Grand Jury Full Report – 2001/2002 (5.2 Mb)

For the Board of Supervisors weekly meetings, 1,679 agenda items were claimed. A review of Board agendas for the fiscal year identified approximately 3,443 agenda items. Accordingly, reimbursement for over 50 percent of agenda items was not claimed. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 21 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year The Auditor-Controller filed an amended claim that included costs for a total of 1,887 agenda items. According to the Auditor-Controller, not all agenda items were claimed because some departments believed it was not cost-beneficial to do so. However, when combined, these agenda items allow for a significant amount of reimbursable costs. A revised claim should be filed that accounts for these items, which are estimated to total approximately $47,013 in reimbursable costs in excess of the original claim. It is recommended that the Auditor-Controller revise its procedures for this claim and centralize the compilation of agenda items by internally tallying items from the Board of Supervisors weekly agendas. The agendas clearly designate which department is sponsoring the agenda item, which will enable the Auditor-Controller to apply the appropriate blended productive hourly rate. The blended productive hourly rate includes indirect costs. In the computation of the rate, indirect costs are calculated using the standard ten percent indirect cost rate. Because the standard ten percent rate is typically well under the actual indirect cost rates of departments, we recommend the Auditor-Controller calculate indirect cost rates for departments that have a significant number of agenda items. Additionally, because the Clerk of the Board, County Counsel, and the County Administrative Officer are components in every blended productive hourly rate calculation, the Auditor- Controller should prepare indirect cost rate proposals for these three departments. The Auditor-Controller has developed spreadsheets that would make the computation of the blended productive hourly rate using actual indirect cost rates easy to implement. As an example, increasing the District Attorney’s indirect cost rate to 83 percent increases the blended productive hourly rate by almost 22 percent. However, 50 percent of the time worked on District Attorney agenda items is by Clerk of the Board, County Counsel, and County Administrative Office staff. Accordingly, computing and applying an actual indirect cost rate for these three departments could substantially increase the blended productive hourly rate and reimbursed costs. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Perinatal Services PH/ARMC $280,114 This claim reimburses counties for inpatient costs of screening maternity patients, as well as the costs of testing and assessing newborns for substance-exposure. The claim reimburses counties to establish a discharge plan for substance exposed newborns that ensures a safe and healthy return to the family’s home or, if necessary, a referral to the County welfare department. Three areas of this claim were identified that merit further analysis and claim preparation by the Auditor-Controller’s Office, the Public Health Department and staff at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 22 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year The services submitted for reimbursement are provided by the Public Health Department and Medical Center, however the claim does not include an indirect cost rate proposal for the medical center and uses salary information from the Public Health Department to calculate salary costs for medical center employees. Based on Medical Center budget data from the 2000-01 fiscal year, it is estimated that the productive hourly rate in the claim understates the costs of Registered Nurses by 26 percent. Medical Center staff and ACR staff should develop an indirect cost rate and devise a system whereby Medical Center provides the ACR office with the data necessary to prepare the claim each year. Fieldwork confirmed that Medical Center staff who provided the Auditor-Controller’s office the data for this claim did not receive a copy of the finalized claim for review prior to it submission, nor had they received a copy of the claim as submitted at the time of our review. The changes in the claim related to the salary adjustment described above, other adjustments made using salary figures of Medical Center employees during the fiscal year and the application of the Public Health indirect cost rate total an increase in the claim of $13,350. The toxicology screen claim component is described in the instructions as the “Costs incurred in identification of substance-exposed newborns by an employee in the health care setting, in accordance with hospital protocol.” This cost is reflected in the current claim by estimating the actual cost of the toxicology screens performed relative to the published charge for the procedure, based on the Medical Center’s consideration of its overall charge to cost ratio. This cost estimate should be strengthened by further analysis of the costs of a toxicology screen, including lab costs and staff costs. A positive screen may trigger more specific laboratory tests to be ordered, which are reimbursable, as was the case in three of 19 positive screens, provided by Medical Center staff. Medical Center should track the tests that take place when a screen is positive and the additional costs. Based on estimates using the Medical Center method, the toxicology screen costs may be understated by approximately $2,871, given reimbursement received for the tests, as described below. The claim instructions direct counties to reduce each claim by savings or reimbursements submitted or received. The fiscal year 2000-01 claim does reduce the total claim by the Medi-Cal reimbursement amount for toxicology screens. Any additional reimbursement received by Public Health or Medical Center that is directly related or allocated to the perinatal services included in the claim should be reflected in lines nine and 10 of Form PS-1. Taken together, the changes recommended in the claim will result in an increase of $16,221 or six percent. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 23 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Search Warrant AIDS District Attorney $81,584 Penal Code Section 1524.1 allows crime victims the opportunity to approach the court and request that a Search Warrant be issued to test the charged person for HIV/AIDS. This claim reimburses the County for costs related to the testing of the charged person and the victim, the provision of pre- and post-test counseling and the informing of the victim and the charged person of the test results. The District Attorney’s Office claimed $81,584 of reimbursable SB 90 search warrant AIDS costs in FY 2000-01. This claim was based on the salary cost of one investigative technician, plus fringe benefits, indirect costs and the cost of related services and supplies. No costs were included for attorney time spent reviewing approximately 10,000 complaints filed by local law enforcement agencies prior to referring specific cases to the investigative technician for processing. Attorney time could potentially include the following: • Review of complaints filed with the District Attorney’s Office to identify potential cases where police reports showed probable cause that blood, semen, or any other bodily fluid identified by the State Department of Health Services as capable of transmitting the human immuno-deficiency virus to another individual may have been transmitted. • Preparation and filing of a notice of testing document with the courts and providing a copy of such document to the arrested person at his/her arraignment, and routing copies of the complaint to the appropriate personnel and the court. • Notification of the victim of the right under Penal Code Section 1524.1(c) to have the defendant tested for AIDS. Provide professional consultation to the victim informing him/her about the spread of disease, high risk factors for transmitting AIDS and the benefits and limitations of testing, per Penal Code Section 1524.1. Provide pre-request counseling to help the victim decide whether to ask the accused be tested, and to decide whether the victim wants to be tested. (Although notification by mail is the initial approach usually attempted, personal contact is generally necessary to adequately meet the requirements of this component of the mandate.) • In cases where the victim requests testing, prepare the necessary documentation for the courts. Distribute and follow-up on all Penal Code Section 1524.1 search warrants. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 24 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year • Prepare for and attend hearings before the court to support the issuance of a search warrant pursuant to Penal Code Section 1524.2(c). State Controller instructions for collecting costs related to this mandate permit counties the option of performing periodic time studies to calculate the average number of hours spent on reimbursable activities related to this mandate in-lieu of tracking actual hours. Such time studies must be supported by documentation. One such form of documentation would be a simple survey questionnaire identifying the approximate number of hours or fractions thereof expended weekly performing the above activities. A short questionnaire could be provided to attorneys annually or every two or three years depending on the County’s assessment of the stability of this function as related to workload and process requirements. The District Attorney’s Office provided a response to the draft report indicating that this function has been automated and that Technicians now do this work. The District Attorney also asserted that no attorney time is expended reviewing police reports to identify these cases. However, interviews with attorneys whose fulltime job is to review police reports eight hours per day and 40 hours per week report that they do look for cases that may have involved a transfer of body fluids and refer such cases to the Technician to process. The attorney also reported that there are approximately 14 deputy district attorneys County-wide who perform the identical function of reviewing police reports. The time of each of these attorneys expended identifying and referring these cases is reimbursable and should be reported and claimed. As an example, one hour per week for 14 attorneys would amount to approximately 700 attorney hours and total claimable costs, including overhead, of at least $70,000. Further, any attorney time expended maintaining records and reporting time would also be fully reimbursable as a part of the mandate process claim. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Services to Handicapped Behavioral Health $877,779 Students This claim reimburses the County for costs related to the assessment and treatment of seriously emotionally disturbed children. The assessments and related treatment services are the result of a collaborative process between the Department of Behavioral Health, the parents and caretakers of the child and representatives of the education system. While the amount claimed by San Bernardino appears somewhat low relative to other large counties, it does appear that the claim generally reflects the delivery of services to severely emotionally disturbed students. Strategies are presented to refine Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 25 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year the claim, analyze an alternative claiming method and augment the future claimable amount by including time spent by County Counsel in mediation and due process proceedings. An issue affecting all counties regarding this claim is currently under consideration by the State and a decision is expected when the State finalizes the fiscal year 2002-2003 budget. At issue is the determination of whether 100 or 10 percent of treatment costs are reimbursable under this SB 90 claim, given the consideration of the claim when Realignment legislation was enacted. San Bernardino has historically claimed 100 percent of both the treatment and assessment costs and a letter stating that no Realignment funds were used to support the programs has accompanied the claim data provided to the Auditor-Controller office by the Department of Behavioral Health. The passage of a trailer bill may hold counties harmless for previous claims under this chapter of SB 90, freeing up previously reserved funds received from the State.1 We have determined that the County has already transferred approximately $800,000 of previously claimed funds under this chapter to the department. The trailer bill language also precludes counties from amending their fiscal year 2000-01 claims. Regardless of the outcome of the trailer bill, the recommendations should be used to construct future claims that more accurately and completely detail all the relevant and appropriate costs of providing the functions described in the claim instructions. The data used to report units of treatment provided and the related costs is derived from two sources – the Department of Behavioral Health’s Management Information System and the year-end cost report submitted to the California Department of Mental Health. While the data may have been transferred accurately from these sources, two recommendations will increase the accuracy of the data and augment those units of treatment claimable in future years. First, the MIS system relies on clinicians and clerical staff recognizing the child as one specifically entitled to the SED services. Periodic verification of the payer classification of all children receiving mental health services will ensure that the claim data captures all relevant costs. In addition, program staff and fiscal staff of the Department of the Behavioral Health should carefully review the claim instructions and procedure codes to ensure that what the claim considers “assessment” matches the type of service provided under the assessment procedure codes. In reviewing this information with Department staff, it appears that the standard 1 “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, with respect to the Handicapped and Disabled Students state-mandated program, county reimbursement claims submitted to the State Auditor-Controller for reimbursement for services associated with providing eligible mental health treatment services to Special Education Program pupils in years up to and including the 2000-01 fiscal year are deemed correct and shall not be subject to dispute by the State Auditor-Controller’s Office. No county may amend a previously submitted reimbursement claim for the 2000-01 fiscal year or prior for eligible mental health treatment services to Special Education Program pupils.” Subcommittee on Health and Human Services May 8, 2002, Item 4440 Issue 13. Trailer Bill language as proposed. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 26 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year classification of types of treatment under the MIS system may not necessarily correspond with the categorization of service under the claim instructions. Such categorization is important related to the issue discussed above. San Bernardino’s Department of Behavioral Health has selected the cost report method to prepare this claim, deriving the proportion of Administrative costs related to the specific set of services and including this amount for reimbursement under the claim. While this method may be allowable, it is recommended that the Department prepare a cost report method claim using an indirect cost rate in order to compare the two claim amounts and select a claim method for future years. Such analysis will determine how effectively the current claiming method captures the indirect costs related to the provision of services and the administration of the program. A component of the claim that was not considered includes the time that County Counsel spends representing the Department of Behavioral Health in due process mediation sessions and hearings. The Office of the County Counsel provided data indicating that a total of approximately 30 hours were spent on cases related to this claim and the SEDs claim, discussed later in the review. Future claims should include the specific hours related to each claim, including the development of an ICRP for the Office of the County Counsel and the exclusion of these direct charges from the Behavioral Health ICRP. Finally, a review of the claim instructions and forms provided by the State for this claim revealed that the forms have been updated in 1998 and 2000 but that the Department of Behavioral Health used the 1997 forms when preparing the claim. The Auditor- Controller’s Office provides DBH staff with an electronic version of the claim forms annually. It is recommended that the Auditor-Controller update the revised forms into the electronic forms and forward a hard copy of the revised claim forms and instructions to the Department. A discrepancy in a form across revisions related to the calculation of administrative costs was identified during the review. The State Controller’s Office verbally confirmed the error in the claim forms. This discrepancy does not affect the amount claimed, given the Department’s selection of the cost report method. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Sexually Violent Predators District Attorney $988,821 The claim related to sexually violent predators reimburses the County for legal counsel, support staff, prisoner housing, transportation and other costs. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 27 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year The District Attorney’s Office claimed $988,821 of reimbursable SB 90 sexually violent predator costs in FY 2000-01. This claim reported labor and services and supplies costs related to 43 cases. Cases are manually tracked by clerical support staff and related staff hours are obtained from attorneys, paralegal, and investigative staff time sheets. While this is an acceptable method of tracking these SB 90 reimbursable costs, it is possible that costs related to reimbursable cases could be omitted without the use of an automated verification process. Ideally, a computer generated list could be produced each fiscal year identifying all cases involving persons convicted of offenses as sexually violent predators for whom continued detention assessments and hearings were conducted in accordance with Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 6250 – 6608. In addition to the use of a second case identification methodology to verify that all reimbursable case costs are included in the SB 90 claim, costs related to lead attorney, attorney and investigator administrative time spent maintaining records, compiling data and summarizing and reporting unit statistics and costs related to this mandated function are not claimed. Such costs are claimable on the County-wide mandate process claim. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim SIDS: Coroner $74,353 Autopsy Protocol This claim reimburses the County for autopsies performed according to established State protocols on infants who have died suddenly and unexpectedly. The Coroner’s office, which is combined with the Public Administrator, the Public Guardian, and the Public Conservator, claimed $74,353 in fiscal year 2000-01. A review of the indirect cost rate, which is 186.55 percent, indicates that a significant amount of staffing costs have been classified as indirect costs. In fact, almost 55 percent of salaries and benefits have been classified as indirect, including Embalmer Autopsy Assistants, a Medical Transcriber, a Transcriber Typist, and Clerks that directly support on the Public Guardian or Coroner functions. All of these positions have a direct relationship to one cost activity. To the extent that these positions provide assistance to the Coroner, their time should be classified as direct and billed as direct, if they work on the reimbursable mandate. If this time is difficult to track, a time study should be utilized to appropriately capture the direct time worked by these employees. Reclassifying these positions as direct costs reduces the indirect cost rate to 89 percent and reduces reimbursable costs by $22,884. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 28 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Further, the time spent fulfilling this mandate is estimated by the Coroner, but not supported by actual time records or formal time studies. The Coroner’s Office did do an informal review in 1997 of the SIDS autopsy process including tracking the time for several claimable activities. However, this review did not cover all claimable activities and for some activities that it did cover, claimed hours substantially exceed the hours reported in the internal review. For example, 3.5 hours are claimed for death investigation interviews. The internal review of three cases averaged only 1.25 hours to conduct these interviews. The Department should track the actual time spent on this mandate or derive formal time studies to support the time claimed. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 29 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Unitary County-wide Auditor- $17,058 Tax Rate Controller The Unitary County-wide Tax Rates claim reimburses counties for the implementation and on-going costs related to the establishment of a single tax bill for unitary and operating non-unitary property, which had received numerous tax bills by parcel prior to the mandate. While the components of this function primarily reside in the Auditor- Controller Department, the Treasurer-Tax Collector is responsible for issuing one tax bill. The time spent fulfilling this mandate is estimated by the Auditor-Controller’s Property Tax Division, but not supported by actual time records or formal time studies. While the time claimed appears reasonable, the Property Tax Division should track the actual time spent on this mandate or derive current time studies to support the time claimed. Additionally, as previously discussed with the Allocation of Property Tax Revenues: Education Revenue Augmentation Fund claim, the indirect cost rate utilized for Auditor-Controller activities appears to be high. In the calculation of the rate, almost all services and supplies are classified as indirect costs. These costs should be examined and reclassified as direct, if applicable. An estimate of the impact of reclassifying data processing charges alone results in a reduction of the claim by $1,661 or ten percent. The Treasurer-Tax Collector has not filled for reimbursement under this claim for the issuance of unitary tax bills. According to the Department, the insignificant amount of time that is spent on this mandate precludes filing for reimbursement. The Department reported one clerical staff works approximately half a day per year on this mandate, which would total approximately $80 in salary and benefit costs. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Voter Registration Registrar of Voters $38,784 This claim reimburses the County for costs incurred in complying with voter registration provisions, including the provisions authorizing voter registration by mail and voter outreach programs. The reimbursement rate is the fiscal year 1992-93 per affidavit cost adjusted for annual changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The amount fixed by the State per affidavit for fiscal year 2000-01 is $0.405. During the fiscal Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 30 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year year 2000-01, the Registrar of Voters processed 95,762 affidavits. (95,762 x $0.405 = $38,784). Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 31 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim SED Pupils: Out of State DBH $227,081 This claim reimburses counties for the placement of Severely Emotionally Disturbed (SED) children out-of-state as well as the case management of out-of-state placements when in-state residential treatment is not available or effective. The claim prepared by the Department of Behavioral Health and the Office of the Auditor-Controller does not include any indirect costs. The State Controller allows for an indirect cost rate of 10 percent to be applied without any workpapers; the calculation of indirect costs based on a rate higher than 10 percent requires the preparation of an Indirect Cost Rate Proposal (ICRP). DBH staff prepared two portions of the claim that require calculations of productive hourly rates and productive hourly benefit rates. These calculations used total hours worked during the fiscal year rather than the 1,800 allowed without work papers, and rather than the 1,655 hours typically used by the County’s ACR office when calculating its “charge rates.” By applying the appropriate productive hours and using the estimated indirect rate of 28 percent, the claim can be increased by $10,735. It is recommended that the Department of Behavioral Health and the ACR’s office develop an ICRP to be used in this claim and to be considered for use in the Services to Handicapped Students claim. A memo from the ACR’s office to the Department of Behavioral Health in May of 2001 indicates that the development of an ICRP was initiated and that the first three claims included the 10 percent indirect rate. Staff of the ACR Office confirmed that the claim for the 2000-01 fiscal year erroneously did not include any indirect costs. This claim includes reimbursements of payments to vendors for out-of-state placements, per the claiming instructions. There are two components of these payments – the room and board fees and the fees related to treatment that the children receive while they reside in the placement. Because the payment is processed and delivered to the vendors through the Social Services agency, the Department of Behavioral Health transfers funds related to the treatment costs and relies on the Department of Social Services to add these transfers to the room and board costs. The Department of Social Services receives approximately 40 percent of the room and board costs from the State and Federal governments under its assistance claim. The Office of the Auditor- Controller, DBH and Social Services should meet and discuss the instructions to submit a SB 90 claim that includes all related County costs and subsequent reimbursements. While the County has only claimed the costs of treatment under this SB 90 claim, the claim instructions specifically direct claimants to include the room and board costs Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 32 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year related to these placements.2 Such inclusion would, in effect, seek reimbursement for 100 percent of the placement costs of these children and offset these amounts by the 40 percent reimbursed by Federal and State funds. The net effect of including these costs would total an estimated $300,000 for the 2000-01 fiscal year. We have submitted a written request for clarification related to this issue to the State Controller’s Office Local Reimbursement Section and are awaiting a response. Because the reimbursements to two of the vendors listed in the claim during the 2000-01 fiscal year exceeded $25,000, audit staff inquired as to the nature of these contracts and their approval by the Board of Supervisors, pursuant to the recently approved ordinance and policies regarding purchasing.3 The Department provided audit staff with a brief placement agreement and indicated that no MOU or contracts exist. If these placements meet the definition of an exception per the Board’s policy 11-05, or have been previously approved under a delegation of authority provision, this should be documented and provided to the Board of Supervisors. If the placements do not meet the exception criteria, contracts approved by County Counsel should be developed and executed with the vendors. The initial claim under this chapter specifically provided one-time reimbursement for the establishment of contracts, so the costs to develop such contracts, if deemed necessary, may be claimable under this SB 90 chapter. Although the Department of Behavioral Health previously submitted a claim for one-time costs, an additional vendor began to provide services during the 2000-01 fiscal year. One-time costs in addition to those already claimed may be eligible for reimbursement as the claim instructions specifically state that costs to “develop policies, procedures and contractual arrangement, necessary to implement a county’s new fiscal and programmatic responsibilities for SED pupils placed in out-of-state residential programs” are reimbursable.4 The appropriateness of including these costs in the claim should be clarified with the State Controller’s Office. In a manner consistent with the Services to Handicapped Students claim, time spent by County Counsel providing the specific services outlined in the claim instructions appear to have been provided in the 2000-01 fiscal year but not submitted for reimbursement. Out-of-state placements required County Counsel to dedicate approximately 30 hours to the Department of Behavioral Health. Based on the County’s productive hourly average of 1,655 hours and the minimum indirect rate of 10 percent, the inclusion of these hours will increase the claim by $2,481. State Auditor-Controller’s Office, Mandated Cost Manual, Form SEDP-2 Instructions: “Mental Health Service Vendor Reimbursements*. This component includes reimbursement for residential costs, i.e. board and care of out-of-state placements.” 3 Item 61, April 30, 2002 Board of Supervisors Meeting, Item 53, May 7, 2002 Meeting 4 Parameters and Guidelines, Government Code Section 7576, Statutes of 1996, Chapter 654, p. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 33 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Program staff who provide vendor payment information to the Department of Behavioral Health finance staff identified an error in the 2000-01 fiscal year claim during our review of the claim. The claim includes vendor costs for the month of July 2001, the first month of the subsequent fiscal year. This error underscores the need for program, finance and ACR staff to collaborate on claim data preparation and review each other’s work. An amended claim should be prepared to correct this error which will result in a reduction of $17,219 dollars in the fiscal year 2000-01 claim. These costs can be claimed in FY 2001-02. In summary, the adjustments to this claim will result either in a claim reduction of $4,003 or an increase of $295,997, depending on the outcome of the placement cost issue submitted to the State Controller. Original Claim Title Departments Claim Peace Officer Bill Sheriff $247,650 Of Rights County Counsel (POBAR) This mandate includes reimbursement for administrative activities, appeals, interrogations and other costs incurred by the County to respond to adverse comments concerning the employment of specified peace officers. During the course of our review, we determined, after discussion with Sheriff staff that there may be some additional unclaimed County costs incurred by the County Counsel in connection with POBAR cases. Details of such costs have been requested from fiscal personnel in the Office of County Counsel, however they have not been received to date. These costs are not believed to be material, however, all costs incurred to comply with State mandates should be documented and claimed in order to fully reimburse the County for expenses incurred by it complying with State Law. Original Claim Title Departments Claim Cancer Presumption CAO Not Determined Peace Officers Risk Management This claim allows the recovery of costs incurred by the County for the treatment of cancer that may develop or manifest in peace officers engaged in active law enforcement activities. Costs for treatment are allowed if the cancer has developed or manifested itself in peace officers during their period of active employment or within a specified period following termination of the officer’s service. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 34 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year According to the Senior Adjuster in the Risk Management Office, reimbursable costs have been incurred by the County. She states that data was forwarded to the Auditor- Controller’s Office for a claim reimbursement by the State, however, we have been unable to ascertain or examine these amounts. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Domestic Violence Treatment Probation Not Determined Services: Authorization & Case Management This domestic violence claim reimburses counties for specified costs associated with the administration and regulation of batterers’ treatment programs, notification of victims, and assessment of the future probability of homicide. According to the Probation Department, a claim was not filed for fiscal year 2000-01 due to chronic understaffing. In the fall of 2001, a dedicated position was created in the Probation Department for SB 90 programs. This position has focused on filing the Police Officers Bill of Rights claim due to the large amount of reimbursable costs. Currently, the Department is researching the Domestic Violence Treatment Services mandate and anticipates filing a late claim for fiscal year 2000-01. Sheriff Department Claims Not Filed At the outset of the review, quality review staff identified multiple instances where the Sheriff’s Department had not prepared claims or submitted the information necessary to claim costs to the Auditor-Controller. At the time we concluded our review and as a result of our inquiries pursuant to the review, the Sheriff’s Department researched these potential claims and identified costs totaling $382,000 of previously unclaimed reimbursable costs and forwarded the necessary information to the Office of the Auditor-Controller. These claims are discussed below: Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Sexually Violent Predators Sheriff Not filed This claim allows reimbursement for the continued detention and treatment of sexually violent offenders. Before detention and treatment are imposed, the County attorney is Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 35 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year required to file a petition for civil commitment. A trial is then conducted. If the inmate accused of being a sexually violent predator is indigent, the County is required to provide the indigent with the assistance of counsel and experts necessary to prepare the defense. During our review, we determined that the Sheriff had been given a list of possible cases that might be eligible for reimbursement under this mandate. Sheriff staff claimed they were encountering some difficulty in determining the costs for housing, if any, of these cases due to a lack of identifying data from the District Attorney. Sheriff staff state they could more easily determine eligible costs under this mandate if they were furnished, in addition to the subject’s name, a date of birth and a booking number or warrant number. Some of this information was developed during the course of our review of the District Attorney’s claim related to Sexually Violent Predators and was given to the Sheriff for research and subsequent claim filing. However, no cost data had been generated during the period of our review. As recommended in the Introduction section of this report, improving interdepartmental coordination and communication in the claiming process could facilitate more timely and complete filing of SB 90 claims, thereby increasing County revenues. $126,789 in claimable costs have now been identified by the Department. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 36 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Rape Victim Counseling Sheriff Not originally filed Center Notices Costs for the Sheriff to obtain rape victim consent for and notification of a counseling center and to provide verification to a hospital of the notification are costs eligible for reimbursement by the State. Although no claim had been filed at the time of our review, the Sheriff’s staff states that extensions have been requested in order to file a claim under this mandate and that the requested extension is in process. $4,940 in claimable costs have now been identified by the Sheriff’s Department. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Prisoner Parental Sheriff, Courts, Not originally filed Rights District Attorney The costs of transporting prisoners to and from court hearings for minor dependency cases in which they may be involved is reimbursable. No reimbursement claim has been filed because, according to Sheriff’s personnel, they have received insufficient data from the courts and District Attorney to track these cases. As has been previously noted, communication and coordination among the various County departments can aid the recovery of mandated costs from the State. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Misdemeanors Sheriff Not originally filed Booking & Fingerprinting Costs to provide an arrestee with verification of booking or fingerprinting and the costs of providing documentation to the arrestee are eligible for reimbursement. Although the time to comply with this mandate generally ranges from only 1.5 to 5.0 minutes per arrest, the County had over 16,000 citations potentially eligible for reimbursement in FY 2000-01 so that there is a potential for a few thousand dollars in reimbursed costs. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 37 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year During the course of our review of unfiled claims, we were informed by Sheriff’s staff that preparation of a claim for reimbursement of these costs was in process, however we were not able to independently review the components of the claim. $21,500 in claimable costs have now been identified by the Sheriff’s Department. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Stolen Vehicle Sheriff Not originally filed Notification Costs to the Sheriff for notifying the party who reported a vehicle stolen of its recovery are, with some exceptions, reimbursable. We were advised by staff in the Sheriff’s Office that a claim was in the process of preparation, however we were not able to review the final amount claimed during the course of our review. $24,284 in claimable costs have now been identified by the Sheriff’s Department. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Domestic Violence Sheriff Not originally filed Arrest Policies This mandate provides for the printing of notices and training of deputies. $205,000 in claimable costs have now been identified by the Sheriff’s Department. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 38 AUD ITOR I CONTROLLER-RECORDER COUNTYC LERK COUNTYO F SAN BERNARDINO AUDITOR/CONTROLLE2R22. WestH ospitalityL aneF, ourthF loor LARRY WALKER SanB ernardinoC, A 92415-0018. (909) 387-8322 .Fax (909)3 86-8830 Auditor/Controlle r- Recorder RECORDERC. OUNTCYL ERK. 222W estH ospitalityL ane,F irstF loor County Clerk SanB ernardinoC, A 92415-0022. (909) 387-8306 .Fax (909)3 86-8940 ELIZABETH A. STARBUCK Assistant Auditor/Controller-Recorder June 11,2002 Assistant County Clerk MR. ROGER MIALOCQ Harvey M. Rose Accountancy Corporation 1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 San Francisco, CA 94102 RE: QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW OF THE FY 2000-01 SB 90 CLAIMS SUBMITTED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Dear Roger: We received your revised report of the FY 2000-01 SB 90 Claims. We appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and also to respond to your findings and recommendations. There has been significant turnover of staffing in the past, which has contributed to the reported findings. However during the short time that the current management team has been put in place, they have made significant steps to improve the SB 90 processes or identified the areas in need of improvements. We do agree with some of your findings and recommendations but still have some issues with others. We have attached our specific comments to each of your findings and recommendations. We would appreciate if our comments could be attached to your final report. Thank you for your consideration. HOWARD M. OCHI, CPA CHIEF DEPUTY AUDITOR Office of the Auditor/Controller-Recorder County of San Bernardino HO:spr wd/aud/ho/letters/HM Rose Response-revised.doc Board of Supervisors WilLIAM H. RANDOLPH BILL POSTMUS First District DENNIS HANSBERGER .Third District CountyA dministrativeO fficer JON D. MIKELS J..ESReRcoYn d EAVEDSi.s trict FRED AGUIAFRift.h District Fourth DIstrict SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Summary of Recommendations It is recommended that the Auditor-Controller: 1.1 Enhance and disseminate written procedures regarding the SB 90 claiming process for the Auditor-Controller’s Office including claims tracking, completion of forms, and documentation requirements. This is particularly important because there has been a significant amount of turn over in the positions that handle SB 90 claiming. Comprehensive procedures would assist new staff without prior SB 90 claiming experience and would provide a more consistent approach to the claiming process. Response: The Auditor/Controller-Recorder’s Office (ACR) disagrees with this finding. The ACR has established, written procedures in place for all aspects of the SB90 claiming process. Our SB90 claiming procedures do include brief outlines but we also have detailed instructions by claim. Both are complemented by the related claiming instructions that detail the completion of forms and documentation requirements. The ACR’s procedures are kept in a computer file accessible by all staff. Claims are tracked on a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet details the claim, department contact, date documentation is received, employee assigned to process the claim, date completed, and date submitted to the State for reimbursement. 1.2 Develop written SB 90 guidelines for County departments describing the SB 90 claiming process, specific departmental responsibilities, data collection and reporting requirements and procedures, documentation standards, and other pertinent requirements of the County’s SB 90 claiming process. Response: ACR agrees with this finding as our future plans for the SB90 process were addressed during the entrance conference. New management took over the Reimbursable Projects Section (RPS) in January 2002. In working with departments to process the SB90 Claims by the January 15 deadline, it became evident that past communication of SB 90 guidelines, responsibilities, and procedures was poor. Planning has begun to hold training in the fall of 2002 to go over the claiming process, and to conduct field audits to assist departments in tracking costs, data collection, timekeeping, etc. In addition, planning includes incorporating procedures to “physically” work with departments, not only after a test claim is approved, but prior to filing the initial test claim to determine where reimbursable costs are, provide information, and set up tracking systems. RPS has requested additional positions to handle the added responsibilities. An Accountant II position was placed in the budget for FY 2002/03. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 33 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year 1.3 Provide annual training for County departmental staff involved in SB 90 services, including data collection, reporting and reimbursement claiming and conduct field visits to departments to review departmental data collection systems and procedures and provide assistance as appropriate. Assist departments in the design, development and implementation of data collection systems to support the SB 90 claiming process. Distribute State instructions and program descriptions to appropriate departmental personnel to obtain departmental input. This process would improve the identification of all applicable County departments and related costs consistent with the claim instructions. Response: Again, ACR agrees with this finding as our future plans for the SB90 process were addressed during the entrance conference. Planning has begun to hold training in the fall of 2002 to go over the claiming process, and to conduct field audits to assist departments in tracking costs, data collection, timekeeping, etc. In addition, planning includes incorporating procedures to “physically” work with departments, not only after a test claim is approved, but prior to filing the initial test claim to determine where reimbursable costs are, provide information, and set up tracking systems. RPS also has plans to create a web site under the Auditor/Controller-Recorder’s Web Site in which to post an SB90 Activity Calendar, claim forms, claiming instructions, time sheets, parameters and guidelines, legislative updates, training sessions, etc., so that departments will have more information readily available. Require all departments choosing not to submit a claim for reimbursement of program costs to provide a written explanation of why such costs were not incurred or should not be claimed. Response: The ACR agrees and has already incorporated this procedure to assist with tracking the SB90 Claims and for auditing purposes. Staff has been instructed that an explanation memo is required from any department refusing to file an SB 90 Claim. The memo is then placed in the claim file. 1.4 Revise the existing County-wide productive hours analysis by utilizing hours recorded by the County’s time capture segment of the payroll system. Pursuant to page six of the State Controller’s September 2001 SB 90 claiming instructions, the only exception is for vacation hours that should be on “earned” rather than Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 34 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year “used “ time. In addition, rest periods or break-time provided by union contract should be included in the analysis as illustrated on page six of the State SB 90 instructions. Administrative time included as non-productive hours is allowable to the extent that such time is documented and can be verified by independent audit of payroll or other records. Response: ACR agrees with capturing an employee’s accrued vacation to determine an individual’s productive hours. A work order has been initiated to capture accrued vacation time from the payroll system. The work is estimated for completion during the 2002/03 FY. However, the ACR disagrees with reducing productive hours by an employee’s break times. Currently, the ACR is using the most cost effective method of producing productive hourly rates. It is believed that employing the auditor’s suggestion would net the same results that the ACR gets using the current method. In addition, it would be cumbersome and costly to estimate break times, from the County’s 19,614 employees and the various compressed work schedules in use, how many employees are subject to 15 or 20 minute breaks. Consideration would also need to be given to the possibility that breaks are not taken or an employee is out on leave. The ACR can find no authority to reduce productive time by break periods nor is it a customary practice. 1.5 Develop indirect cost rate proposals for all departments for which SB 90 claims are submitted and which currently do not have ICRPs if the cost of preparing the ICRP does not exceed the benefit. Revise and update the existing departmental indirect cost rate proposals to ensure that staffing and services and supplies costs that are direct charged in claims and grants are not also included as indirect costs in departmental ICRP’s. Annually or bi-annually, require County departments to analyze and submit schedules distributing all departmental staff and services and supplies costs by program or function in accordance with Federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87 guidelines. Response: The ACR is in concurrence with this finding to a point. A cost/benefit analysis will determine whether it is beneficial to prepare an ICRP. The type of claim and significance of the claim will be factors in the decision. For example, it may not be beneficial to prepare an ICRP for all departments submitting claims for the Open Meetings Act where 10 or 11 agenda items were prepared. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 35 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Again, training is planned for the fall of 2002. The ACR currently requires that departments analyze and submit schedules distributing all departmental staff and services and supplies costs in preparation of ICRPs, but we will begin to compare the information departments submit for ICRPs with the information submitted for SB90 Claims. 1.6 Limit hours claimed per individual to the total annual number of productive hours calculated for each fiscal year except for employees who receive cash overtime compensation. Limit the number of daily chargeable hours to 7.5 hours to account for the one-half hour of break-time included in the analysis of productive hours. Response: Again, the ACR disagrees. The ACR can find no authority to reduce productive time by break periods nor is it a customary practice. 1.7 Review and assess specific claims identified in this report and submit amended claims to obtain full reimbursement of previously unclaimed costs or to correct amounts over claimed in error. Amended claims for additional reimbursement should only be claimed in instances when the revised claim would result in a net reimbursement to the County sufficiently in excess of the original claim and the applicable late claim penalty. Response: ACR is in concurrence with this finding to a point. As discussed during the Exit Conference, there is a cost/benefit to amending all claims submitted in this report. There is also a risk that the auditor’s estimated reimbursement will not reflect the actual reimbursement. One also has to consider the late penalty and the 20% reduction imposed by the State. However, we will review the claims and where it is cost effective submit amendments. 1.8 Develop an SB 90 processing calendar to ensure adequate time for the collecting and reporting of program data to the Auditor-Controller, the preparation of a draft claim, departmental review of draft claims, and the final submission of claims by the annual January 15 due date. Copies of all final claims should also be provided to the departments claiming reimbursement. Response: Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 36 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year ACR agrees with the first part of this finding but notes that the second part is a longstanding practice of the ACR. We have always provided departments with a copy of the SB90 Claims filed. As previously mentioned, the ACR plans to conduct training sessions this fall so that departments will have a clear understanding of the documentation needed and the time frames required. RPS has plans to create a web site under the Auditor/Controller-Recorder’s Web Site in which to post an SB90 Activity Calendar, claim forms, claiming instructions, time sheets, parameters and guidelines, legislative updates, training sessions, etc., so that departments will have more information readily available. 1.9 Use a uniform timesheet for recording Auditor-Controller SB 90 time that includes all program codes. This will improve the recording and tracking of time spent on all SB 90 related activities. Response: The ACR disagrees. All ACR staff use a uniform timesheet. However, to prevent the timesheet from becoming unwieldy, RPS staff includes only those activity codes applicable to their monthly job assignments. It is recommended that the Auditor-Controller’s Office and the Office of the County Counsel: 1.10 Review the current procedures under which County Counsel provides support of SB 90 claims and bills for such support in order to determine the most effective strategy to maximize the County’s SB 90 revenues and include County Counsel- related costs in the SB 90 claim each year. Response: Again, ACR agrees with this finding as our future plans for the SB90 process were addressed during the entrance conference. Planning has begun to conduct field audits to assist departments in tracking costs, data collection, timekeeping, etc. RPS will work with County Counsel and County departments to coordinate accumulating cost data for claim processing. It is recommended that all County departments that provide SB 90 reimbursable services: 1.11 Develop written procedures related to SB 90 data collection, reporting and documentation requirements to ensure that all reimbursable costs are fully and accurately identified, reported and claimed. Departments should also retain Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 37 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year complete work papers and supporting time records and other documentation for each claim submitted in the event of an audit or future reference needs. Response: Again, ACR agrees with this finding as our future plans for the SB90 process were addressed during the entrance conference. Planning has begun to conduct field audits to assist departments in tracking costs, data collection, timekeeping, record keeping etc. In addition, RPS will offer assistance for writing procedures. Findings Pertaining to Specific FY 2000-01 SB 90 Claims The following findings relate to specific SB 90 claims. The original claim amount submitted by the department is presented and relevant issues discussed. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim AIDS Testing Public Health $7,816 Response: The Public Health department disagrees in part. The Public Health Department will look into determining the costs for medical staff to conduct testing in the jails. However, the cost for Public Health testing is based on an established State rate and any further time study or actual cost study would be counter productive. Overall, Aids Testing has declined in recent years. It is the Department's stance that costs are being met. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Allocation of Property Auditor-Controller $16,131 Tax Revenue: Education Revenue Augmentation Fund Response: The ACR disagrees. The reported time spent on the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund claim is based upon interviews conducted by the Property Tax Manager Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 38 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year with staff in prior years. The Property Tax Manager then forwarded the various times spent to the Reimbursable Projects Section. These times were brought forward from year to year with minor adjustments made when related factors in these areas changed. Eventually, Property Tax Staff, at the direction of the Manager, began to provide times spent for the SB90 claims based upon trends that had formed. The times now reported for SB90 claims are a development of what has historically been required to perform related tasks. The ACR ICRP is prepared in accordance with State guidelines and has been accepted by the State for many years. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Child Abduction Recovery District Attorney $1,099,756 Response: The District Attorney’s Office disagrees. To date, no attorney has had to relieve the assigned attorney during vacation, sickness, etc. If one should have to fill-in for the assigned attorney, the appropriate time sheets will be kept. There are 4 investigators assigned to this unit. If one or more is out, the others handle the work. There have been occasions when an Investigator, not assigned to the program, has performed these activities and they have prepared time sheets to account for hours spent performing reimbursable activities. The supervisor maintains time sheets to track time spent on this program. The time spent keeping time studies for the various programs supervised is not likely to be worth the minimal cost captured. Administrative time is currently captured, however, for attorneys and investigators and reported to the ACR every year by this department. The estimate made by the auditor that the supervisor spends 1/13 of his time on Child Abduction does not take into account that fact that he maintains his own criminal caseload that takes a significant portion of his total time. The auditors’ estimate is therefore, inflated. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Developmentally Disabled: Public $33,614 Attorney Services Defender Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 39 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Response: The Public Defender disagrees. It is accurate that Developmentally Disabled Attorney Services are compiled based on a formula that attributes 1 hour of attorney time and ½ hour of clerical time for appearances on a petition, and 2 hours of attorney time and ½ hour of clerical time for commitment hearings. Said formula was not devised based upon a formal time study. Relative to 24 cases upon which hours were claimed last fiscal year, approximately 200 Attorney hours and 140 clerical hours were claimed [approx. $20,000], and $13,500 in expert costs, for a grand total of $33,614. The size of the claim would not seem to warrant a more specific system of tracking actual time. Indeed, the computed 201 attorney hours were mistakenly transposed to read 210 on the summary claim, and $1400 claimed as direct costs for expert fees were cut from the Public Defender’s Claim Form by the Auditor’s Office; while said expert fees were accrued in the prior fiscal year, they were not paid until the beginning of the last fiscal year, and were therefore claimed for the last fiscal year. Attorney services outside of court appearances include review of State reports, review of defense reports and reconciliation of differences. An attorney whose primary responsibilities are unrelated to this SB 90 caseload and for which documentation of time is not a regular activity handles these cases. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Investment Treasurer- $21,945 Reports Tax Collector Response: The Treasurer is in agreement that our department should not double bill investment costs. We will research this matter and if necessary, we will revise the SB 90 claimed costs from the calculation of the administration fee. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Mandate Auditor-Controller $216,470 Reimbursement Process Response: Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 40 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year The ACR disagrees with the point that there are no uniform timesheets in use. All ACR staff use uniform timesheets. The ACR disagrees in part with the timing of SB90 data collection. Currently, the ACR starts collecting department data in early November, not January. In October of 2001, all SB90 lead personnel had left to pursue other job opportunities. There were no staff members available to follow up with departments on the data submitted or to file the claims due in November. The claims mentioned were filed or are presently being processed. The ACR disagrees that Public Health is not adequately capturing their costs. Public Health files 3 straightforward SB90 Claims: SIDS, Perinatal Services, and HIV Testing. Public Health’s Mandate Reimbursement Process Claim is substantially lower because they collect data efficiently. Data is captured with their existing computer system for other reporting purposes. So, extracting data for SB90 purposes is timely and simple. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Mentally Public Defender $17,698 Disordered Sexual Offenders Response: The Public Defender’s Office agrees in part. While it is accurate that the MDSO claim failed to include 42 hours of attorney time attributable to travel, it is not accurate that mileage that should have been included in the claim was missed. Mileage accrued during the end of the last fiscal year, which was not reimbursed to the employee until this fiscal year, will be reflected on next year’s claim. Our office claims reimbursement based on the fiscal year during which costs are paid, as opposed to the fiscal year during which expenses are accrued. The ACR received the MDO claim on 6/3/02. The error was corrected. Also, transportation costs are included in the Sheriff’s and the Public Defender’s claim. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Not Guilty by Reason Public $45,526 Of Insanity Defender Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 41 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Response: The department agrees in part. The Public Defender has established “Billing Guidelines for SB 90 Reimbursement” cases as well as an SB 90 Time Sheet. Unlike the DA’s Office, the Public Defender civil commitment staff does not handle NGI extension cases, with few exceptions. Attorneys whose primary responsibilities are unrelated to this SB 90 caseload and for whom documentation of time is not a regular activity, handle NGI extension cases. Said billing forms were not in fact used for purposes of documenting hours on NGI cases other than for cases that actually went to trial. Indeed, only the cases that went to trial included hours categorized as “trial preparation,” which is consistent with accurate characterization of hours. Hours relative to cases that did not go to trial were computed based on FACTS documentation of appearances. It is in fact the case that four NGI extension cases upon which appearances were made during the fiscal year, were not picked up by the computer assisted means used to identify NGI cases. Next year our staff will compare case listings with the DA’s Office before submitting claims, so as to insure recovery of hours expended on all NGI cases. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Open Meetings Act Various $71,744 Response: The ACR disagrees in part. It has been a past and current practice that the ACR tally the Board agenda items year round. However, last year was an exception due to the lack of management and staff turnover. There was no SB90 lead staff to follow-up with those departments not submitting data for the claim and a tally had not been completed for the fiscal year. New management started January 7, 2002 and had 7 days to compile the department’s data and submit the claim. Due to time constraints, and the capability to later amend the claim, a tally was performed for only those departments submitting data. However, a post survey revealed that the departments with the most significant agenda items were filed. We had one department that submitted a memo explaining that it was not cost beneficial to submit data for a claim. The auditors suggested an unconventional method for filing a claim on the remaining agenda items. The ACR cannot find any authority to file accordingly. An amended claim was filed June 4, 2002 in the amount of $81,379 for a total of 1,887 agenda items. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 42 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year While preparing the FY 2000/01 Open Meetings Act Claim, the “across the board” 10% indirect cost rate was noted for determining the Blended Hourly Rate. There will be an ICRP prepared for each department submitting significant agenda items for next year’s claim. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Perinatal Services PH/ARMC $280,114 Response: The ACR agrees with this finding in part. The wrong ICRP rate was used for calculating the Medical Center’s salary costs. However, Public Health does not receive Medi-Cal reimbursement for toxicology screens. Also, it is “policy” to send copies of filed SB90 claims to the department who submitted the claim. If the department had notified the ACR, an additional copy would have been sent. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Search Warrant AIDS District Attorney $81,584 Response: The District Attorney’s Office was not able to verify that attorneys do look for these cases. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Services to Handicapped Behavioral Health $877,779 Students Response: Behavioral Health agrees in part. We will assess the possibility of producing an “Ad Hoc Report” to verify payor classifications. However, this periodic verification may or Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 43 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year may not result in more services claimed for SB90. We will work to set up a separate tracking system for assessment services in our Management Information System. However, for FY 01/02, we will ensure that these services are captured and accurately claimed. We have used the Cost Report Method for a number of years (probably about 12) because as a “County Behavioral Health Agency”, we are accountable to the State Department of Mental Health each year to submit an annual cost report. In this cost report, our total administrative costs are separately reported. Since the cost report was inherent in our process, we use this method; it would take precedence over the ICRP. However, a comparative analysis of the two methods will be prepared. We agree. We will determine the SB90 contact at County Counsel's Office and coordinate future efforts to set up a reporting system with staff at the County Counsel. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Sexually Violent Predators District Attorney $988,821 Response: The District Attorney agrees in part. The department supports the use of an automated verification process to track SB 90 costs within the department and countywide. The department has had several meetings with Information Services staff regarding improving our ability to capture and track these cases. However, the administrative costs are so minimal the cost to track them out weights the reimbursement. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim SIDS: Coroner $74,353 Autopsy Protocol Response: The Coroner’s Office disagrees. The ICRP was prepared according to OMB Circular A- 87 guidelines. Individuals that spend only a portion of their time in an administrative role can include only that portion of their salary as an indirect cost. The rest are billed as direct costs. A time study was performed and it was determined that our current estimates are the best conservative estimates. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 44 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Unitary County-wide Auditor- $17,058 Tax Rate Controller Response: The ACR disagrees. The reported time spent on the Unitary Countywide Tax Rate claim is based upon interviews conducted by the Property Tax Manager with staff in prior years. The Property Tax Manager then forwarded the various times spent to Reimbursable Projects Section. These times were brought forward from year to year with minor adjustments made when related factors in these areas changed. Eventually, Property Tax Staff, at the direction of the Manager, began to provide times spent for the SB90 claims based upon trends that had formed. The times now reported for SB90 claims are a development of what has historically been required to perform related tasks. The ACR ICRP is prepared in accordance with State guidelines and has been accepted by the State for many years. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Voter Registration Registrar of Voters $38,784 This claim reimburses the County for costs incurred in complying with voter registration provisions, including the provisions authorizing voter registration by mail and voter outreach programs. The reimbursement rate is the fiscal year 1992-93 per affidavit cost adjusted for annual changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The amount fixed by the State per affidavit for fiscal year 2000-01 is $0.405. During the fiscal year 2000-01, the Registrar of Voters processed 95,762 affidavits. (95,762 x $0.405 = $38,784). Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim SED Pupils: Out of State DBH $227,081 Response: The Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) agrees. DBH and Social Services will meet to ensure that costs for room and board for client placements are included in future claims. An amended claim can also be filed. We are determining whether the Out of State Placements were exceptions to the brief placement agreements and Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 45 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year whether additional one time costs for new vendors were included in our claim. Also, we will contact County Counsel to make sure their costs are included in our future claims. Original Claim Title Departments Claim Peace Officer Bill Sheriff $247,650 Of Rights County Counsel (POBAR) This mandate includes reimbursement for administrative activities, appeals, interrogations and other costs incurred by the County to respond to adverse comments concerning the employment of specified peace officers. During the course of our review, we determined, after discussion with Sheriff staff that there may be some additional unclaimed County costs incurred by the County Counsel in connection with POBAR cases. Details of such costs have been requested from fiscal personnel in the Office of County Counsel, however they have not been received to date. These costs are not believed to be material, however, all costs incurred to comply with State mandates should be documented and claimed in order to fully reimburse the County for expenses incurred by it complying with State Law. Original Claim Title Departments Claim Cancer Presumption CAO Not Determined Peace Officers Risk Management Response: The ACR never received the claim documentation. RPS staff made several inquiries before the January 15th deadline and was informed that there were no reimbursable costs for FY 2000/01. Risk Management will forward documentation so that a claim can be filed. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 46 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Domestic Violence Treatment Probation Not Determined Services: Authorization & Case Management This domestic violence claim reimburses counties for specified costs associated with the administration and regulation of batterers’ treatment programs, notification of victims, and assessment of the future probability of homicide. According to the Probation Department, a claim was not filed for fiscal year 2000-01 due to chronic understaffing. In the fall of 2001, a dedicated position was created in the Probation Department for SB 90 programs. This position has focused on filing the Police Officers Bill of Rights claim due to the large amount of reimbursable costs. Currently, the Department is researching the Domestic Violence Treatment Services mandate and anticipates filing a late claim for fiscal year 2000-01. Sheriff Department Claims Not Filed Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Sexually Violent Predators Sheriff Not filed Response: The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. Work was underway prior to the audit and research has been completed. The claim will be submitted to ACR by June 30, 2002. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Rape Victim Counseling Sheriff Not originally filed Center Notices Response: The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. Work was underway prior to the audit and research has been completed. The claim was submitted to ACR on June 4, 2002. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 47 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year Prisoner Parental Sheriff, Courts, Not originally filed Rights District Attorney Response: The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. The Sheriff’s Department will coordinate with other County agencies to obtain sufficient data to process this claim. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Misdemeanors Sheriff Not originally filed Booking & Fingerprinting Response: The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. Work was underway prior to the audit and research has been completed. The claim was submitted to the ACR on April 18, 2002. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Stolen Vehicle Sheriff Not originally filed Notification Response: The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. Work was underway prior to the audit and research has been completed. The claim was submitted to the ACR on June 4, 2002. Claiming Original Claim Title Department Claim Domestic Violence Sheriff Not originally filed Arrest Policies Response: Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 48 SB 90 Quality Control Review 2000-01 Fiscal Year The department agrees that this claim had not been filed at the time of fieldwork. Work was underway prior to the audit and research has been completed. The claim was submitted to the ACR on June 4, 2002. Harvey Rose Accountancy Corporation 49 COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE Michael J.D.R. Wilson, Chair Peggy M. Bautista Thomas Ma 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE The Complaints Committee thoroughly examined all complaints received from County residents. All complaints were required to be on the standard complaint form. Complaints were handled in the strictest confidence and reviewed only by the Complaints Committee, unless it determined to forward a complaint to an action committee. During the period July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002 the Grand Jury received 15 complaints. One was a carryover from the 2000-2001 Grand Jury and was dismissed because the Grand Jury did not have jurisdiction. Of the remaining 14, seven went to the following committees: Administrative 3 Economic Development/Public Services 1 Internal Services 1 Law and Justice 2 Each complainant was informed when no action was taken on his or her complaint. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE Amos Isaac, Chair Peggy M. Bautista Janet M. Carter Alfred J. Dubiel Victor G. Edinburgh Debra S. Gray Sarah L. Harrison Norma L. Mays Jack R. Woods PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE The Economic Development/Public Services Committee (ED/PS) was charged with the review and investigation of the operations and functions of the following departments: Agriculture/Weights & Measures Airports Economic and Community Development Economic Development/Public Services Group Administration Fire Department/Office of Emergency Services Jobs and Employment Services Land Use Services Library Museum Public Works Redevelopment Agency Registrar of Voters Special Districts Due to the limitation of time and the fact that three of the 13 ED/PS departments had been extensively reviewed last year, only ten of the 13 ED/PS departments were reviewed this year. The departments that were not reviewed this year were: Agriculture/Weights & Measures Land Use Services Economic Development/Public Services Group After the interviews and investigations, it was determined that no findings and recommendations would be made on Airports, Economic & Community Development Department, Library, Public Works Department, Redevelopment Agency and Special Districts. Background, findings and recommendations are being presented on the following departments. 17 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND “The mission of the San Bernardino County Fire Department is to provide a community based all-risk emergency services organization dedicated to the health and well being of the citizens of San Bernardino County through a balance of regionalized services delivery and accountability to the local community.” The centralized management of the County Fire Department oversees the budget concerns of 32 separate budget units that: (a) make up a proposed FY 2001/2002 budget of $56.2 million; (b) employs a staff of nearly 400 permanent employees, including 218 safety personnel and over 500 paid call firefighters and other non permanent staff. The County Fire Department is unique in that it provides management services for the Board- governed fire districts and County Services Areas (CSA), while they maintain their separate legal status. The varying levels of tax funding in each community determine the level of emergency services that can be provided. All-risk emergency services are provided to 64 communities/cities as well as the sparsely populated areas within the department’s 16,255 square miles of protection responsibility. The term “all-risk” is used because the department is responsible not only for traditional fire suppression duties, but also for: (a) emergency medical services; (b) ambulance transportation; (c) hazardous materials response/mitigation; (d) specialized technical rescue; (e) disaster preparedness; (f) fire prevention; and (g) code enforcement duties. Many County Fire stations serve as the citizens’ first link with County government and the Board of Supervisors. FINDINGS Members of the Grand Jury met with County Fire Department officials and visited facilities, including the training facility located at the San Bernardino International Airport. The County Fire Chief/Warden and his administrative staff have created a course of study for training of potential firefighters. There is now a module located on the Fire Department’s training grounds specifically for classroom training. County Fire personnel man and operate the module. 18 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Students are given hands-on instruction in all types of fire extinguishing apparatus and the types of fires that have a potential for causing great bodily harm, or death, if the students are improperly trained. The training facility incorporates a series of underground tunnels and obstacles as well as rooms that a firefighter must learn to maneuver in and out of during an emergency. There is a system that must be mastered, which provides for the safe removal of an injured party. The training programs are practiced repeatedly in an effort to give the trainees the maximum amount of self-confidence. The San Bernardino Regional Emergency Training Center, a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) between San Bernardino County Fire, San Bernardino City Fire and the San Bernardino Community College District, intends to build a $7.5 million Federal Aviation Administration funded Crash Fire Training enter. The facility will provide training needs for the western United States. The JPA will run the facility. Projected expenditures, together with the growing population within the Inland Empire, have brought upon County Fire administration the need to modify their philosophy in providing for the needs of the general population. The County Fire Department is proceeding with improvements to the training facility. All of the management staff at County Fire insists that their employees strictly adhere to the two-man concept (two men in and two men out) in firefighting strategies. The firefighters currently have in their inventory different types of breathing apparatus. Critical time is lost if the firefighters’ breathing apparatus is not completely fitted against the face until they enter a fire and smoke filled room. Should the firefighter not adjust the mask properly it could cost the person being rescued their life because the firefighter could become one of the people in need of rescuing. Firefighters have contained in their equipment a communications device. If one firefighter should be separated or impaired, his second team member can communicate with others for assistance. San Bernardino County standards basically reflect the national standards for replacement of fire equipment: Engines 10-15 years Ladder Trucks 15-20 years Wild Land Apparatus 20 years The County currently contributes from the General Fund: (1) $500,000 annual basic services to unfunded County areas, of which $270,000 is for replacement of fire apparatus, extrication tools, and other related heavy life-saving equipment for those stations providing services to the unfunded areas; (2) $200,000 reimbursement of actual 19 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report cost to provide service to those district’s providing service outside of their legal boundary on a regular ongoing basis. County Fire covers 90 percent of the National Forest land in the County, provides all-risk services to these lands, and receives no direct allocation of the payment in lieu of taxes. There are radioactive and transuranic waste routes through the County of San Bernardino to a facility in New Mexico. The transported material consists of nuclear fuel (high and low level), mixed waste and transuranic waste. Transportation of this waste is categorized as safe from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Panel of the National Academy of Sciences. The transportation routes have been identified as Highways 15, 40, 58 and 127 at this time. It is expected that additional routes will be authorized in the future. Responding to any type of accident occurring on any route will be from the County’s paid call firefighters to provide emergency medical rescue, fire fighting and abatement of hazardous materials. Radioactive shipments are transported through the northern portion of the County. Other shipments of higher-level wastes will traverse the entire County. The training plan for San Bernardino County to address the responses to the radioactive shipments in the North Desert is in full swing. The training plan will be expanded in the next two years to include all areas of the County. The plan consists of several operational categories as follows: Public information officers Trainer training – fire/rescue first responders Emergency medical personnel County hazardous materials response teams and incident commanders Receiving hospitals Tabletop exercises, as well as live action real-time drills As of this time, none of this training is being funded by State or Federal government.

We were advised the commander of Fort Irwin was quite concerned with the accidents and deaths occurring on Fort Irwin Road and is issuing restrictions to Army personnel. A detailed map and a copy of the “Proposed Department of Public Works Fort Irwin Road Project” information sheet were provided to the Grand Jury. This improvement project is in cooperation with the U.S. Army.

This data is contained in the Crowding Assessment Report of the BOC dated January 8, 2001. The information is required to be submitted by each overcrowded juvenile detention center, under Section 1343, Title 15 (CCR). The report is required to be submitted every 30 days to the BOC whenever overcrowded conditions are evident in a detention facility. 68 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report ASSAULT ON STAFF MODEL YEAR 2000 No. of Assaults YEAR 2001 No. of Assaults JANUARY 0 JANUARY 1 FEBRUARY 1 FEBRUARY 1 MARCH 0 MARCH 0 APRIL 1 APRIL 2 MAY 2 MAY 2 JUNE 1 JUNE 2 JULY 0 JULY 0 AUGUST 1 AUGUST 1 SEPTEMBER 1 OCTOBER 3 NOVEMBER 0 DECEMBER 1 Total assaults Year One 11 Partial Second Year Tracking 9 The following pattern depicts the CJH facilities reportable incidences of detainee behavior. This data pertains to January through December 2000. Suicides 0 Suicide Attempts 24 Escapes 0 Escape Attempts 3 Use of Restraints 111 Use of Force 151 Self-Inflicted Injuries 52 The process of placement of detainees out of the area is noted. This is in part due to a lack of specific facilities and personnel in the County. Currently the department is in the process of developing facilities to enable displaced detainees to be housed in the County. The CJH kitchen and dining hall are antiquated. The general appearance of the grounds indicates that the CJH grounds are not well maintained. The CJH superintendent indicated these issues need attention due to lack of funds. Yearonetracking Yeartwotracking 2001-2002 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The issue of funding was addressed, and budget research has indicated that sufficient funds have not been allocated to the Probation Department to keep CJH in proper repair. From 1989 to 2000, the Probation Department budget reports show that the Board of Supervisors (BOS) has not provided adequate funding. According to a budget report from the Probation Department, administrators have received approximately 33 percent of their monies from outside funding sources to run existing programs at CJH.