Santa Clara County Grand Jury
• 2006-2007
2006-2007 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Record Keeping in Disarray at San Jose Bureau of Fire Prevention
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
The evidence, written and oral, provided to the Grand Jury by the Bureau of Fire Prevention demonstrates that, as of May 2007, the Bureau of Fire Prevention has failed to follow many of the recommendations issued by the City Auditor in 2003.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Complete all recommendations from the Auditor’s 2003 Report no later than January 2008. A status report on any outstanding audit recommendations should be updated and sent to the San Jose City Council annually.
F2
The Bureau of Fire Prevention lacks a system to prioritize inspections based on risk assessments of the use or occupancy of structures and premises.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Establish periodic inspections for other than State-mandated annual inspections, based on a structure’s inspection history and occupancy risk assessment, and implement a self-inspection program for low-risk structures and premises.
F3
There is no approved business plan to provide a focus for the Bureau of Fire Prevention. Thus, the Bureau of Fire Prevention is generally limited in its ability to assess its productivity and increase collectable revenue. Poor record keeping leaves the Bureau of Fire Prevention unaware of: the number of structures in its jurisdiction; changes in occupancy classification; the percentage of structures requiring inspections that are being inspected; the frequency of inspections; the need for re-inspections; the amount of potential revenue relative to the amount of fees collected; and whether code violations are being corrected in a timely manner.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Adopt a business plan to ensure that: inspection goals are set and achieved; maximum revenue is collected; inspections are done efficiently and are based on risk evaluations; an accurate and current inspection history is created for all structures and premises; and the Bureau of Fire Prevention’s mandate to eliminate fire hazards in the use or occupancy of structures and premises is followed.
F4
The Bureau of Fire Prevention lacks a data maintenance and retrieval system which renders it unable to show whether Code Enforcement is performing inspections in compliance with State and local laws. 3
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Maintain a master list of occupancies to be inspected and update it monthly. As new structures or occupancies are constructed or established, add them to the inspection list. 4
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 3The Fire Department’s Bureau of Fire Prevention failed to prove to the Grand Jury that it had adopted a large number of the recommendations from the 2003 Auditor’s Report, nor could the Bureau of Fire Prevention provide the Grand Jury any updated information on actions taken to implement the 2003 audit recommendations. In addition, there is currently no formal plan in place to correct any of the deficiencies still outstanding as noted in the 2003 Auditor’s Report.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
San Jose
City