📋
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.
Mendocino County Grand Jury
• 2024-2025
Mendocino County’s Trailing Information Technology July 16, 2021
⚠️ 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 13 findings
F1
The CEO and BOS have not clearly defined the scope, authority or recruitment strategy for the proposed CIO position.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
the BOS and CEO define the scope, authority, fiscal responsibility, recruitment strategy for and establish the position of Chief Information Officer/Director of Technology by August 1, 2021. Possibilities for filling this position include: outsourcing, consulting service or direct hiring of an at-will director with the charge to complete the ITMP by July 1, 2026. (F1, F2)
R2
the CIO position focus on improving the IT infrastructure in a steady, timely manner with quarterly public status reporting of active and planned Initiatives to the CEO and BOS including planned start and completion dates, progress status, budgeted cost and spending to date. (F1, F2, F7-F9)
F2
The completion of the 99 Initiatives of the IT Master Plan has been delayed by 21 months due to factors such as a low priority for improving IT, uncoordinated project management, budgetary commitments and demonstrated deficient leadership.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
the BOS and CEO define the scope, authority, fiscal responsibility, recruitment strategy for and establish the position of Chief Information Officer/Director of Technology by August 1, 2021. Possibilities for filling this position include: outsourcing, consulting service or direct hiring of an at-will director with the charge to complete the ITMP by July 1, 2026. (F1, F2)
R2
the CIO position focus on improving the IT infrastructure in a steady, timely manner with quarterly public status reporting of active and planned Initiatives to the CEO and BOS including planned start and completion dates, progress status, budgeted cost and spending to date. (F1, F2, F7-F9)
F3
The BOS approves funding for the ITMP but does not participate on the ITMP Steering Committee to communicate priorities, provide leadership and approve resources.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3
by August 1, 2021, the BOS assign at least one member to take part in the quarterly ITMP Steering Committee meetings and report back to the BOS to set priorities for projects and to facilitate funding. (F3)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F4
Since some costs are recorded in departmental budgets but not consolidated into the ITMP, the total cost of the Initiatives is possibly underrepresented by millions of dollars.
Related Recommendations (3)
R4
the BOS establish a consolidated, shared County IT Department responsible for all IT functions under the direction of a Chief Information Officer/Director of Technology by FY 2022. Any centralized IT staff that support the SO shall receive the requisite background check required by DOJ. (F4-F6)
R5
the BOS with the CIO, as part of the FY 2022-23 budget, consolidate all IT related costs, including ITMP funds into a single IT budget that accurately reflects total IT costs. These costs could then be appropriately allocated to department budgets as a proportioned shared service thus providing greater transparency to the public. (F4, F7-F9)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F5
The SO IS Department has been allowed to operate separately from the County’s IS department which is a detriment to efficient delivery of services and cost effectiveness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
the BOS establish a consolidated, shared County IT Department responsible for all IT functions under the direction of a Chief Information Officer/Director of Technology by FY 2022. Any centralized IT staff that support the SO shall receive the requisite background check required by DOJ. (F4-F6)
F6
If the IT staff with access to DOJ systems have received clearance to maintain equipment of the SO, there is no legal obstacle that would prevent reporting to a central IT Department headed by a CIO.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
the BOS establish a consolidated, shared County IT Department responsible for all IT functions under the direction of a Chief Information Officer/Director of Technology by FY 2022. Any centralized IT staff that support the SO shall receive the requisite background check required by DOJ. (F4-F6)
F7
Project status reporting is not clearly or regularly represented to the public and the BOS, thus leaving them uninformed of IT’s priorities and project initiatives.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2
the CIO position focus on improving the IT infrastructure in a steady, timely manner with quarterly public status reporting of active and planned Initiatives to the CEO and BOS including planned start and completion dates, progress status, budgeted cost and spending to date. (F1, F2, F7-F9)
R5
the BOS with the CIO, as part of the FY 2022-23 budget, consolidate all IT related costs, including ITMP funds into a single IT budget that accurately reflects total IT costs. These costs could then be appropriately allocated to department budgets as a proportioned shared service thus providing greater transparency to the public. (F4, F7-F9)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F8
Project Manager position(s) are unfilled, or the need not recognized, which leads to project plans not consistently being prepared for the management of IT Initiatives.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2
the CIO position focus on improving the IT infrastructure in a steady, timely manner with quarterly public status reporting of active and planned Initiatives to the CEO and BOS including planned start and completion dates, progress status, budgeted cost and spending to date. (F1, F2, F7-F9)
R5
the BOS with the CIO, as part of the FY 2022-23 budget, consolidate all IT related costs, including ITMP funds into a single IT budget that accurately reflects total IT costs. These costs could then be appropriately allocated to department budgets as a proportioned shared service thus providing greater transparency to the public. (F4, F7-F9)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F9
Project managers and process application analysts are critical and unfilled positions in Mendocino County's IT organization, which is already understaffed given the number of Initiatives in the ITMP as well as on-going operational needs.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2
the CIO position focus on improving the IT infrastructure in a steady, timely manner with quarterly public status reporting of active and planned Initiatives to the CEO and BOS including planned start and completion dates, progress status, budgeted cost and spending to date. (F1, F2, F7-F9)
R5
the BOS with the CIO, as part of the FY 2022-23 budget, consolidate all IT related costs, including ITMP funds into a single IT budget that accurately reflects total IT costs. These costs could then be appropriately allocated to department budgets as a proportioned shared service thus providing greater transparency to the public. (F4, F7-F9)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F10
The County’s efforts to secure its systems has not been evaluated by an independent audit in more than fifteen years which presents a considerable risk of systems compromise or ransomware attack.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
the Auditor/Controller, as part of their responsibility for safeguarding County assets, engage an independent outside auditor to evaluate the County’s systems, website and network security and recommend corrective actions. This is in addition to continued quarterly phishing testing. (F10)
F11
The Auditor/Controller has not established the accounting procedure for the mandated funding reserve established by County Policy 35 which is obsolete and inadequately capped at $850,000.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
the BOS revise Policy 35 by October 1, 2021 and base its funding on the capital cost needs established in the ITMP. (F3, F4, F7-F9, F11)
F12
Unlike many modernized California Counties, there are few mechanisms for the public to request most on-line County services or electronically submit forms thus inadequately serving the needs of the public and efficiently processing through County staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
the BOS, through its CIO, engage a County-government-experienced consultancy to evaluate all websites managed with County funds, including those of Special Districts. This to include recommendations for the design/maintenance strategy and cost/benefit justified funding to better serve the public by January 1, 2022. (F12)
F13
The County plans to issue an unnecessary and expensive RFP to select an alternative email service to replace GroupWise, when Microsoft email could simply be implemented. The County already licenses all other Office software from Microsoft except for email which is tightly integrated with all other Microsoft products.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
by August 1, 2021, the County IS cutover all County email services from GroupWise to Microsoft Exchange as the email server and Outlook for the user interface. (F13)