Orange County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
• Agency Response
Cost Saving Opportunities For County Information Technology
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F7, F10, F14, F16
Findings and Recommendations 14 findings
F1
The Chief Information Officer at County Executive Office and three departmental IT directors came from private industries.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Three options are available for the County Accounting and Personnel System (CAPS). The options are: 1. Upgrade CAPS software and continue to run as a mainframe application. 2. Change CAPS to a server-based application. 3. Outsource CAPS to the software vendor.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Assessment/Tax System will be the only mainframe application after year 2005 if no action is taken.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The District Attorney Office plans to move Case Management System to a server in August 2003.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The Court System was off the Data Center mainframe in 2002.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Social Service Agency’s Case Management System will be moved to a statewide system in 2005. 9 7. The County is spending about $11,590,000 a year in mainframe related expenses that include hardware depreciation, supporting staff, operating systems, monitoring tools, and software products.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The County has two mainframe based tape cartridge silos. The cartridge silo is not server compatible.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Auditor-Controller, County Assessor, Treasurer-Tax Collector Office, and Clerk- Recorder are located adjacent to each other on a campus-like setting. Their imaging systems require high speed Asynchronous Transfer Mode network to support. IT Related Financial Issues 10. Each County department has its own IT budget in addition to the inter-fund transfer allocated to the Data Center.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Some County departments and agencies have expressed dissatisfaction with the current IT charge back.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The County procedures require a review from OIT on all technology procurements exceeding $10,000, but some departments do not follow the procedure.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The Data Center spends $23,286 annually on maintaining rarely used equipment. Network and Support Structure 14. Each department has its own IT support structure that encompasses Network Operations, Help Desk, and Network Security.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Each department contracts its network support out. The contractors left the door open on some occasions and could have caused security breach. Telecommunication Expenses 16. The County departments in Table B require only 98 T-1 lines, but 163 lines were installed.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
The digital station to Digital Inward Direct (DID) trunk line ratio is below 5 on six departments listed on Table B.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
A local phone company has an exclusive contract to program and to maintain all voice related equipment in the County. The same company also sells phone lines to the County. Responses to Findings 1-18 are requested from the Office of Information Technology.
No recommendations for this finding