Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05071996 - C84 C.84 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 7, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop , De5aulnier, Torlakson, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Grand Jury Report No. 9601 and Report No. 9602 IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the 1995-1996 Contra Costa County Grand Jury Report No. 9601, "Audit Cooperation/Teamwork in Auditing and Grand Jury Report No. 9602, "Inmate Welfare Fund, " is REFERRED to the County Administrator and the Internal Operation Committee. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: May 7, 1996 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator BY—VIM jj A ,Deputy cc: CAO Auditor-Controller Sheriff Grand Jury A REPORT BY THE 1995-96 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY 1020 Ward Street Martinez, California 94553 (516),646-2345 Report No. 9601 AUDIT COOPERATION/TEAMWORK IN AUDITING Approved by the Grand Jury: Date: RAMIRO AROSEMENA GRAND JURY FOREMAN Accepted for Filing r' Date: --. J VAN DE POEL JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT AUDIT COOPERATION/TEAMWORK IN AUDITING SUMMARY This report recommends policies to be followed with respect to County.audits.. INTRODUCTION The 1995/96 Grand Jury has a mandated interest in the use and allocation of public funds throughout the County. In addition, the Grand Jury is committed to evaluation of the operational effectiveness and efficiency of government entities within the County. The Grand Jury recognizes the varied levels of yearly internal and independent audits initiated by the County and deems it appropriate to insure appropriate Grand Jury*review of County audits. FINDINGS 1. The County performs several types of audits: ♦ The Board of Supervisors requires an annual independent audit by a professional audit firm, currently KPMG Peat Marwick LLP. ♦ Whenever a particular need is perceived, the Office of the County Administrator conducts Management Audits to evaluate the operation of specific departments. ♦ The Auditor-Controller conducts both financial and internal control audits of government entities, as required by various laws and regulations on a selective basis, or as specifically requested by a responsible official. 2. The Grand Jury is generally satisfied with the County's performance of audit responsibilities and believes that they were accomplished in a professional and thorough manner. 3. Immediately upon request, audit reports were provided to the 1995796 Grand Jury. However, a procedure for a routine delivery of audit reports and their subsequent responses to the Grand Jury was non-existent.. 4. The Office of the County Administrator initiated two (2) Management Audits in Fiscal Year (FY)1993-94 and none in FY1994-95. . r , 5. The Auditor-Controller's Office completed six(6) Financial Statemnt Audits and twenty-three(23) Internal Audits in FY1993-94. In FY1994-95, the Auditor-. Controller's Office completed eleven (11) Financial Statement Audits and twenty- five (25) Internal Audits: 6. Implementation of corrective actions suggested in internal audits are not always accomplished in a timely manner. Although some recommendations are initially accepted, no administrative follow-up is apparent. This leaves remaining recommendations requiring action to be carried forward into subsequent reports. CONCLUSIONS 1. Each newly empaneled Grand Jury with the County Administrator should confer on audits, in early July, to determine its participation in and review of current year. 2. The Grand Jury should routinely receive a copy of all management, financial and internal control audits produced by the Office of the County Administrator and the Office of the Auditor-Controller, concurrent with transmission to the audited entity. The Grand Jury should also receive copies of any responses from these audited entities.. 3. A better structured, documented system should be established to assure that targeted entities are responsive to the individual audit comments. 4. In spite of intense manpower requirements, an aggressive program of management audits should be developed to assess the operational effectiveness and efficiency of departments prior to an obvious need. RECOMMENDATIONS The 1995-96 Grand Jury strongly recommends that 1. The County Administrator and the Grand Jury Foreman consult on the following matters with respect to audits carried out jointly for the Grand Jury and the Board of Supervisors: a. The Grand Jury's participation in audit activities. b. Grand Jury review of the contract proposed for a joint audit. 2 c. The provision of Grand Jury training as part of a joint audit contract. d.Grand Jury participation in joint audit progress meetings between Count staff and the independent auditing firm. e. Concurrent submission of the joint audit report and management letter to the Grand Jury and to the Board of Supervisors. 2. The Office of the County Administrator develop a structured Management Audit Program, whereby individual departments undergo periodic,.in-depth evaluation by an independent ad hoc team of knowledgeable County employees: a. The Management Audit would identify the Department's performance against goals, operational-effectiveness, efficiency and conformance with County policies and regulations. b. A goal would be established to accomplish management audits, such as: two (2) departments per year with each department receiving a Management Audit at least every five(5)years. C. These recommendations are not intended to interfere with special management audits of specific departments. 3. The Auditor-Controller direct staff to furnish a copy of all financial and internal audit reports and responses to the Grand Jury. 4. The Board of Supervisors develop'-a- system to assure written, timely, responses to audit findings. The system must include a course-of-action to be taken by the next higher authority in the event of inadequate or no response. COMMENT The 1995-96 Grand Jury appreciates the dedication and interest taken by County leaders in establishing and overseeing operations through audit programs. These modifications provide improved guidelines to assure the financial and operational integrity of entities under County Jurisdiction. The recommendations also provide an avenue for newly empaneled Grand Juries to determine their own audit and budget emphasis. 3 SECTION 933(c) . OF THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE Sec- 933. Findings and recn -ndations; com— ment of governing bodies, elective officers, or agency heads (c) No lata than 90 days afar the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elective county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court,with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors,on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that offi= or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All such comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impan- Bled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand Jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the -mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control . of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minima of five years. (Added by Stats 1961, c 1284, §L Amended by Stam 1963, c 67.4; § 1; St=1974, c 393, § 6; Stars-1974, c 1396, § 3; Sra=1977, c 107, § 6, Stals 1977, c 187, § 1; Stats 1980, c 543, § 1; Stars 1981, c 203, §1;. Stam 1982, c 1408, § 5, Srars.1985, c 221, § 1; Srars.1987, c 690, § 1 Stars-1988. c 1297, § S.) Former § 9;3, added by Stas198:., c. 1408. b 6, Zmended by Stau1985.e''1.§ 2,operative Jan. 1. 1989,evas rc?c:ald by Stats.1987, c 690. § Former § 933, added by Stas 1959, c 501. § ?. was repcald by Sus1959. c 1812. § 3. RECEIVED APR 2 91996 CSRCONTRAARID OCOSTA CO SUPERVISORS A REPORT BY THE 1995-96 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY 1020 Ward Street Martinez, California 94553 (510) 646-2345 Report No. 9602 INMATE WELFARE FUND Approved by the Grand Jury: Date: t/7" RAMIRO AR SEMENA GRAND JURY FOREMAN Accepted for Filing: Date: JOHN F VAN DE POEL JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT INMATE WELFARE FUND REPORT NO. 9602 INTRODUCTION Numerous questions have been asked by County Taxpayers regarding the Sheriff s Department Inmate Welfare Fund expenditures. These taxpayers presume that public funds are being used to maintain detention facility programs. The 1995-96 Contra Costa County Grand Jury'conducted an investigation of the Sheriffs Department Inmate Welfare Fund. This investigation provided a detailed analysis of the Fund's establishment and purpose of • Inmate Welfare Fund Administration • Inmate Welfare Fund Revenue • Inmate Welfare Fund Programs The Inmate Welfare Fund is not County tax dollars. CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES The Sheriff s Department Inmate Welfare Fund is operated under the authority of California Penal Code, Section 4025 and California Code of Regulations, Section 1043. The Code Section 4025 states that"money and property deposited in the Inmate Welfare Fund be expended by the Sheriff primarily for the benefit, education and welfare of the inmates confined within the jail." "Any funds that are not needed for the welfare of the inmates may be expended for the maintenance of County Jail facilities." "Maintenance of County Jail facilities may include, but is not limited to, the salary and benefit of personnel used in the programs to benefit the inmate including, but not limited to, education, drug and alcohol treatment, welfare, library, accounting and other programs deemed appropriate by the Sheriff." Section 4025 of the Penal Code was amended in September 1993 to provide"that any funds that are not needed for the welfare of the inmates may be expended to the maintenance of County Jail facilities as defined. Title 15 of the California Code of Regulations sets the standard for an accounting of the Inmate Welfare Fund in Section 1043." 1 This section requires that each facility administration develop a written policy regarding the appropriate use of the Inmate Welfare Fund in accordance with the Penal Code, Section 4025. FINDINGS 1. ADMINISTRATION - INMATE WELFARE FUND A. Contra Costa County Detention Facility Policies and Procedures for the Inmate Welfare Fund issued July.1, 1995, replaces the form dated September 22, 1988. This policy and procedure governs Inmate Welfare Fund use and provides committee guidelines for recommendation of fund expenditures. B. The fund is administrated by the Sheriff with the advice and counsel of the Inmate Welfare Fund Committee who recommends to the Sheriff regarding Inmate Welfare Fund administration and expenditures. C. The committee consists of five(5)voting members; the Detention Facility Commander and four(4) at-large public members, each appointed by the Sheriff for one(1)year terms. One committee position is currently vacant. D. The members meet quarterly and are given advance notification. Meeting minutes are posted for review at the three(3) adult detention facilities. 2. INMATE WELFARE FUND SOURCE OF REVENUE A. The Inmate Welfare Fund generates revenue from commissary sale profits and inmate telephone call commissions within the detention facilities. B. The County Auditor-Controller conducts a biennial fund audit. 3. PROGRAMS CURRENTLY FUNDED BY THE INMATE WELFARE FUND A. Friends Outside Program Provides social services for Contra Costa County Adult Detention Facilities. B. School Program Provides funding support for a County Office of Education school program conducted at three (3) adult detention facilities. 2 C. Library Program Provides funding support for County Library services including a law library and law clerk service. D. Inmate Engraving Program This is a new vocational program that will be implemented in 1996. Inmates involved in this program will be afforded job skill training. E. Chaplaincy Program Provides funding support to the Contra Costa County Council of Churches for inmate chaplaincy services in all three(3) adult detention facilities. Since 1979, the Council of Churches has contracted with the SherifFs Department to provide this service. The services provided are numerous and invaluable; arranging for performance of.these services and counseling by representatives of various organized religions to meet the diverse spiritual needs of inmates. The council developed and currently supervises a program consisting of more than 300 volunteers that involve local clergy, seminary students and the community. The two (2)full-time chaplains and two (2) full-time interns funded by the Inmate Welfare Fund make regular visitations to all three(3) detention facilities. They provide inmate and family counseling and respond to crisis and emergency situations involving inmates. F. Director of Inmate Services This is a management level position funded by the Inmate Welfare Fund. Specific to the many responsibilities of the position is the management of all contracts charged to the Inmate Welfare Fund and preparation and submission of an annual budget to the Inmate Welfare Fund Committee. In September of 1995, the person filling this position retired and the responsibilities have been executed by the Detention Division Commander. Currently, this position is in review to determine the necessity of a management level position as opposed to a lower salaried staff coordinator. 4. GENERAL EXPENSES The Inmate Welfare Fund provides funding for general expenses that include newspaper subscriptions, basic cable service, TV and VCR maintenance, BART tickets and other general expenses which directly benefit inmates. 3 5. REVENUE A. The 1995-96 projected revenue for the Inmate Welfare Fund is $960,000. The audited Fiscal Year(FY) (ending June 30, 1996) fund receipts were $608,0921 B. Two-thirds(2/3) of the 1995-96 projected revenue will generate from inmate telephone call commissions; the remaining one-third (1/3) from commissary sale commissions, additional phone commission contracts and the 1994-95 carryover balance. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Inmate Welfare Fund provides programs that benefit County Detention Facility inmates. 2. Revenue from this fund is generated by the inmates themselves as a result of their telephone call commissions and commissary purchases. 3. The Inmate Welfare Fund revenue is not tax dollars. RECOMMENDATIONS The 1995-96 Contra Costa Grand Jury recommends that: 1. The Sheriff fill the Director of Inmate Services vacancy. 2. The Sheriff fill the vacant position on the Inmate Welfare Fund Committee. 3. The Inmate Welfare Fund continue to be supported entirely by inmate generated income; i.e., inmate phone call commissions, commissary sales and any other revenue stipulated under the authority of the Penal Code, Section 4025. 4 SECTION 933(c) OF THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE Sec_ 933. Findings and recommendations; cam- went of governing bodies, elective officers, or agency heads (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the aresiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elective county offices or agency head for which the grand jury has responsicdity pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court,with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors,on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All such comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impan- cled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the -mayor when applicable, and shaIl remain on file in those offices One copy shaIl be placed on Me with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years. (Added by Sears 1961, c 1284, §L Amended by S=m 1963, e 67.4; § 1; Sw=1974, c 393, § 6, Stam1974. c 1396, § 3, Srars19777. a 107, ¢ 6; Stars1977 c 187, § l; Sears 1980, a 543, § 1; Stals1981, a 203, § 1; St=1982, a 1408, § J; Staa1985, c 221, § 1; Srau1987, a 690, § 1; Sram 1988, c 1297, ¢ 5.) Forme § 933, added by Sues198:, c. 1408. § 6, -ended by Stats.1985.c'_1,§ Z,Operative Jan. 1, 1989,was rt'xsld by Stats.1987, C_ 690, § 2 Former § 933, added by Stats 1959, e 501. § 2. was repealed by Suns 1959. c- 1812. § 3.