📋
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.
Orange County Grand Jury
• 2015-2016
To Be Continued: Follow-Up for Open Formal Grand Jury Report Responses
⚠️ 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 8 findings
F1
Page 70
The beneficial impact of Grand Jury reports is diminished if recommendations are left open and not properly pursued to closure.
F2
Page 70
The credibility and impact of the Grand Jury watchdog function is diminished if recommendations are left open, without a process within County Administration for follow-up and for holding responding departments to their commitments.
F3
Page 70
Tracking and consolidation of open report recommendations directed to the Target Audience should be the responsibility of the CEO.
F4
Page 70
The process of tracking open Grand Jury report recommendations is most effective when formalized and instituted as an ongoing procedure by the CEO.
F5
Page 70
The follow-up of open report recommendations is best done in March of each year to coincide with the requirement that responses of Further Analysis (FA) must have been completed within 180 days from the original response date.
F6
Page 70
The Target Audience needs written policies and procedures from the CEO for proper use of the “Needs Further Analysis” (FA) response to ensure it complies with CPC section 933.05, including the scope, and parameters of that analysis and timeframe not to exceed six months.
F7
Page 73
F8 Orange County Board of Supervisors X X X X X X X X 90 Day Required Responses:
F8
Page 70
The CEO is in the best position to track and consolidate long-standing open report recommendations directed to the Target Audience. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2015-2016 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the recommendations REPORT 2 To Be Continued…Follow-Up For Open Formal Grand Jury Report Responses 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “To Be Continued…Follow-Up For Open Formal Grand Jury Report Responses,”, the 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following five recommendations:
Recommendations 6
-
R1Page 78Adopt an Ordinance establishing a follow up committee similar to the "Past Grand Jurors Association Implementation Review Committee," as adopted by San Diego County. Do not concur. Establishing an additional County organizational unit is not recommended in light of continuing County fiscal constraints. 1992/1993 BoS
-
R2Page 81FA Contract Policy Manual will undergo thorough review in 2015 for mods to be approved by BoS. See above where same response was a WBI Juvenile Offenders and Recidivism: Orange County Solutions 1314 BoS
-
R3Page 81WBI Agree, grant funds & donations to be solicited. Probation Dept to take the lead. Orange County Information Technology Management:Good Job Overall; Disaster Recovery Must Be Addressed 1314 BoS
-
R4Page 81WBI Cell Phone parking lot has indeed been implementedl opened in Sept2015. DANA POINT HARBOR REVITALIZATION ~ 15 YEARS OF PLANNING: WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED? 1314 CEO
-
R5Page 73Orange County Board of Supervisors X X X X X Requested Responses:
-
R8Page 81WBI Prior to expiration of current East Basin Ops Agrmt in Feb2021, a cost analysis will be done for both basins Improving The County of Orange Government’s Multi-Billion Dollar Contracting Operations 1314 BoS
Agency Responses 2
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.