San Francisco County Grand Jury
• 2004-2005
A Report of the 2004-05 Civil Grand Jury For the City and County of San Francisco What is the Difference Between a
⚠️ 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 8 findings
F1
The recent indictment of a prominent San Franciscan for alleged misuse of grant funds illustrates the potential for fraud and abuse of public funds in the awarding of grants. Ibid., 25 “From Hindering to Helping: Transforming the City’s Contracting Process,” Office of the Controller, January 26, 2004, . 11
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The recent indictment of a prominent San Franciscan for alleged misuse of grant funds illustrates the potential for fraud and abuse of public funds in the awarding of grants. Ibid., 25 “From Hindering to Helping: Transforming the City’s Contracting Process,” Office of the Controller, January 26, 2004, . 11
F2
There are no apparent legal or functional differences between contracts and grants.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
There are no apparent legal or functional differences between contracts and grants.
F3
As contracting procedures have become more cumbersome, the granting mechanism for purchasing goods and services has been used increasingly.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
As contracting procedures have become more cumbersome, the granting mechanism for purchasing goods and services has been used increasingly.
F4
There are no Citywide rules and regulations regarding the awarding of grants. Therefore, procedures vary from one City department to another.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
There are no Citywide rules and regulations regarding the awarding of grants. Therefore, procedures vary from one City department to another.
F5
Grants are apparently being awarded to for-profit entities, in violation of existing policies regarding grants.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Grants are apparently being awarded to for-profit entities, in violation of existing policies regarding grants.
F6
The procedures being used to award grants do not ensure on a Citywide basis adequate competition amongst potential applicants because they do not require publication of opportunities to compete for grants. Inadequate competition can increase price unnecessarily.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The procedures being used to award grants do not ensure on a Citywide basis adequate competition amongst potential applicants because they do not require publication of opportunities to compete for grants. Inadequate competition can increase price unnecessarily.
F7
The procedures being used to select grantees from amongst applicants do not ensure on a Citywide basis that grantees are capable of performing the services being purchased, or that the grantee is the most competitive with respect to quality and price.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
The procedures being used to select grantees from amongst applicants do not ensure on a Citywide basis that grantees are capable of performing the services being purchased, or that the grantee is the most competitive with respect to quality and price.
F8
The City’s conflict of interest law (Campaign and Government Conduct Code 3.2220), which prohibits City officials from contracting with the City, specifically exempts grantees from this prohibition.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
The City’s conflict of interest law (Campaign and Government Conduct Code 3.2220), which prohibits City officials from contracting with the City, specifically exempts grantees from this prohibition. Recommendations
Additional Recommendations 1
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R9The Ethics Commission should recommend an amendment to the voters that would remove an exemption for grants from Campaign and Government Conduct Code 3.2220 regarding conflict of interest of public employees and officials Required Responses (Please respond to those Findings and Recommendations within your jurisdiction.) Board of Supervisors – 90 days City Attorney – 60 days Controller’s Office – 60 days Ethics Commission – 60 days 13