📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

LOS Angeles County

Published: June 23, 2015 34 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 15 findings

F1 Page 47
Currently, the decision to institute a PAD program is within the discretion of individual county departments.
F2 Page 47
Although no one interviewed disputed the usefulness of AEDs, on balance the costs to Los Angeles County in expanding installation of the devices, as well as the time needed for training government personnel on the use of AEDS, do not justify countywide installation of AEDs. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
F3 Page 48
Educating the public on the purpose of AEDs, including training in the use of existing AEDs, is economically feasible and would help make better use of already installed AEDs.
F4 Page 48
The city of Los Angeles PAD program is understaffed. Its existing devices are in need of maintenance and may currently be a liability.
F5 Page 58
The Los Angeles Department of City Planning does not keep a copy of notices mailed.
F6 Page 58
The Los Angeles Department of City Planning keeps copies of affidavits of mailings but could not locate that affidavit in this instance.
F7 Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works does not have access to information about its mailing of notices.
F8 Page 58
Without public access to city identifier numbers, city staff cannot respond to public inquiries.
F9 Page 58
After the public hearing, data is confidential, available to the property owner and the city only, until the project is approved.
F10 Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works’ website is not organized to help the public register disputes.
F11 Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works has no dedicated phone number that the public can use to register disputes.
F12
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is moving toward consolidating most of Los Angeles County data centers into one disaster-resistant facility.
F13
Los Angeles County information systems use many different programming languages. The county has no standard or guideline on how to select a programming language for use on its development projects.
F14
There are no enterprise-wide programming standards for the languages that are used. There is no central guide to good programming practices.
F15
In Los Angeles County, there is a countywide tendency to replace existing systems rather than modernize them, in part because COBOL is unjustifiably considered obsolete, and lack of expertise in COBOL contributes to this tendency.

Recommendations 6

Commendations 1

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office