director's improper conduct, the oversight agency should work with the Governor's office to take appropriate steps to ensure that the director, and any other individual who may occupy her position, cannot take similar actions. (Duplicate of Recommendation 1)
Agency Response From May 2020
The agency provided evidence that the new director completed training on anti-retaliation and anti-bias. Thus, we have deemed this recommendation fully implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency reported that it hired a director effective March 2020, and it indicated that the new director has strong human resources and administrative experience to ensure that the issues identified in the report are never repeated. The agency stated that the new director would attend and complete all of the training recommended by our office by March 31, 2020.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From December 2019
Even though the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From September 2019
Although the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From June 2019
As of June 2019, the director position is still vacant. However, the agency reiterated that once a permanent director is appointed, it will ensure within 12 months that he or she completes the training about impermissible bias and the anti-retaliations provision of the California Whistleblower Protection Act
Since the public report, the agency also stated that it has hired a team of special consultants with HR, personnel, and administrative experience to help build appropriate administrative operations and culture in the department.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From March 2019
As the director retired from state service, the agency did not take any action against her. To prevent any other individuals who occupy the same position from taking similar actions, the agency stated in May 2018 that it would require the department's future directors to undergo training on the importance of avoiding perceptions of impermissible bias as well as the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act. The agency did not provide any relevant training completed by its acting director, who subsequently also retired. In March 2019, the agency provided evidence that the department's chief deputy director attended training about these two topics. Once a permanent director is appointed, the agency stated that it would ensure the new director completes the training within 12 months of his or her appointment.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #11 To: California, State of
The oversight agency should require the director, HR chief, and the senior staff member to undergo CalHR or SPB training on the requirements for making good-faith appointments, permissible reinstatements, leaves of absences, and pay differentials.
Agency Response From November 2021
The agency reported that it has filled the HR chief position and provided us with evidence supporting that the HR chief completed training on making good-faith appointments, permissible reinstatements, leaves of absences, and pay differentials.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From October 2021
The agency reported in October 2021 that it is currently in the process of hiring an HR chief. Once the selected candidate completes the recommended training, the agency will notify us.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2020
The agency reported the HR chief position remains vacant as of September 2020 but that the recommended training will be provided when the position is filled.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From June 2020
The agency provided evidence that the new director and new senior staff member have completed training on good faith appointments, permissible reinstatement, leaves of absences, and pay differentials. The HR chief position remains vacant.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency hired a new director in March 2020 and stated that the director will complete the recommended training by March 31, 2020. In addition, the agency stated that it will provide completion of training by the new senior staff member as well as the new director in its next update. The HR chief position remains vacant.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From December 2019
The department recently appointed a new senior staff member. The agency reported that the new senior staff member is scheduled to take the recommended training in January 2020.
The department continues to operate without a director and HR chief. The agency stated that once the positions are filled, it will ensure the recommended training is completed.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From September 2019
The department continues to operate without a director, HR chief, and senior staff member. The agency stated that once the positions are filled, it will ensure the recommended training is completed.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From June 2019
In April 2019 the agency provided evidence that the chief deputy director and other relevant staff attended a CalHR training on permissible reinstatement, leaves of absence, and pay differentials in March 2019. Currently, the department's director, HR chief, and senior staff member positions are vacant.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Partially Implemented
Agency Response From March 2019
In June 2018, the agency told us that it had decided that all department supervisors and managers would receive this training. In December 2018, the agency stated that it had engaged CalHR to design and provide customized training to the department on these topics. The agency reported that the training is scheduled to occur in late March 2019 and that its chief deputy director and other department managers and executives are enrolled in the training. The agency also stated that the senior staff member was removed from her CEA position and no longer functions in a supervisory capacity. Until the training is completed by the director and HR chief, and we are given an opportunity to evaluate the course materials covered, this recommendation is pending.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Case Number I2019-1
Recommendation #12 To: California, State of
Given the totality of the director's improper conduct, the oversight agency should work with the Governor's office to take appropriate steps to ensure that the director, and any other individual who may occupy her position, cannot take similar actions. (Duplicate of Recommendation 1)
Agency Response From May 2020
The agency provided evidence that the new director completed training on anti-retaliation and anti-bias. Thus, we have deemed this recommendation fully implemented.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented
Agency Response From March 2020
The agency reported that it has hired a director effective March 2020, and it indicated that the new director has strong human resources and administrative experience to ensure that the issues identified in the report are never repeated. The agency stated that the new director would attend and complete all the training recommended by our office by March 31, 2020.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From December 2019
Even though the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From September 2019
Although the director position has been vacant since March 2018, the agency reported that it is still committed to ensuring that once a permanent director is appointed, he or she will complete training within 12 months on impermissible bias and the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From June 2019
As of June 2019, the director position is still vacant. However, the agency reiterated that once a permanent director is appointed, it will ensure within 12 months that he or she completes the training about impermissible bias and the anti-retaliations provision of the California Whistleblower Protection Act
Since the public report, the agency also stated that it has hired a team of special consultants with HR, personnel, and administrative experience to help build appropriate administrative operations and culture in the department.
California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Pending
Agency Response From March 2019
As the director retired from state service, the agency did not take any action against her. To prevent any other individuals who occupy the same position from taking similar actions, the agency stated in May 2018 that it would require the department's future directors to undergo training on the importance of avoiding perceptions of impermissible bias as well as the anti-retaliation provisions of the California Whistleblower Protection Act. The agency did not provide any relevant training completed by its acting director, who subsequently also retired. In March 2019, the agency provided evidence that the department's chief deputy director attended training about these two topics. Once a permanent director is appointed, the agency stated that it would ensure the new director completes the training within 12 months of his or her appointment.