📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado
Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.
Score: +22
(24/17/2)
Santa Clara County Grand Jury
• 2023-2024
Amounts Not Shown
⚠️ 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.
Findings and recommendations have not been extracted yet.
The full report content may still be accessible via the PDF link above.
Agency Responses 6
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
County of Santa Clara
August 27, 2024
•
5 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
County of Santa Clara
August 27, 2024
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
County of Santa Clara
August 13, 2024
•
8 pages
• 21 responses
•
Score: +5
(+7, 10, -2)
View Details ▾
21 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The continuum of care for justice-involved people who have committed low-level crimes due to their behavioral health disorder is disjointed between BHSD, CBOs, community programs, the Court, and Custody Health. The County and its partners’ programs and services are too siloed, resulting in a lack of coordinated care.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially agrees with the finding. The County has established and continuously expanded a coordinated continuum of care for justice involved persons with behavioral health disorders. For example, the County's San José Reentry Resource Center (SJ RRC), includes integrated medical and behavioral health services to serve as a "health home" for justice-involved persons. These services are provided in coordination with housing, shelter, public assistance, and employment services, some of which are directly accessed through multi-agency staff located at the SJ RRC. Additionally, each year...
F2
BHSD staff in Collaborative Court and Custody Health do not systematically collaborate to support the clients they have in common, resulting in clients spending unnecessary time in custody.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially agrees with this finding. For every individual in Collaborative Court receiving a discharge plan, BHSD staff works with Custody Health staff to coordinate and execute the plan to ensure efficient release into community treatment. Custody Health and BHSD collaborate on all Collaborative Court cases on a weekly basis. They conduct regular multidisciplinary case consultations involving medical social workers, mental health staff, and Collaborative Court managers to develop individualized discharge plans that address the complex needs of individuals. For all Collaborative Cour...
R2
BHSD staff in Collaborative Court and Custody Health should establish more effective systems of collaboration. Some examples could include: • Custody Health being present in Collaborative Court to ensure collaboration in client support. • Have BHSD staff from FDR and Custody Health attend mutually relevant trainings together. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
Page 3 of 8 The County will implement this recommendation by December 31, 2024, using the opportunity presented by the CalAIM Justice Involved initiative to begin improving coordination and/or bolstering current activities. For example, BHSD and Custody Health staff have regularly attended joint trainings and have initiated joint planning for CalAIM implementation. The training events have covered topics, including, but not limited to, Mental Health Diversion, medication adherence, and motivational interviewing. Through the CalAIM Justice Involved initiative, BHSD and Custody Health staff may ...
F3
The current system does not allow for discharge planning for people accused of low-level offenses with behavioral health disorders soon after arrest and booking.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially agrees with the finding. Many individuals who are accused of low-level offenses are released from custody within hours of being booked, before there is an opportunity for BHSD or Custody Health to plan for discharge.
Recommendation 3
Appropriate County agencies should create a system that allows for the possibility of discharge planning for appropriate individuals to occur much earlier in the process. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R3
Appropriate County agencies should create a system that allows for the possibility of discharge planning for appropriate individuals to occur much earlier in the process. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. Custody Health will convene meetings with Behavioral Health and other stakeholders to gather information and formulate a cross-functional strategy to develop a system to be reviewed by appropriate County leadership by December 31, 2024. Additionally, if approved by the State, the aforementioned 90-day pre-release services under CalAIM will also support earlier discharge planning efforts for appropriate individuals.
Finding 4
The current countywide system is not conducive to justice-involved clients with behavioral health disorders establishing a ...
F4
The current countywide system is not conducive to justice-involved clients with behavioral health disorders establishing a personal connection with a service provider who can help them navigate all available services for the long-term. Such a personal connection could increase the likelihood of clients participating in treatment plans and transitioning more smoothly to the community.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially agrees with the finding. The County provides significant in-reach and system navigation services for many justice-involved clients with behavioral health disorders, including all Collaborative Court participants. BHSD contracts with provider agencies that provide in custody outreach (in-reach) and engagement services to individuals in custody. Upon receiving a referral, the contractors physically meet the individual in custody and orient them on the services offered by the agency. Utilizing the information gathered via the screening and referral process and additional info...
R4
The County should coordinate systems of care more effectively to make it easier for clients to establish personal connections. Some examples could include: • Increased in-reach services to County Jails (peer navigators, social workers, etc.) to work with clients to build trust and form a relationship to smoothly transition into community programs. • A more coordinated system of communication among service providers countywide regarding clients’ history and needs. This recommendation should be im...
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
This recommendation requires further analysis. While CalAIM will improve the coordination of services for many clients with 90-days pre-release, County stakeholders will need time to assess lessons from this initiative to help identify areas that require better coordination, highlight gaps in service type, and illuminate areas where data sharing is possible and supported by law. Custody Health leadership will review initial lessons learned through the CalAIM implementation by December 12, 2024 to inform decision-making for future enhancements to the County's systems of care coordination, inclu...
F5
County services do not have a central repository for client digital records. This impedes coordination of care.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 5a
To the maximum extent legally allowable, the County should develop an initial plan of how to improve coordination of client digital records across its currently disparate network of data systems in different service areas, beginning with the following agencies: Custody Health BHSD and the CBOs EPS [Emergency Psychiatric Services] Collaborative Court And other related agencies This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
Page 5 of 8
R5a
To the maximum extent legally allowable, the County should develop an initial plan of how to improve coordination of client digital records across its currently disparate network of data systems in different service areas, beginning with the following agencies: • Custody Heath • BHSD and the CBOs • EPS • Collaborative Court • And other related agencies This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. The County is making substantial progress in this area through ongoing improvements to various digital record platforms, but significant legal restrictions on sharing of health and criminal justice data limit these efforts.
Recommendation 5b
Once a coordination plan is established, the County should have regular meetings every 6 months to monitor progress and implementation of the plan. This recommendation should be implemented by March 31, 2025.
R5b
Once a coordination plan is established, the County should have regular meetings every 6 months to monitor progress and implementation of the plan. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. This will be implemented to the extent possible consistent with the
F6
Collaborative Court judges are often forced to rely on clients bringing paper copies of their CSRs to court to be able to assess their adherence to program requirements. This is a cumbersome barrier toward program graduation and reentry into the community.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 6
BHSD should devise a reliable and user-friendly system to provide electronic copies of CSRs to judges in advance of each client's court date. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R6
BHSD should devise a reliable and user-friendly system to provide electronic copies of CSRs to judges in advance of each client’s court date. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The County will implement this recommendation, with the goal being to have it implemented by December 31, 2024. BHSD is currently working with the County IT department-Technology Services and Solutions (TSS)-to deliver Client Status Report (CSR) information more efficiently to the Courts and other stakeholders. TSS has gathered business processes information from BHSD to: 1) automate as much of the current manual-intensive information entry, manual exchange/delivery processes between BHSD, Courts, service providers, and other parties involved in the CSR process to deliver information to the Co...
F7
Insufficient staffing and an increased workload of BHSD in FDR has negatively impacted staff morale and led to longer wait times for clients who are incarcerated to enter treatment programs.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding, although the County has budgeted for more positions than are currently filled, we have faced persistent challenges filling vacancies due to the overall shortage of
Page 6 of 8 qualified behavioral health workers and even more limited pools of applicants wanting to work in criminal justice.
Recommendation 7
BHSD should prioritize staffing and resources in Collaborative Court and FDR. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R7
BHSD should prioritize staffing and resources in Collaborative Court and FDR. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The workload of BHSD staff in FDR has not increased, but the team has been impacted by vacancies. Currently three clinical positions are vacant, and recruitments are under way. The County has consistently prioritized the need to fill clinical positions, especially those who support our justice-involved clients. Even when the County implemented a hiring freeze to manage a $250 million budget deficit, clinical social worker positions were categorically exempt from the freeze. The County anticipates filling these three positions by December 31, 2024.
Finding 8
Innovative programs such as PARR s...
F8
Innovative programs such as PARR successfully reduce time incarcerated for their clients.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding. In June 2023, data scientists at UC Berkeley's California Policy Lab (CPL) published a policy brief detailing their findings from a study of Santa Clara County's PARR program. CPL reported two key findings1: 1. Arrested individuals who received PARR services were detained in jail, on average, for 23 fewer days relative to comparable people who did not receive PARR services (6 total days vs. 29 total days). This reduction reflects both reductions in pretrial detention, as well as potential reductions in the probability and length of incarceration imposed at s...
R8
The County should prioritize the current PARR program and the proposed expansion of this program for people with behavioral health disorders ensuring an earlier possible referral to Collaborative Court. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation requires more analysis. There is currently a plan for a pilot program entitled, "Mental Health PARR Arraignment Court," targeted to begin in August 2024. The pilot program will initially serve 10 dockets a week. Persons selected for the pilot program will be newly arrested, in-custody, and suffer from one or more mental health conditions. The goals of the program are: 1 California Policy Lab, Policy Brief, June 2023, Providing Early Legal Counsel Reduces Jail Time and Improves Case Outcomes, Brett Fischer, Johanna Lacoe, Steven Raphael.
Page 7 of 8 At the outset of the cr...
F9
Custody Health’s current procedure for mental health screening and assessment allows too many incarcerated people with non-acute behavioral health disorders to go undiagnosed and untreated.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially agrees with this finding. The County's current procedure for mental health screening during the intake process includes automatic flags and notifications to Nursing to refer any patient with a documented history of self-harm behaviors in their chart, reviewing medication histories, and referrals made by the arresting agency or Sheriff's Office Custody Bureau staff for any patient observed with concerning presentations. However, the Nursing screening questions do rely on patients to self-report for suicide risk, symptoms of potential psychosis, history of psychotropic medic...
R9a
Custody Health should review its procedures for behavioral health disorder screening of newly booked clients to determine why so many are passing through without getting flagged. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. The current mental health screening process was developed in collaboration with, and approved by, the County's mental health monitors in the Chavez case. As such, any changes to the intake screening process would require their input. However, to ensure the County is addressing any potential gaps in the process, as a first step, Custody Health will pull data on how many patients Mental Health is assessing at Intake to determine whether changes to the process are required. Although a high number of patients are likely referred and offered services, n...
R9b
Once the County determines the issues related to flagging clients the County should fix the screening process. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. Custody Health will document its end-to-end workflow procedures for behavioral health disorder screening of newly booked clients to identify existing gaps and make suggestions for improvement to be reviewed by Custody Health leadership by December 12, 2024. An effective re-engineering process will take additional time to develop, and then require updating of existing documentation and staff training to fully implement. Moreover, as noted above, any changes to the County's screening process would require input from the mental health monitors and it ...
F10
Custody Health does not consistently check clients’ court schedules, leading to scheduling conflicts of court dates and medical appointments.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 10
Custody Health should consult the Court calendar using a system such as the Inmate Finder website to view court dates to ensure they do not schedule a client's medical appointments at the same time as their court date. This recommendation should be implemented by September 30, 2024.
R10
Custody Heath should consult the Court calendar using a system such as the Inmate Finder website to view court dates to ensure they do not schedule a client’s medical appointments at the same time as their court date. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. Custody Health is currently exploring the use of a space scheduling tool across all the adult facilities with the goal of maximizing availabilities and increasing efficiency in scheduled services for all patients. Custody Health leadership will evaluate the viability of this tool by December 12, 2024.
▶
County of Santa Clara
August 13, 2024
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
County of Santa Clara
August 13, 2024
•
9 pages
• 26 responses
•
Score: +17
(+17, 7, 0)
View Details ▾
26 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The County cannot find accurate contract information in a timely manner. This hinders the County Executive’s Office in decision making, prevents procurement cooperation that could save money, and unnecessarily wastes many hours of effort.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 1a
The County should investigate other counties or similar organizations to find out if and how they solved the problem of finding up-to-date contract information in a timely manner. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R1a
The County should investigate other counties or similar organizations to find out if and how they solved the problem of finding up-to-date contract information in a timely manner. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The County agrees with the recommendation, and it has already been implemented. The County conducted surveys of other public entities in 2019 and 2023 to determine which enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems and/or applications they are using, the pros and cons with their systems, and whether they are considering alternative systems or application solutions.
Recommendation 1b
The County should develop a plan for a countywide contract-search system. This should include estimated annual cost savings from using the system as well as the estimated implementation cost. This recommendation sh...
R1b
The County should develop a plan for a countywide contract-search system. This plan should include estimated annual cost savings from using the system as well as the estimated implementation cost. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future. Countywide contract-search system functionality is partially met through the County's current use of Ariba and would be fully met once the County fully implements one contract management system Countywide. Before committing to one system, County staff are taking steps to determine whether the County should continue using Ariba or instead procure a different system. After assessing the market for contract management system vendors, the County issued a Request for Information (RFI) in July 2024 to a selected l...
R1c
The County should evaluate the cost and benefits of using outside expert resources to plan, select components for, and develop a countywide contract-search system. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. As part of the County's plan to determine next steps for implementing a Countywide contract management system, County staff will determine whether consultants or other resources are needed to assess and implement such a system. This assessment will be completed by November 30, 2024.
Finding 2
The County saves multiple, sometimes inconsistent, copies of contract information on department storage devices and multiple procurement systems. This makes it difficult for the County to find accurate, up-todate, information.
F2
The County saves multiple, sometimes inconsistent, copies of contract information on department storage devices and multiple procurement systems. This makes it difficult for the County to find accurate, up-to-date, information.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 2a
The County should define where the most up-to-date contract information is located so that a countywide contract-search system can find that information. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R2a
The County should define where the most up-to-date contract information is located so that a countywide contract-search system can find that information. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future. The County's plan to eliminate inconsistent contract information is to centralize all countywide contracts within a contracts management system that will be identified through the processes described within responses to Recommendations 1a, 1b, and 1c.
Page 3 of 9
Recommendation 2b
The County should create a plan to eliminate inconsistent contract information. This recommendation should be implemented by March 31, 2025.
R2b
The County should create a plan to eliminate inconsistent contract information. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future. The most upto-date contract information will be located in a centralized Countywide contract management system. The contract management system will be the record of source for subsequent Countywide contract-search processes and information. A decision for a new contract management system will be determined through the processes described within responses to Recommendations 1a, 1b, and 1c.
Finding 3
Due to the absence of a uniform contract search system, County departments are not able to learn if other dep...
F3
Due to the absence of a uniform contract search system, County departments are not able to learn if other departments already have contracts that are relevant to their needs and, thus, are not able to take advantage of cooperative procurement opportunities. Further, if the County had a publicly accessible contract-search system, other government entities could use that resource to partner with the County on cooperative procurement opportunities to the benefit of the County.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially disagrees with the finding. While the County does not have a uniform contract search system for professional services contracts managed by departments, County departments do have visibility to all Countywide contracts for goods and related services via the internal County Procurement SharePoint site and contracts reports. Work is ongoing to simplify the comprehensive contract reports and have contracts information and search more transparent for County departments. Departments are also able to identify and take advantage of existing agreements via communication and support...
R3
The County should discuss cooperative procurement methods, such as contract piggybacking, with potential government partners and ask the potential government partners to provide their requirements for a countywide contract-search system accessible to them. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. Since the County intends to have its "countywide contract search system" to be a part of is Countywide contract management system or Procure-to-Pay system, the County will consult with other jurisdictions to determine if this recommendation is feasible, with recommendations to be implemented by December 31, 2024.
Finding 4
Multiple departments in the County do not have a department policy for contractor evaluations and do not evaluate contractor performance. This violates the Policy Manual guidelines and could lead to departments making a poor ch...
F4
Multiple departments in the County do not have a department policy for contractor evaluations and do not evaluate contractor performance. This violates the Policy Manual guidelines and could lead to departments making a poor choice of contractor.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding. Board of Supervisors Policy Manual Section 5.4.5.5-Monitoring, Administration, and Evaluation of Contracts-establishes the minimum requirements for contractor performance management; departments may have additional requirements depending on funding source and other considerations. The County's hospital system has a required (CMS/Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services Certification) contractor evaluation system with monthly audits. Additionally, the County's Social Services Agency (SSA) has a robust contract performance monitoring procedure that includes an ...
R4
The County should provide employees with a contractor evaluation template that includes criteria such as overall satisfaction, quality, cost-effectiveness, and timeliness. The County should provide guidelines for County employees that explain when and how to evaluate a contractor and how to use the contractor evaluation template. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in the future. The County will develop and implement minimum vendor evaluation requirements, an evaluation template, and guidelines by June 30, 2025. Developing a template and its requirements must be done in consultation with County Departments since many departments already have vendor evaluation, monitoring, and reporting requirements specific to their funding sources and/or regulatory agencies. The County will need to develop a Countywide approach for other contract types while avoiding unnecessary or duplicative efforts.
...
F5
The County does not have a countywide mechanism to store and share contractor evaluations making it impossible for departments to view other departments’ evaluations.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 5a
The County should develop a short-term plan for a simple countywide system for storing and sharing contractor evaluations. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R5a
The County should develop a short-term plan for a simple countywide system for storing and sharing contractor evaluations. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis, which will be completed by a future date. Long-term plans for storing and sharing contractor evaluations depend on the results of the County's determination of whether it will continue with its current contract management system or procure for a new system. This decision will be made by November 30, 2024. If the decision is to procure a new system, the County will also implement an interim solution.
Recommendation 5b
The County should develop a long-term plan for an integrated procurement and evaluation system that requires employees to enter an ...
R5b
The County should develop a long-term plan for an integrated procurement and evaluation system that requires employees to enter an evaluation for appropriate contracts. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis, which will be completed by a future date. Long-term plans for storing and sharing contractor evaluations depend on the results of the County's determination of whether it will continue with its current contract management system or procure for a new system. This decision will be made by November 30, 2024. If the decision is to procure a new system, the County will also implement an interim solution.
Page 6 of 9
Finding 6
Multiple County departments with professional service contracts manage their procurement process using custom spreadsheets ins...
F6
Multiple County departments with professional service contracts manage their procurement process using custom spreadsheets instead of using a procurement system. This leads to the County having multiple inconsistent copies of contract data and makes it difficult to measure county-wide procurement performance.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 6
The County should develop a plan for the implementation of one or more procurement systems that the departments must use instead of custom spreadsheets. The procurement system(s) should improve efficiency, help automate the procurement of professional service contracts, and allow integration with existing procurement and financial systems. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R6
The County should develop a plan for the implementation of one or more procurement systems that departments must use instead of custom spreadsheets. The procurement system(s) should improve efficiency, help automate the procurement of professional service contracts, and allow integration with existing procurement and financial systems. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in the future. As indicated above, the County is in the process of determining whether to continue with its current contract management system or procure a new system, and the timeline for implementation will be a multi-year effort.
Finding 7
County departments cannot practically measure procurement contract lead times. The County has no way of determining if a department performing its own procurement consistently fails to establish contracts in a timely manner.
F7
County departments cannot practically measure procurement contract lead times. The County has no way of determining if a department performing its own procurement consistently fails to establish contracts in a timely manner.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 7
The County should establish contract lead time targets and require all departments with procurement employees to use a procurement system that makes it practical to track contract lead times. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R7
The County should establish contract lead time targets and require all departments with procurement employees to use a procurement system that makes it practical to track contract lead times. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in the future. The County agrees that it is important to establish targets for, to monitor, and to continuously improve sourcing/contract cycle times. The County intends to implement a new eSourcing systems platform that will allow monitoring and reporting on sourcing/contract cycle times. Critical to monitoring and improving sourcing/contract cycle times is the implementation of a new electronic sourcing platform and determining whether the County will utilize the current or procure for a new contract management system. In re...
F8
Most employees engaged in procurement do not know about the County’s procurement performance goals.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 8
The County needs to inform all County employees involved in procurement of the procurement of the performance goals and make clear how their individual performance connects to department and countywide goals. This recommendation should be implemented by October 31, 2024.
R8
The County needs to inform all County employees involved in procurement of the procurement performance goals and make it clear how their individual performance connects to department and countywide goals. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented by the recommended time frame. The County will report Procurement Department performance goals to employees through quarterly PLC and CCW meetings but will increase efforts to communicate goals and expectations to staff involved in procurement, along with Department/Agency executives. Discussions with both PLC and CCW relative to new Procurement Department performance goals will be conducted on a quarterly basis effective October 31, 2024.
Finding 9
The County does not track procurement performance measures of individual...
F9
The County does not track procurement performance measures of individual departments involved in procurement. The County cannot evaluate the performance of those individual departments.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 9
The County needs to monitor individual department performance using procurement measures such as contract lead time, competitiveness of solicitations, and cost savings. This recommendation should be implemented by December 31, 2024.
Page 8 of 9
R9
The County needs to monitor individual department performance using procurement measures such as contract lead time, competitiveness of solicitations, and cost savings. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation has not been implemented but will be partially implemented by June 30, 2025. However, many aspects of implementation will depend on how quickly the County can implement its new eSourcing platform and Countywide contract management system.
Finding 10
The County does not have a Countywide strategic procurement plan to address the long-standing issues of finding contracts in a timely manner, eliminating data consistency issues, measuring performance, evaluating contractors, and the choice of procurement systems.
F10
The County does not have a countywide strategic procurement plan to address the long-standing issues of finding contracts in a timely manner, eliminating data consistency issues, measuring performance, evaluating contractors, and the choice of procurement systems.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The County agrees with the finding.
Recommendation 10
The County should develop a countywide strategic procurement plan with objective performance measures that encompass all County departments, offices, and agencies. The countywide strategic procurement plan should address the long-standing issues of finding contracts in a timely manner, eliminating data consistency issues, evaluating contractors, and the choice of procurement systems. This recommendation should be implemented by March 31, 2025.
R10
The County should develop a countywide strategic procurement plan with objective performance measures that encompass all County departments, offices, and agencies. The countywide strategic procurement plan should address the long-standing issues of finding contracts in a timely manner, eliminating data consistency issues, evaluating contractors, and the choice of procurement systems. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in the future. The County Procurement Department is currently developing a Countywide procurement strategic plan that includes areas relative to people, technology, and processes that will address mitigating those long-standing issues pertaining to contracts-Compliance, Cycle Time, Cost Savings, and Customer Satisfaction-by March 31, 2025.
Finding 11
The County has made minimal progress in implementing procurement technology over the last decade because the County failed to make this a priority.
F11
The County has made minimal progress in implementing procurement technology over the last decade because the County has failed to make this a priority.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The County partially disagrees with the finding. The County deployed core components of a procure-topay system (SAP/ARIBA) in 2015/2016. All County departments and agencies currently have access and utilize Ariba to purchase goods and related services; however, the County has not fully deployed select modules (e.g., sourcing, vendor information, and performance management), nor has the County fully configured the system for use in professional services contracting.
Recommendation 11
The County should evaluate if it has the appropriate talent and resources to develop and implement a countywid...
R11
The County should evaluate if it has the appropriate talent and resources to develop and implement a countywide technology plan to address the procurement shortfalls. This recommendation should be implemented
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
The recommendation requires further analysis. The County will evaluate and determine if consultants and/or other resources will be necessary after its contract management system RFI and determination of whether there is an alternative system solution to the current SAP/Ariba Contract Management system. This analysis will be completed by November 30, 2024.
▶
County of Santa Clara
December 19, 2022
•
4 pages
• 2 responses
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1f
The County should, by March 31, 2023, take appropriate action to request that the state legislature consider amending current law to require the County Counsel to review and approve local ballot measure questions before they are voted on. Id.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Recommendation 1 b fulfills this purpose more expeditiously and effectively without creation of a new Brown Act body or jeopardizing election timelines. Recommendation le. Governing entities within Santa Clara County should submit their ballot questions for review by the Good Governance in Ballots Commission pursuant to Recommendation ld. Please see the response to Recommendation ld. Memorandum to Greta S. Hansen, Chief Operating Officer Re: Response to the Octobe
R13
This recommendation has been and is being implemented.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 13, 2022 meeting oft he County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors (Item No. 63), the Board adopted the response from the Office of the County Counsel to the Final Civil Grand Jury Reports entitled, If You Only Read the Ballot, You're Being Duped. As directed by the Board of Supervisors and on behalf of the Board President, our office is forwarding to you the enclosed copy oft he responses to the Final Grand Jury Reports. The responses constitute the responses of the Board of Supervisors, consistent with provisions of California Penal Code Section 933(c). lfthere are any questions concerning...